The Campaign and the Kingdom

In 1844, Joseph Smith, President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ran for president of the United States. At the April 1844 LDS general conference, a call was made for volunteers to “electioneer for Joseph to be the next President,” as Heber C. Kimball put it.¹ Immediately, 244 elders volunteered. By the time the list of names was recorded in the records of the Church a week later, the number approached 340. Even more elders eventually volunteered or were called to take up the cause.² As part of the campaign, the Quorum of the Twelve scheduled public political conferences in each state. These conferences were to be attended by members of the Twelve and the electioneers during the campaign.³

The electioneers prepared to leave as soon as possible. Wilford Woodruff and Franklin D. Richards did all in their power to finish their red-brick homes before they left so they could, in good conscience, leave their families.⁴ Heber C. Kimball left for his mission worried about his wife, Vilate, who seemed to be getting ill; he later learned that she was pregnant.⁵ Abraham Smoot’s wife boarded the steamship Osprey with him, accompanied him to his berth, and then bid him a sad farewell.⁶ Moses Tracy asked if he could take his wife, Nancy. The Prophet told him that not only could Tracy take her but that she would “prove a blessing to him.” Indeed, it was she who wrote an account of their trip, without which we would know nothing of his mission.⁷ Some of the electioneers knew politics; others, such as Heber C. Kimball, had no interest in politics—he said politics gave him about as much pleasure as sectarian Christendom.⁸ These electioneers ranged from the most able and practiced spokesmen and leaders in the Church, such as the Twelve Apostles, to people like Henry Boyle, who had never spoken in public, and Alfred Boaz Lambson, who had been a member of the Church for five days when he volunteered to campaign for the prophet of his recently found faith.⁹

Much has been written concerning Joseph Smith’s candidacy, his intentions, and his expectations of winning. Several different schools of thought have emerged. Some historians have portrayed him as an imperialist who desired to take over the world¹⁰ or as a near madman who, as Fawn Brodie says, was “fully intoxicated with power and drunk with visions of empire and apocalyptic glory.”¹¹ Many LDS historians, on the other hand, emphasize a different set of reasons for Joseph Smith’s candidacy: first, to give the Saints a candidate they felt they could support in good conscience; second, to avoid a political party fiasco in Illinois (the Mormons held the balance of power between Whigs and Democrats); third, to publicize the Mormon cause and thus help Church members obtain redress for their lost property in Missouri; and, fourth, to bring the tenets of the Church and the political ideas of its prophet to the attention of the nation.¹² These historians rely on Joseph’s statements concerning his candidacy¹³ and believe or at least raise the possibility that he did not seriously expect to win. For instance, James B. Allen concludes that the Prophet “may not have seriously believed he could win a national election, but he was serious about putting his views before the nation as positively as possible.”¹⁴

Another interpretation views Joseph Smith’s candidacy as a serious attempt to establish the Kingdom of God in the United States. Often relying heavily on the statements of George Miller, a member of the Council of Fifty,¹⁵ these historians claim that Joseph Smith and his followers expected he could win the election. In the wake of his victory, the Prophet would lead God’s government on earth, the political Kingdom of God, in anticipation of Christ’s imminent return.¹⁶

Despite all that has been written on the Prophet’s candidacy, the electioneers themselves have been almost completely ignored.¹⁷ Some historians have seen the sheer number of electioneers as prima facie evidence that Joseph seriously believed he could become president. For example, Klaus Hansen asks, “If Smith had not believed his election in 1844 to be a possibility, why did he enlist the entire manpower of the church in a quixotic venture?”¹⁸ In this essay, I have not attempted to prove whether the electioneers deemed their prophet’s campaign viable. Rather, I have examined the available journals and autobiographies of the campaigners in an attempt to illuminate some of the possible reasons for and effects of the campaign. Furthermore, I will analyze some of the electioneer’s activities including their campaigning efforts, their proselytizing activities, the proceedings of the conferences they held, and their work among the branches of the Church. I will also discuss an inadvertent effect of the campaign: the Twelve were protected from the mob violence that took the lives of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. While many of the electioneers gave political addresses and distributed copies of Joseph Smith’s platform, in the main, their activities did more to strengthen the Church than to present the Prophet to the nation as a presidential candidate.

Campaigning Efforts

One of the purposes of the campaign made plain by the activities of the electioneers was to put forward their prophet as a candidate for the presidency of the United States.¹⁹ The electioneers held political conferences and made an effort to present and distribute Joseph’s platform, which was published in the pamphlet Views of the Power and Policy of the Government of the United States (hereafter called Views).²⁰ This platform included such measures as abolition through the federal government purchasing slaves with the revenue from the sale of public lands;²¹ prison reform;²² unity as a nation;²³ a national bank;²⁴ the annexation of Texas, California, and Oregon;²⁵ and the expansion of federal power.²⁶

Many of the electioneers did a great deal to promote the candidacy of Joseph Smith. Lorenzo Snow claimed the honor of giving “the 1st political lecture that was ever delivered [to] the world in favor of Joseph for the Presidency,” a lecture he delivered on the steamer Osprey while en route to Ohio the day after the April 1844 conference.²⁷ Ezra T. Benson and Norton Jacob reported that they appointed delegates to go to their respective state conventions in New Jersey and Michigan. On July 1, 1844, at the state convention in Boston, Brigham Young “appointed delegates to the Baltimore national convention.”²⁸ John D. Lee and Franklin D. Richards both reported holding informal “elections” on a steamship as they left Nauvoo to electioneer. In both cases, Joseph Smith received the most votes, but since the boats were largely filled with elders leaving on missions, the results are neither surprising nor representative. Still this incident shows the electioneers’ excitement in campaigning for their prophet.²⁹

The electioneers concentrated their political work on distributing and presenting Joseph Smith’s Views in public and private meetings. James Burgess recorded reading Views both to congregations of Saints and the general public. Wilford Woodruff, Edson Barney, George Miller, and Joseph Holbrook did likewise.³⁰ Norton Jacob usually preceded his companion’s political speeches by reading Views aloud. On one occasion, Alfred Cordon discussed religion in general with a family, explained to them the principles and doctrine of Christ, and then read Views.³¹ David Pettegrew claimed “good success” as he read Views to the people, for “it was so far beyond anything they had heard before that it took with the people surprisingly.”³² W. R. R. Stowell told of reading Views to a very old gentleman who claimed to have served under George Washington in the Continental Army. When Stowell finished reading, the old man said it sounded like the views General Washington had held.³³ William Watkins, though he served in the slave state of Kentucky, found that Smith’s solution to the slavery problem, as stated in Views, was well received.³⁴ James Burgess and Alfred Cordon read Views to a Mr. Willows, who said that the ideas of Joseph Smith “were the best he had ever heard.”³⁵ Joseph Holbrook similarly reported an acceptance of the ideas in Views but added that the people still had their reservations because they “didn’t know so much about ‘Your Mormon Prophet for president.’”³⁶ Despite setbacks such as this, the electioneers recorded that Views was generally considered an impressive document.

Many electioneers published and distributed copies of Views. Jacob Hamblin “surculated the vews of Joseph th[e] p[r]ophet.”³⁷ Before leaving for New Jersey, John Horner had one thousand copies of Views printed in Nauvoo. Other elders had the pamphlet printed after arriving in their assigned areas. For example, Lorenzo Snow had four thousand copies printed in Ohio; Charles C. Rich, who was assigned to campaign in Michigan, had five thousand printed; and Abraham Smoot ordered three thousand from a printer in Tennessee before a man insisted that it was illegal in that state to print a pamphlet that supported abolition. Smoot paid for the pamphlets but never mentioned receiving them. Also in Tennessee, James Holt contracted to have five hundred pamphlets printed, yet when he went to pick them up, the printer explained that he had lent Holt’s copy to various interested people in the community, one of whom, unfortunately, had lost it.³⁸

Presenting the Mormon prophet’s Views sometimes caused conflict between the electioneers and some citizens. One conference in Tennessee and one in Boston were interrupted by mobs. Some historians have concluded almost exclusively on the basis of this evidence that Mormon campaigners were rather rowdy and specialized in picking fights.³⁹ Historian George Gayler goes so far as to claim that Joseph Smith’s death saved the United States from the bloodiest campaign this nation had ever known.⁴⁰ In reality, the two aforementioned conferences are the only two I discovered in the electioneers’ journals in which anything approaching a brawl took place, and in both cases outsiders stormed the meeting through no apparent fault of the Mormons. Of course, there were other times, not at conferences, when the campaigners got into trouble or faced persecution. George A. Smith apparently said something in a political meeting that upset some people. There “was some prospect of fighting,” Wilford Woodruff wrote, “but with soft words we turned away wrath & returned home in peace.”⁴¹ On the whole, the electioneers did not record a violent or rowdy campaign. The electioneers experienced some violent incidents, but these problems do not appear to come from the electioneers being rowdy or picking fights. Rather, they stemmed from the dedication and determination that the electioneers felt for the cause.

The electioneers faced additional physical challenges. William Lampard Watkins, at age seventeen the youngest electioneer, left Nauvoo for Kentucky to begin campaigning alone because his companion took too long preparing for the journey. Just outside nearby Warsaw, Watkins accepted a ride by a man in a wagon. In response to an inquiry, Watkins told the man he was campaigning for Joseph Smith. The man became very angry and declared that Smith would never become president and, if he did, he would be killed. Fortunately, the driver soon calmed down, and Watkins continued the ride to Warsaw. Soon thereafter, his leg brace, which enabled him to walk, broke, and he spent a week obtaining a suitable replacement. Watkins later became lost in the woods and traveled for some time in the wrong direction.⁴²

James Burgess and Alfred Cordon faced similar difficulties. Caught in a rainstorm near McComb, Ohio, they came to a house where they were invited in. Upon explaining their business, Mr. Thompson, the man of the house, said he was opposed to the Mormons and “would not mind shooting Joe Smith.” He said he knew a man who lived nearby who would shoot Smith if he were elected. Burgess and Cordon left because, as Burgess wrote, “the conversation was not pleasing to us, no more than it gives us to see the wickedness of man.”⁴³ After leaving Nauvoo on May 4, 1844, they walked almost the entire way to Vermont, often through “many sloughs and creeks which made it very uncomfortable.” They, like all the electioneers, went without purse or scrip, which meant they often went hungry, being denied food and shelter repeatedly because they were Mormon elders. Burgess became ill a few times from such conditions. Over two months after they began their journey, Cordon and Burgess reached Vermont on July 19, 1844, twenty-two days after their presidential candidate and prophet had been killed.⁴⁴

In addition to hunger, fatigue, and illness, the electioneers often faced malacious hazards. When Elders Terry and Nixon tried to campaign, the people threw tobacco at them, took their copy of Views, and tore it up.⁴⁵ Levi Jackman and Enoch Burns also had things thrown at them. They were even hit with a board and whipped with a black snake whip.⁴⁶ Jacob Hamblin and his companion were told that if they did not leave they would be tarred and feathered; yet, said Hamblin, “we Still travaild about throu the diferant Townes preaching whare ever we could get the chance.”⁴⁷ And in an unspecified “very wicked place,” the people did not merely threaten Elder McGin; they tarred and feathered him.⁴⁸

In summary, the electioneers did campaign. They held political meetings, and some even had electors appointed for their respective states. The bulk of their campaigning effort involved presenting the Prophet’s Views to the citizenry of the United States, who on the whole seemed impressed and pleased with this platform. On the other hand, many of the elders did have difficulty campaigning and were sometimes severely opposed. Yet the electioneers went on in their cause, campaigned for Joseph Smith, and, as will be shown, did a great deal to strengthen the Church.

Proselytizing Activities

The electioneers did much more than merely campaign for Joseph Smith: one of the purposes of the candidacy, which becomes obvious from the journals of the campaigners, was to proselytize. By their own accounts, campaigning seemed secondary in comparison to the amount of time they devoted to preaching. For example, William Wommack Riley, who was called to Tennessee, kept a day-by-day account of his activities. Of the forty-two sermons he recorded preaching, only one, an address given on June 22, was “politickal”; it was followed by a debate the next day. The rest of his sermons were religious, twenty-five of them being on the first principles of the gospel. Riley also delivered sermons about the Book of Mormon, prophecy, the Resurrection, the kingdom of God, and the commandments. Other times he expounded on a chapter of Galatians, Luke, Jude, John, or Isaiah.⁴⁹

Stephen Post, who was called to campaign in New York, also preached from the scriptures. He gave discourses on 1 Peter 1:2, Romans 11:25–27, Micah 4:1–2, Matthew 1:21, Mark 1:15, John 7:16–17, Revelation 14:16, and Hebrews 8.⁵⁰ While presiding over the mission in Tennessee, Abraham O. Smoot frequently preached on topics such as the Resurrection, eternal judgment, and the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.⁵¹ Smoot also held and attended the conferences set up by the Twelve. Although at one conference he read Views and appointed an elector for the state,⁵² the majority of these meetings were spent preaching doctrine. At a conference on June 8, Smoot concluded the meeting by asking for baptismal candidates; one volunteered that day and five the next. In all, Smoot baptized thirteen people on his three-month mission.⁵³

John D. Lee, who presided over the Kentucky mission, preached “boath in Public and private allmost incesantly.”⁵⁴ He recorded preaching about fifty sermons between May 28 and August 20 on subjects such as the origin and authenticity of the Book of Mormon, the discerning of spirits, priesthood authority, faith and baptism, the apostasy, the power of God, the doctrine of Christ, the Restoration, Christ’s millennial reign, and spiritual gifts and charity. Though Lee did attempt to have Views printed at one point during his mission, he never mentioned delivering a political speech. While on his mission, he baptized six people.⁵⁵

Charles C. Rich recorded holding ten political meetings on his mission, yet he still proselytized fifteen other times and visited branches on twelve occasions, baptizing twenty people on his mission.⁵⁶ “I preached,” Orson Pratt wrote, “and baptized a few.”⁵⁷ Similarly, Chapman Duncan summed up his political mission to Virginia as “I preached considerable that summer only baptized two ladies and two gentlemen.”⁵⁸ Also, Franklin D. Richards preached and held sacrament meetings and prayer meetings regularly. On his mission, he baptized thirteen people, three of whom he had dreamt he would baptize.⁵⁹ Even George Miller, who is often cited for his zeal for the political Kingdom of God, described his activities as preaching and campaigning alternately.⁶⁰

Alfred Cordon and James Burgess preached steadily, seizing every opportunity to share the gospel. For example, one day during the haymaking season, it began to rain, and since one can make hay only while the sun shines, Cordon and Burgess went around the neighborhood inviting all of the unoccupied farmers to a meeting at three o’clock that afternoon. A large group assembled, and Cordon and Burgess preached “to some lenght on the first principls of the doctrine of Christ.”⁶¹ David Pettegrew and George P. Dykes, each in his own account, wrote of preaching “faith and repentance and baptism.”⁶² By preaching so much, the elders not only presented the gospel and baptized new members⁶³ but in many areas also “seamd to remove a great deal of prejudice,” as Jacob Hamblin said of his mission.⁶⁴

One method by which the elders proselytized was a result of their traveling without purse or scrip; they lodged with many people—Mormons, non-Mormons, and part-member families—who allowed the elders to discuss religion in their homes. Nearly every journal entry written by Burgess and Cordon begins or ends by naming the individual or family with whom they stayed. Burgess held lengthy conversations on the topic of Mormonism with almost all his of hosts, including a Methodist preacher and a German family that spoke only a little English.⁶⁵ In one instance, Burgess “had much conversation on the principles of the gospel got them in great favor with our principles.”⁶⁶ Alfred Cordon wrote of an anti-Mormon with whom they stayed: they talked with her until midnight “and removed conciderable prejudice from her mind.”⁶⁷ Once when Levi Jackman and his companion were out in a heavy rain, a family invited them into their home after the elders had been turned down three times by others. The two electioneers talked to the family “freely about our faith.”⁶⁸

Because the electioneers often served in their native states, many of them had the opportunity to visit their families and teach them about LDS beliefs; for some, this would be the last time they would see their families because of the forthcoming Mormon migration to the Great Basin. While staying with his family in Kentucky, Daniel D. Hunt baptized twenty-three people, most of whom were his relatives.⁶⁹ When James Holt arrived at his father’s home, his father would not shake hands with Elder Holt’s companion. Holt told his father that if he could not treat his companion as a gentleman they would go elsewhere. His father tearfully called them back, and Holt visited with his relatives, “teaching them the principles of the Gospel, when they gave me an opportunity.”⁷⁰ Before going to his assigned state of Maryland, Jacob Hamblin traveled to Wisconsin to see “if I could convince some of my Father’s folks of the gospel.” He found his family planning their move to Nauvoo to join the Saints; Hamblin’s brother-in-law had already been baptized and his father “was a believing.”⁷¹ Chapman Duncan went to see his “kinsfolks and warn them as I supposed for the last time.” Although he stayed with his family through 1845, he left them “unbelieving as to our doctrine.”⁷²

When Henry G. Boyle joined the Church in 1843, his parents told him that he would have to give up Mormonism or leave their house. They fully expected he would renounce his religion, but Boyle surprised them by gathering a few articles of clothing, tying them in a kerchief, and leaving his “once beloved home.”⁷³ While on his mission, Boyle returned to his hometown. Upon hearing that he was in town, his parents sent for him to come stay with them. They apologized for their harsh opposition and admitted they had been wrong. Though they did not join the Church, the breach between parents and son was substantially healed. Boyle and his companion, Seabert C. Shelton, stayed with Boyle’s parents the entire time they served in the area. Boyle and Shelton then traveled 150 miles to Tazewell County, where they visited Shelton’s relatives. While there, Boyle dreamt he was preaching to some of his relatives who lived about sixty miles away. He recounted his dream to Shelton, and they traveled to the home of Boyle’s great-uncle McClanahan, who had a family of six children. Boyle determined that he would preach the gospel to them, and if they believed and joined, he wrote, “they may be more happy and more inteligent or if they reject the testimony that I will bear to them, [they] will be left in their ignorance and be condem[n]ed.” Uncle McClanahan allowed them to use his house for preaching, which they did for a month, and though McClanahan, his children, and their cousin showed great interest in Mormonism, Shelton and Boyle had to leave for a conference before anyone was baptized.⁷⁴

Other electioneers invited their wives to join them as they electioneered and visited family. Heber C. Kimball had planned to send for his wife, Vilate, primarily so they could be together but also so she could visit her sister and brother-in-law, Nathaniel, with whom Kimball stayed for a time.⁷⁵ Because Moses Tracy’s wife, Nancy, had not seen any of her family for ten years, Moses took her with him to New York for the express purpose of visiting both of their families. While staying with each family, she and Moses taught them the gospel, but none of them were baptized. Nancy tried to convert her brother, Albert, who came from Canada to see her after learning she was home, “but he was satisfied with his religion and would not listen to the message we had to bear.” He returned to Canada, and though they corresponded, Nancy never saw him again.⁷⁶

W. R. R. Stowell had success preaching to his family—not only were they baptized, but they also decided to move with him to Nauvoo. They even wrote “Nauvoo” on both sides of their wagon cover. When Stowell received news of the Martyrdom, he was saddened. But “the spirit of gathering with the Saints and sharing their fortunes whatever they might be,” he wrote, “was still upon me and I continued to labor diligently in preparing for the journey to Nauvoo.” Despite Joseph’s death, Stowell was happy to lead his family to the city of the Saints on the Mississippi. David Pettegrew visited not only his “relations in Vermont and New Hampshire” but also, as he later wrote, “the graves of my father and mother. I had grave stones put over their graves on the 8th day of July, 1844.”⁷⁷ Similarly, Wilford Woodruff visited with his wife’s parents on his mission and during his return journey stopped at his father’s home (who was LDS), following a prompting of the Spirit. Woodruff recorded:

I lade my hands upon my Father Aphek[’s] head. . . . I ordained My father Aphek Woodruff unto the office of an high Priest and Patriarch after the order of Melchezedeck. I sealed him up unto eternal life. I placed upon his head the seals of the covenant.

When all was oer [over] it was right, my soul was satisfyed. I had accomplished what my soul longed after.

After his parents went to bed, Woodruff prayed for them and felt a marvelous spirit. The next day “a peculier Charm was thrown around my soul as I left the threshhold of my fathers house, having the confidence that if I never see my father in the flesh again I shall meet him in the first resurrection.”⁷⁸

Another evidence that electioneering was a proselytizing opportunity as well as a political mission is that many elders did not end their mission upon Joseph Smith’s martyrdom. Had the mission been primarily or merely political, it would have died with the candidate. Before the Martyrdom, Alfred Cordon and James Burgess read Views to people and spoke of politics; afterward they continued to preach the principles of the gospel one to three times a day. They did not start home for Nauvoo until April 29, 1845, ten months after the Martyrdom.⁷⁹ John M. Horner specifically noted that, while the Prophet’s death did end the campaign, it did not end the electioneers’ mission. He and other elders continued to hold branch meetings and preach in New Jersey and Pennsylvania until February 1846, at which time Horner sailed with other Saints to California aboard the ship Brooklyn.⁸⁰ After mourning Joseph Smith’s martyrdom, Stephen Post wrote in his journal, “May the work of the Almighty roll on till the earth is filled with his knowledge. The Lord said he would move the cause of Zion for good & surely he has done it & thousands are rejoicing in the everlasting covenant. . . . Let the saints be filled with joy tho they mourn their loss for a little season.” Understanding that the work would continue, Post stayed on his mission to preach and in February 1845 joined with some elders who had also been sent on a mission.⁸¹

William W. Riley said nothing of the Martyrdom in his daily journal until recounting a sermon he delivered on July 7, 1844, in which he “spoke of the Percicution of Mo. and Illinois and the death of Joseph and Hiram Smith and the progress of the Kingdom of god.” Riley mentioned his leaders’ deaths almost casually, as if they did not affect his mission at all, and he continued regular preaching through September 15, 1844.⁸² Likewise, Henry G. Boyle stayed on his mission until April 1845, ten months after the Prophet’s death.⁸³ When John D. Lee learned of the Martyrdom, he prayed and reported having a vision of Joseph’s martyrdom and receiving instruction from an angel.⁸⁴ Starting the very next day, Lee continued his preaching until he received word that he was to return home.⁸⁵ Charles C. Rich began his journey home immediately after hearing of the Martyrdom but preached along the way.⁸⁶ David Pettegrew similarly decided to return to Nauvoo immediately but first visited all the people he could, “bearing testimony to what we verily knew and believed.” He and his companion then started for home, “lifting up our voices by the way.”⁸⁷

Joseph Smith’s 1844 campaign for the presidency thus proved to be a great proselytizing movement. The electioneers preached nearly daily, mostly on the basic doctrines of the Church. Moreover, this emphasis was in accordance with the instructions given to them in the April conference, where they were told to preach the first principles of the gospel.⁸⁸ The elders also preached to the families they stayed with and, significantly, proselytized among their own families—sometimes converting them and sometimes bidding them a final farewell. Most of the elders who kept journals recorded baptizing between four and twenty people during their summer missions. While the Martyrdom was devastating to elders such as Lorenzo Snow and Abraham Smoot,⁸⁹ many of the electioneers continued their missions after the death of their candidate. The Twelve, of course, returned home immediately, and most of the elders were soon after called home to work on the temple and fill other duties.

Proceedings of the Conferences and Other Work among the Branches

The political conferences set up by the Twelve, like the fact that there were a large number of electioneers, have often been used by historians as evidence of the seriousness of Joseph Smith’s candidacy. However, these conferences, like the work of the electioneers, have not been examined sufficently. Because these conferences were the principal means by which the campaign was to be carried out, their proceedings are a valuable key to understanding the nature and purpose of the campaign. At each of the conferences, the branches of the Church in that area were accounted for, though some of these branches had very few members. At some conferences, up to ten branches were represented, and the numbers of elders, priests, teachers, and deacons in each were ascertained. Although the number of members attending from each of these small branches may seem insignificant, the combined number of members was significant. For instance, the number of members attending the three conferences recorded in George A. Smith’s journal totaled 350.⁹⁰ At the conferences, some members were ordained to offices in the priesthood. Brigham Young recorded that he ordained “28 to the office of elder” at one conference alone.⁹¹ Conference attendees were instructed, usually by a member of the Twelve or by a presiding elder, to teach the first principles of the gospel rather than delve into mysteries. Also, presiding elders (branch presidents) were called and set apart over many of the branches. Thus the campaign provided a way to organize and account for the many branches of the Church scattered across the United States.

The minutes of the political conferences are largely indistinguishable from the minutes of contemporaneous area conferences in England and Canada. During the Sunday session of each of these conferences, the sacrament was administered to the Saints, and members of the Twelve or the electioneers spoke on such topics as the first principles of the gospel, the Atonement, revelation, living prophets, obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel, the Resurrection, the new and everlasting covenant, charity, and baptism for the dead. Interested nonmember citizens also attended these conferences. James Burgess and Alfred Cordon “placarded the city with some written handbills” to advertise the Chicago conference to the general public for the following Saturday and Sunday (May 25 and 26). This particular conference was opened on Saturday by the singing of “The Spirit of God.” Representation of the branches was then called for—only twenty-two members attended, including four elders, three priests, and one deacon. The electioneers then preached over the next two days on the first principles of the gospel, the latter-day work of the Lord, the Resurrection, and work for the dead as taught in Isaiah 61:1–3.⁹²

To some extent, these were political conferences, and sometimes Views was read or other campaigning was done. For example, at the Chicago conference held by Burgess and Cordon, Cordon alluded to Smith’s candidacy in his talk on the Resurrection, and at a meeting separate from the conference, Elders Terry and Nixon presented Views to a group of citizens.⁹³ James Harvey Glines reported that Brigham Young, Lyman Wight, and George B. Wallace spoke at the Boston conference “on the election of Joseph Smith the prophet to the Presidential chair of the Union and also upon the powers and policy of the government of the United States of America [Views]. Considerable excitement prevailed throughout the city, very many people were favorably inclined to vote for our candidate for President of the United States.”⁹⁴

Yet most of the time in these conferences was dedicated to preaching to the members and proselytizing. It was at one of these conferences, in fact, that Abraham Smoot called for all who desired to be baptized to receive that ordinance. The day after the Pleasant Valley conference, Wilford Woodruff baptized two people,⁹⁵and Alfred Cordon recorded eight baptized during another conference.⁹⁶ Not only did this preaching by the elders and the Twelve bring new members into the Church, it also strengthened the testimonies of the members of these little branches.

The conferences were also used as a forum to curb apostasy. As mentioned, at the conferences the Twelve warned the Saints and electioneers against delving into or teaching mysteries, admonishing their audiences to focus on the first principles of the gospel. Relying on these basic principles would give the Saints a measuring rod to determine the truthfulness of any pronounced doctrine. Some Saints, however, did not heed the Twelve’s advice. George A. Smith announced at the Kalamazoo conference that Samuel Parker, one of the electioneers, had been teaching mysteries “that never entered into the mind of God, or the authorities of the church” and made plain Parker’s apostasy to all the members who might have believed him.⁹⁷

More often, the electioneers themselves helped curb apostasy that had arisen, as some elders and members in these isolated branches were teaching false doctrine. James Burgess dealt with some apostate members during the Chicago conference. After discussing the local apostasy in an early session of the conference, elders were sent to talk with each of the members in question. When these members were unwilling to comply, they were disfellowshipped in the next session of the conference.⁹⁸

Crandell Dunn wrote of a meeting at which three elders and one sister were “cut off” due to apostasy. At another meeting, Dunn made plain to the Saints the folly of an Elder Savage, who spoke in tongues and said that if Joseph Smith was dead then there “was no truth in Mormonism.” Dunn explained to the people that, while the gift of tongues was indeed a real gift when used correctly, Savage had spoken falsely; he had been overly anxious that Joseph and Hyrum Smith should still be alive. Dunn told the Saints it was an “unwise speech,” for which Elder Savage alone “was to blame.”⁹⁹ Nancy Tracy wrote that her husband stayed on his mission after the Martyrdom, during which time as a seventy he “had authority to make some things right that were not altogether in order in the branch” of the Church at Ellisburg, New York, where his father’s family lived.¹⁰⁰

On August 1, 1844, Norton Jacob dealt with greater apostasy. James J. Strang and Aaron Smith arrived at the conference in Florence, Michigan, and claimed that they had received a letter written by Joseph Smith and sent just before he died. The letter purportedly said they were to gather the Saints to Wisconsin. While some of the members might have believed Strang and Smith, Jacob was able to point out all the mistakes in the letter that proved it was a “base forgery.” He noted that it was written “throughout in PRINTED characters,” that the postmark was the wrong color, and the contents were “altogether bombastic, unlike the work of God and dishonorable to the name of Joseph Smith whose signature it bore in a hand he never wrote.” The conference sent Aaron Smith and James Strang to Nauvoo, “where was the proper authority to decide upon their pretentions.”¹⁰¹

While building up branches may seem less monumental than securing Smith’s candidacy for president, the elders seemed to consider this strengthening very important. Because they were traveling without purse or scrip, the electioneers were eager to find LDS members to take them in. The members equally needed to meet with leaders of the Church, especially after Joseph Smith’s martyrdom. On July 13, Brigham Young recorded that “the brethren were glad to see us.”¹⁰² Wilford Woodruff attended a meeting on July 11 with the Saints in Boston, explaining, “They felt to mourn their loss of the prophet and patriarch of the Church, yet they were strengthened in the faith.”¹⁰³ At Joseph’s death, these outlying branches of the Church could have easily fallen away had the elders and the Twelve not been there testifying to them.

Fortunately, the elders spent a fair amount of time working with and strengthening branches. For example, Charles C. Rich visited branches on twelve occasions.¹⁰⁴ Alfred Cordon and James Burgess visited a small branch of fifteen members in Chicago on May 21. In Canada three weeks later, the two discovered a branch with just six members. Cordon wrote, “The verry countenances of them did me good.” He preached to them, and “the saints rejoiced very much.” On July 11, Cordon located another branch of fifteen members at German Flatts, New York. They stayed with these members for several days, held five meetings and “had good seasons . . . [in which their] souls rejoiced.”¹⁰⁵ Burgess then traveled through New Hampshire alone to look for scattered branches. He found one in Gillsom and one in Walpole, but Elders Adams and Twist were already among them.¹⁰⁶ Finding a branch of six members, Levi Jackman stopped and preached to them for several days.¹⁰⁷ Erastus Snow wrote of visiting the branches in New Hampshire and Vermont, including the Saints “in Woodstock, Northfield, Danville, St. Johnsbury . . . & Lyndon all the churches [branches] I could hear of in the state except some scatering members.”¹⁰⁸ At the request of another elder, Jacob Hamblin visited the Thomas Town branch and a “small branch of the Church in Lightersburg.”¹⁰⁹ David Pettegrew said they visited “churches [branches] by the way, exhorting them to diligence and faithfulness, baptizing many who desired to renew their covenants . . . through New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio.”¹¹⁰

Through personal love and care, the electioneers also strengthened individual members. Franklin D. Richards administered to several ill Saints, including a Sister Amey, who was immediately healed. He also blessed a man who had sore eyes and a woman who had a hurt ear. One member, named David Fox, who had a child that was near death asked Richards to stay with him. Even though Richards had planned to leave that area immediately, he stayed with the family and preached the funeral sermon.¹¹¹

The electioneers also showed love by answering individuals’ concerns and traveling out of the way to visit with members. For example, one night Crandell Dunn stayed with a brother named Bartholomew, who asked some “hard questions.” ¹¹² Once, after Elder Burgess preached to a large group of people, a member reported to him that a few Saints three miles away wanted someone to come teach them. Burgess complied with their request.¹¹³ While Enoch Burns claimed he did not accomplish much on his mission—he and his companion held only one meeting—they were able to visit “some scattering saints.”¹¹⁴ In visiting and helping these Saints, the electioneers did in fact do a great work, that of strengthening the Church and its branches by strengthening the members.

Members in outlying areas were also strengthened through their association with the Quorum of the Twelve. Because the conferences were usually attended by one or more of the Twelve, the electioneering elders and the Saints across the nation heard the Apostles testify concerning the gospel. Franklin D. Richards traveled with Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, learning much from them; Elder Crandell Dunn traveled and preached with George A. Smith and Wilford Woodruff. During the conferences, the Twelve ordained men to the priesthood and gave people blessings. James Glines, for example, attended the Boston conference, where seven members of the Twelve participated. Afterward, Heber C. Kimball and Orson Hyde ordained Glines an elder, and Brigham Young called him on a mission.¹¹⁵ Wilford Woodruff found a branch that an Elder Sarine had built up, but Sarine had recently been seriously injured when a horse kicked him in the face. Elder Woodruff not only administered to him but stayed with him through the night to comfort him.¹¹⁶ Such personal care would not be soon forgotten.

Due to isolation and shock over the Martyrdom, these Saints might have concluded that the Church had died with the prophet. However, at the political conferences set up by the Twelve, branches of the Church were organized and accounted for. The members of these branches, as well as interested citizens, were then instructed by the electioneering elders and members of the Twelve in the principles of the gospel. Members of the Church were often ordained to new offices, and nonmembers joined with the Saints through baptism. The elders’ work among the branches also included seeking out and preaching to small or isolated branches. They curbed apostasy in these far-off branches of the Church and cared for the individual needs of the Saints. Through the conferences, the Saints across the nation and the campaign missionaries heard the Twelve testify, learning much from them and coming to know them. Thus members of these branches had their testimonies rekindled by Apostles and missionaries just at the time of Joseph Smith’s death, which undoubtedly prevented many from drifting away from the Church.¹¹⁷

Protecting the Twelve

In the attempt to determine the purposes for and effects of the campaign, another result of the campaign has become apparent, one that seems unintentional and yet visionary. Wilford Woodruff later said that Joseph Smith told him before he left on his campaigning mission, “Brother Woodruff, I want you to go, and if you do not you will die.”¹¹⁸ Was there really that much danger in Nauvoo? At least two of the electioneers who traveled home to Nauvoo via Carthage ran into mobs who sought their lives. When W. R. R. Stowell stopped near Carthage to buy some hay, he was surrounded by several bystanders who recounted to him what had been done to Joseph and Hyrum Smith. They asked if he was afraid, and he said he was not, for he had as much right to travel the public roads as anyone. He then asked the mob if they would sell him some hay. His frankness apparently prevented them from doing anything dastardly.¹¹⁹

Lorenzo Snow had a similar experience while passing close to Carthage on his way home. Traveling up a hill in his buggy, he saw a dozen men waiting in the road with bowie knives and guns. His buggy hit a large rock, and he shouted “Boys! Why in hell don’t you repair this road!” “He is one of us,” one of the men said to another. “He is all right, let him pass.” Lorenzo Snow was carrying some money with him for some Saints in Nauvoo. He wrote of this experience, “How far my uncouth and undignified expression went as security for their money, must be left to conjecture.”¹²⁰ While such incidents demonstrate the danger that the Saints in Nauvoo were in, the particular danger facing the Twelve emerges in a letter written on June 30, 1844, from Vilate Kimball to her husband, Heber C. After relating some of the events surrounding the Martyrdom, Vilate asked where the bloodshed would end, for Nauvoo was still being harassed by mobs. Her main concern was William Law, because, she wrote, he “says he wants nine more [Apostles], that was in his quorum. Sometimes I am afraid he will get them. I have no doubt but you are one.” Vilate believed that the mob wanted to kill specific members of the Twelve in addition to Joseph and Hyrum Smith, although they were the principal two. She wrote that she had “no doubt but [Heber’s] life will be sought.” She was sorry he had been called back to Nauvoo and prayed that “the Lord [would] give [him] wisdom, to escape their hands.”¹²¹

Vilate’s apprehensions seem even more valid in light of the circumstances of the Martyrdom. For who were at Carthage Jail with Joseph and Hyrum—all the members of the Twelve and First Presidency who were not on missions in the East. In another letter written a few days before the Martyrdom, Vilate told her husband of the Smiths being taken to Carthage. Though worried about them, she confided to her husband, “If you were here, you would be sure to be in their midst. Thiss would increase my anxiety of cors.”¹²² In faraway places such as Boston, the members of the Twelve were out of the reach of the Carthage mob. Whether the mob would have killed any of them or not, the Twelve’s Illinois enemies never had the opportunity because of the campaign. The keys of the kingdom, given to the Twelve by Joseph Smith, were not lost, and Brigham Young in particular was preserved to lead the Church for the next thirty years.

Conclusion: The Campaign and the Kingdom

The number of electioneers and the “political” conferences called by the Twelve in 1844 have been repeatedly used as evidence that Joseph Smith fully expected to obtain the presidential chair and that the electioneers’ purpose therefore was to ensure this outcome. But as has been demonstrated, the electioneers did not focus primarily on Joseph Smith’s candidacy, for most of their political rallies were not fundamentally political.

So the question remains: Was the campaign merely a stratagem or a ploy to proselytize and organize the branches of the Church, or was Joseph seriously seeking the presidential chair? To a certain extent, Joseph Smith must have been running for office; otherwise, he would not have made the effort to write Views. In addition, the electioneers did some legitimate campaigning, mainly through publishing and publicizing the Prophet’s platform, which gave serious and rational solutions to major problems of the nation in Joseph’s day.¹²³ The electioneers presented these solutions to the people of the United States as the Views of a prophet and the only man they felt they could trust in politics. As William Hyde declared, “Our object was to vote for a man whom we knew to be our friend—As we had proven many and found them faith less, and untrue to their trust—and in all respects unworthy of our confidence and the confidence of all good men.”¹²⁴ The electioneers knew Joseph to be a good and moral leader who would not betray them or other citizens of the United States. Presenting his Views and his name to the people of the United States is evidence neither that the Prophet was a megalomaniac nor that he was grasping for power or secretly planning to take over the government. It is evidence merely that he was running for president.

Yet the journals of the electioneers provide evidence that the campaign accomplished much more than presenting the Prophet to the nation. In fact, the campaign is more significant than historians have previously supposed, for they have overlooked the point that, while comparatively little was done by the electioneers to secure Joseph’s presidency or to set up the political Kingdom of God as the new United States government, the electioneers, in a very real sense, did build up the ecclesiastical kingdom of God. Rather than elect their beloved Prophet to the presidency, they built the kingdom by teaching the gospel in every state in the nation, by gathering and caring for the Saints and their own families, and by strengthening and organizing the scattered branches and keeping them from falling away at the death of their Prophet and candidate.

Appendix:
The Electioneers¹²⁵

? = Called on a mission in 1844; could have electioneered or served in previously called mission.

Adams, Charles A.—New Hampshire

Allen, Daniel—Illinois

Allen, O. M.—Missouri

Anderson, Miles—Georgia

Anderson, Richard

Andrus, Milo—Ohio

Angus, John O.—Kentucky

Ashby, Nathaniel—Massachusetts

Babbitt, Loren—Ohio

Bacon, Samuel P.—New York

Barlow, Israel—New Hampshire

Barnes, H. W.—Illinois

Barney, Edson—Ohio

Barrus, Ethan—Mississippi

Bartlett, Milton F. —Massachusetts

Bates, Archibald—New York

Bates, Marcellus—New York

Bathrick, Almon—Illinois

Batson, William—Ohio

Beebe, Isaac—Georgia

Bell, Alfred—Tennessee

Bennett, Hiram—New York

Benson, Ezra T.—New Jersey

Bent, Samuel—Michigan

Bentley, Gregory—New York

Betts, John F.—Virginia

Bigler, Henry William

Blanchard, John R.—Massachusetts

Bosworth, J. B.—Louisiana

Boyle, Henry Green—Virginia

Boynton, A. D.—New Hampshire

Brady, L. A.

Brandon, G. W.—Alabama

Brandon, T. J.—Alabama

Briggs, S. H. —Wisconsin Territory

Brooks, L.—Ohio

Brothers, W.—Ohio

Brown, Alfred—Ohio

Burgess, James—Vermont

Burnham, Jacob L.—Illinois

Burns, Enoch

Burton, Issac—New Hampshire

Butler, L. D.—Alabama

Butterfield, J.—Maine

Buys, H. D.—Tennessee

Buzzard, P. H.—Illinois

Candland, David—Illinois

Carlin, Edward—Indiana

Carpenter, S. E.—Georgia

Carroll, J.—Ohio

Carter, Dominicus—Vermont

Carter, S.—Ohio

Casper, J. A.—Ohio

Castell, J. J.—Tennessee

Chamberlain, G.—Pennsylvania

Chase, Darwin—Arkansas

Chase, John D.—Vermont

Chase, Isaac—New York

Childs, Nathaniel—Ohio

Clapp, B. L.—Alabama

Clark, William O.—Illinois

Clough, David, Sr.—New Hampshire

Cole, J. M.—Pennsylvania

Coltrin, Graham—Michigan

Coltrin, Zebedee—Michigan

Condit, A. W.—Ohio

Cook, Henry L.—New York

Cooley, Alvin—New Hampshire

Coon, L. T.—Tennessee

Cooper, John—Ohio

Coray, Howard—Illinois

Coray, William—Missouri

Cordon, Alfred—Vermont

Cornish, Denman—Vermont

Couthouse, John

Crouse, G. W.—Pennsylvania

Curtis, Jeremiah—Michigan

Curtis, Joseph—Michigan

Cutler, William L.

Davis, Amos—Tennessee

Davis, E. H.—Connecticut

Dayton, Hiram—Ohio

Dayton, Lysander—Ohio

Dean, Henry—Pennsylvania

Dobson, Thomas—Illinois

Downing, James—Pennsylvania

Dryer, William W.—New York

Duel, O. M.—New York

Duke, Jonathan O.—Delaware

Duncan, Chapman—Virginia

Duncan, John—Pennsylvania

Duncan, W. A.—Illinois

Dunn, Crandell

Dunn, Simeon A.—New York

Dunn, Thomas—Michigan

Dykes, G. P.—Indiana

Eames, Ellis—New York

Edwards, F. M.—Indiana

Edwards, Thomas—Kentucky

Egan, Howard—New Hampshire

Eldredge, Horace S.—New York

Elliott, Bradford W.—New York

Elliott, Henry—Indiana

Ellsworth, Edmund—New York

Elsworth, B. C.—New York

Emell, John M.—South Carolina

Emmett, J. M.—Ohio

Evans, David—Virginia

Ewell, Pleasant—Virginia

Farlin, Orrin D.—Pennsylvania

Farnham, A. A.—New York

Farr, A. F.—Indiana

Felshaw, William—New York

Fife, Peter—Virginia

Fisher, Daniel—New York

?Fleming, Josiah

Folsom, W. H.—Ohio

Foote, Timothy B.—New York

Foster, J. H.—Ohio

Foster, L.

Foster, Solon—New York

Fowler, George W.—New York

Frost, Samuel B.—Kentucky

Fuller, Thomas—New York

Fulmer, David

Fulmer, John L.—Tennessee

Gardner, Daniel W.—Massachusetts

Gardner, Morgan L.—Georgia

Gillett, Truman—New York

Gillibrand, Robert

Glaefke, A. J.—Pennsylvania

Glines, James Harvey

Goldsmith, G. D.—New York

Gould, John—Illinois

Graham, James—Illinois

Grant, Jedediah M.

Green, Harvey—Michigan

Gribble, William—Michigan

Griffith, Richard—Pennsylvania

Groves, E. H.—Illinois

Gurley, Zenus H.—Illinois

Guyman, Thomas—North Carolina

Haight, William—Vermont

Hale, Jonathan H.—Maine

?Hall, Alfred

Hall, Lyman—New York

Hamblin, Jacob—Maryland

Hamilton, Robert—Virginia

Hammond, John—Illinois

Hampton, J.—Tennessee

Hancock, Levi W.—Vermont

Hanks, A.

Harding, A. M.—Vermont

Hardy, Zachariah—Illinois

Hatch, Jeremiah—Vermont

Hatwood, Elder—Connecticut

Heath, S.

Herriman, Henry—Maine

Hess, Thomas—Pennsylvania

Heywood, J. L.

Hickerson, G. W.—Illinois

Higginbottom, W. E.—Virginia

Hodges, Amos—Vermont

Hoit, Timothy S.—Illinois

Holbrook, Chandler—New York

Holbrook, Joseph—Kentucky

Holmes, M.

Holt, James—Tennessee

Holt, John—North Carolina

Hopkins, Charles—Indiana

Horner, John—New Jersey

Houston, Isaac—Vermont

Houston, John—North Carolina

Hovey, Orlando D.—Massachusetts

Hoyt, Homer C.—New York

Hoyt, Samuel P.—Massachusetts

Hubbard, C. W.—Michigan

Hunt, D. D.—Kentucky

Hunt, Jefferson—Illinois

Hutchins, S. P.—Ohio

Hyde, William—Vermont

Jackman, Levi—Illinois

Jacob, Norton—Michigan

Jacobs, H. B.—Tennessee

Johnson, Jesse—Ohio

Jones, David—Ohio

Jones, John—Delaware

Jones, John—Indiana

Jordan, William H.—Missouri

Judah, David—Illinois

Kelly, John—Louisiana

Kelting, J. A.—Tennessee

Kendall, L. N.—Michigan

Kershner, D. J.—Illinois

King, Joseph—Virginia

?Kinnamen, Elder

Lamb, Abel—Illinois

Lambson, Alfred B.—Virginia

Lamoreaux, A. L.—Indiana

Langley, G. W.—Tennessee

Laurence, John—Illinois

Leavitt, N.—Illinois

Leavitt, Nathaniel—Arkansas

LeBaron, Alonzo—South Carolina

?Lee, E.

Lee, John D.—Kentucky

Lemon, Washington—Indiana

Lewis, Clark—Ohio

Lewis, David—Illinois

Littlefield, L. O.—Ohio

Lloyd, George—Massachusetts

Lovelace [Loveless], John—Ohio

Loveland, Daniel—Massachusetts

Lowry, John—Missouri

Lyman, Amasa—Indiana

Lyman, William D.—South Carolina

Mack, Chilion—New Hampshire

Mackey, John—Indiana

?Mallory, Lemuel

Markham, Stephen—Illinois

Martindale, William—Indiana

McArthur, Duncan—Illinois

?McGin, Elder

McIntosh, J. A.—Arkansas

McIntyre, William P.—Pennsylvania

McKeown, Marcellus—New York

McRae A.—North Carolina

McTaggart, Thomas—Rhode Island

Mikesell, Garrett W.—Kentucky

Mikesell, Hiram W.—Kentucky

Miles, Elder

Miller, Bethuel—New Hampshire

Miller, George—Kentucky

Moffitt, Armstead—Tennessee

Moon, John—Maine

Moore, Lorenzo—Louisiana

Morley, Harley—New Hampshire

Morris, Jacob—Ohio

Morse, Justus—Delaware

Mott, Hiram—Illinois

Mouer, Henry—Pennsylvania

Mount, Joseph—Tennessee

Mulliner, S.—Illinois

Myers, John—Maryland

Nelson, James—Illinois

Nelson, William—Louisiana

Newberry, James—Indiana

Newland, William—New York

Newman, Elijah—Ohio

Nichols, John—Ohio

Nickerson, A. C.

Nickerson, F.

Nickerson, L. S.

Nikon [Nixon?], Elder—Illinois

Noble, Joseph P.—New York

Norris, Patrick—Maryland

Nyman, Hyrum—Pennsylvania

Olmstead, H.—Illinois

Ott, Frederick—Indiana

Owens, Horace B.—Kentucky

?Pace, James—Arkansas

Pack, John—New Jersey

Palmer, Abraham—Indiana

Park, James—Virginia

Parker, Samuel—Michigan

Parshall, William H.—New York

Penn, G.—Tennessee

Perkins, A. H.—Missouri

Perry, Josiah—Vermont

Pettigrew, David—New York

Pew, George—Louisiana

Phelps, J. R. G.—New York

Phelps, Morris—Illinois

Phippin, James W.—New York

Pierson, E. D.—Massachusetts

Porter, Jared—Ohio

Porter, Nathan—Ohio

Post, Stephen—New York

Powers, J. M.—Ohio

Pratt, William D.—New York

Rainey, D. P.—Tennessee

Razor, Aaron—North Carolina

Redfield, D. H.—New York

Reed, Calvin—New Hampshire

Reed, Elijah—New York

Reid, John H.—Kentucky

Rich, Charles C.—Michigan

Richards, Franklin D.—Indiana

Richards, S. W.—Indiana

Riley, W. W.—Tennessee

Riser, G. C.—Ohio

Riser, J. J.—Ohio

Roberts, John W.—Ohio

Rogers, D. H.—Kentucky

Rose, Joseph—Ohio

Rule, William G.—Missouri

Sanderson, James—North Carolina

Sasnett, J. J.—Tennessee

Savage, Bro.—Michigan

Savage, David—Michigan

Savage, William—Michigan

Seabury, William—Rhode Island

Shearer, Daniel—New York

Sheets, Elijah F.

Shelton, Seabert C.—Virginia

Shoemaker, Jacob—Pennsylvania

Simmons, A. A.—Arkansas

Smith, Jackson—Tennessee

Smith, John G.—Indiana

Smith, Moses

Smith, Warren—Tennessee

Smith, William—South Carolina

Smoot, Abraham O.—Tennessee

?Snider, George—Illinois

Snow, Charles—Vermont

Snow, Erastus—Vermont

Snow, James C.—Vermont

Snow, Lorenzo—Ohio

Snow, W.—New Hampshire

Snow, Warren—Delaware

Snow, Warren—Vermont

Snow, William—Indiana

Sparks, Quartus S.—Connecticut

Spencer, Daniel—Massachusetts

Sprague, R. C.—Michigan

Spry, Charles—Kentucky

Stewart, Levi—Illinois

Stewart, U. V.—Indiana

Stoddard, Lyman—Maryland

Stoddard, S. B.—Maine

Stow, Milton—Ohio

Stowell, William R. R.—New York

Strong, Ezra—Ohio

Strong, Reuben W.—Michigan

Tanner, John—New York

Tanner, Martin H.—New York

Tanner, Nathan—Indiana

Terry, Jacob E.—Illinois

Thayer, Ezra

Thompson, Charles—New York

Titus, Martin—Vermont

Toughs. See Tufts.

Tracy, Moses—New York

Tracy, Nancy Naomi—with husband, Moses

Truly, Ekells—South Carolina

Tufts [Toughs], Elbridge—Maine

Tulley, Allen—Ohio

Twiss, John S.—New Hampshire

Tyler, Daniel—Mississippi

Vance, John—Illinois

Vance, W. P.—Tennessee

?Van Deuzen, Increase—Michigan

Van Natta, J. H.—New York

?Venusthrom, James M.

Vincent, Ezra—Ohio

Wait, Allen—New York

Walker, J. B.—Mississippi

Wandell, C. W.—New York

Warner, Charles—Pennsylvania

Warner, Salmon—Indiana

Watkins, William—Kentucky

Watt, George—North Carolina

Watt, George D.—Virginia

Webb, E. M.

Webb, P.—Michigan

?Wells, Elder

Welton, M. B.—Kentucky

West, Nathan A.—Illinois

Wheelock, C. H.—New York

Whipple, Edson—Pennsylvania

White, Samuel—New York

Whitney, A. W.—Virginia

Wilbur, Melvin—Rhode Island

Willard, Stephen D.—Michigan

Wilkes, Ira—Michigan

Wilson, B. W.—Ohio

Wilson, H. H.—Louisiana

Wincester, B.—Virginia

Winchester, Stephen—Pennsylvania

Woodbury, Joseph J.—Massachusetts

Woodbury, W. H.—Massachusetts

Yearsley, David D.—Pennsylvania

Young, A. D.—Tennessee

Young, Alfonzo—Tennessee

?Young, Joseph

Young, L. D.—Indiana

Young, P. H.—Ohio

Younger, Joseph—Tennessee

Zundall, Jacob—Pennsylvania