Can Nauvoo Land Deeds Really Prove Polygamy? – LDS Discussions
Listen on Apple Podcasts Spotify YouTube Download MP3
About this episode
What can Nauvoo land deeds actually tell us about Joseph Smith and the practice of plural marriage?
In this episode of LDS Discussions, we take a close look at Nauvoo land records and examine claims that deeds issued to women –including women who were later identified as plural wives of Joseph Smith –provide evidence for Joseph Smith’s practice of polygamy.
The records are fascinating, but they are also considerably more complicated than they might appear at first glance.
We examine the legal and historical context surrounding Nauvoo property, including the difference between a grantee and a recognized landowner, quitclaim deeds, coverture, widow’s dower rights, property held in the names of women and children, and the ways Joseph Smith and others used property arrangements to protect land from creditors and other legal complications.
We also take a closer look at individual cases involving Helen Mar Kimball, Sarah Ann Whitney, Flora Woodworth, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, Lydia Dibble Granger, Mercy Fielding Thompson, Philinda Myrick, Emma Smith, and others.
Several of these women had connections to plural marriage, but that raises an important historical question: Does the existence of a deed help explain why a particular transaction happened, or does the deed itself provide evidence that polygamy was the reason for the transaction?
Throughout the episode, we compare the deeds with tax records, William Clayton’s journal, bankruptcy proceedings, and other contemporary evidence to see whether the names and dates appearing on the deeds accurately reflect who actually owned, occupied, controlled, or benefited from the property.
One of the key conclusions is that you cannot simply take Nauvoo land deeds at face value. A plural marriage may sometimes provide a possible explanation for a property transaction, but the transaction itself does not necessarily prove that a plural marriage existed.
This episode explores the complicated gap between what was legally recorded, what people were actually doing, and what later historians assume those records mean.
Originally published on mormonstories.org.
Transcript
Machine-generated and lightly edited. Click any timestamp to jump the audio to that moment. The audio is authoritative; please check it before quoting.
Introduction and Guest Background
Nemo Hello, everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories podcast. It is an LDS discussions video, which is what you've got my face and not John Dehlin's. The LDS discussion series is a standalone series that is consumed on its own feed and also as part of the main Mormon Stories podcast feed. So if you've just stumbled across this, welcome again. It was started by Mike. The LDS discussion series was, who did a website full of great essays and information about the church. And he did a series with John. And John believes that it is one of the most impactful things that Mormon Stories has ever produced.
Nemo And as biased as I may be to say it, I would agree. I think it's been a great series so far. He then passed the torch on to Julia. He retired to pastures much greener. Julia came in as a researcher and somehow I ended up with the gig of hosting when Colby's not around. But we are also often joined by Colby. But today is a bit of a different episode. LDS discussions, before we get to why this is different, is an effort to address LDs truth claims and history as accurately and dispassionately as possible. And to do that today, we don't have Colby with us.
Nemo He's not available. But we do have a guest. Historian Mary Ann Clements will be joining us in episode 82, which we always say, this is best consumed in sequence. You will notice if you are on the dedicated feed, we've gone from tithing part one to this, then on to tithing. And that's really just a special one, a special little dose for everyone who wants to, you know, relive your home buying trauma. Because today we are talking about land deeds, the fascinating world of land deeds and property, and particularly to make it exciting for you all, how it pertains to polygamy and what it can and can't tell us about polygamy in the time of Joseph Smith. I have rambled long enough. Let's bring on the people who know what they're on about. Julia and Marianne. Hi. Both.
Julia Hello.
Mary Ann Clements Hello.
Nemo There we go.
Julia I was going to say your British accent makes you great at introducing these episodes.
Nemo I think that's what I'm hired for. It's a diversity hire of some kind. Yeah. But no, it's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for joining us. Marianne, you've just delivered this information at Sunstone. Sunstone was a great time, I think, judging by Julia's face whenever she talks about it. It was a wonderful time had by all and I was sad not to be there. So Maybe one year I can, I can join everyone at Sunstone.
Mary Ann Clements Definitely. It's a super fun experience.
Nemo Yeah, I'm. Yeah, I'm ready. I'm ready for it.
Julia Yeah. So I know, I know this is a niche topic. I know this is like a. Maybe a select few people will be interested in it, but I heard, hearing this research from Marianne Clements, I loved it and I thought it had a place in the LDS discussions. And we've had Brian Buchanan on recently talking about the William Klain journals. And I met him at Sunstone again and he just sang your praises. He was like, please have her on. She's an amazing researcher. Just please, just have her on your podcast. So you know, that's one phrase from Brian.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Julia Yes.
Nemo A ringing endorsement from Brian Buchanan. That's what it takes.
Julia Yeah. Okay. So do you mind telling us a little bit about yourself, about your credentials and maybe why you got started on researching these landings?
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, So I, I got my bachelor's degree in archaeology from byu. So I learned, they taught me really good how to do research and how to research the most random things. So. But then I became a stay at home mom for about 20 years. And then once my kids got a bit older, I was able to kind of go back. And I always intended to go back to grad school, but I decided at that point I had been into doing family history as a hobby like about 15 years. And so I decided instead of doing grad school, I actually would get formal training in genealogy and to get a credential. So I went and I did a bunch of online classes through the local community college. College and I. Bunch of other stuff. And then eventually I submitted a portfolio and got an official credential as a certified genealogist.
Julia So wait, so you went from. What did you say? Archaeology?
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, archaeology. Anthropology with archaeology, emphasis. Yeah.
Julia So archaeology to family history.
Mary Ann Clements Yes. So I still like dead people. I still research dead people. I just do it more in records now instead of in the ground.
Nemo Dead people in writing, not dead people in dirt.
Julia That's the.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Nemo Nice.
Mary Ann Clements Exactly.
Nemo We like that.
Mary Ann Clements But I'm still digging.
Nemo Okay. Yeah, and there's place to a lot of dust. There's some dusty archives still, right?
Mary Ann Clements Absolutely, yes. Crumbling papers. Yeah.
Julia Okay, so how did you get, how did you go from that to the land deeds specifically? Like, you might talk about this in your presentation too, but.
Mary Ann Clements Well, in genealogy we deal a lot with property records. Property records are just super helpful as far as. Because usually I'm researching people that are like, no names. Right. So I'm looking for any mention of them. And so property records is a great way to figure out where the people are, what time they're residing in particular places. But also, like, family members. A lot of times husbands, like, when they would sell land, they would have to list the wife's name. So it's a great way to get, like, a woman's name. Also, like, witnesses to deeds were often family members or friends. And so it just gives great clues to learn more about families. So property records are like genealogists, like, dream love them.
Julia And then do you find these records? Mostly? Are these on, like, ancestry.com, familysearch? Like, where do you track these down? Or does the city. Do they post them? Like, I don't.
Mary Ann Clements No. Most of these I'm accessing through FamilySearch.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements So what's now FamilySearch International used to be the Utah Genealogical Society. They began microfilming local records back in the late 30s, 1930s. And so they've just, over many, many decades, have amassed tons of local civil records, town, county, national records. And so most of the time, especially when we're dealing with US Land records that are kept at the county level, we're usually looking at those in county records. The nice thing about, though, Nauvoo and Mormon history is we also have the Joseph Smith papers, which, between that and the church history library catalog, a lot of that stuff's now been digitized, and we can look in those.
Julia So I guess that's what I was getting at is like, where can people access these? But I think most of these, if not all of these, are available on the Joseph Smith papers.
Mary Ann Clements Would you say Joseph Smith papers? Joseph Smith papers, and then also the church history library catalog.
Julia Okay. Right. Okay. Yeah. Cool. Cool.
Nemo Okay.
Julia Okay. So are we ready to just throw
Why Land Deeds Are Linked to Polygamy Claims
Nemo the slides up to just launch into it? Do it.
Julia Okay. So do you want to read. I don't know if you want to say anything about this, like, what the properties can and cannot reveal. So. Because I think a lot of people use. Or I'll just set this up this way. So a lot of people use this, These landings as evidence for or against Joseph Smith living polygamy. Usually that's four.
Mary Ann Clements If they're going to use the land deeds, usually they're saying it. Four.
Julia Oh, I guess four. Okay. Yeah. So there's. I just have a couple of. Just images of some past episodes from people. So this is Bill Reels. This is on the Mormon discussions podcast. And this is a lot of these are from 2022. So it has been a few years or a couple years, 20, 24, I guess. So this one's called the Smoking gun that Joseph Smith Practiced Polygamy. And this is Bill Real's presentation. Then you have Michelle stone from her 132 problems where she says our Nauvoo land deeds, evidence of Joseph Smith's polygamy. And that's episode 119.
Julia And then on Mormon ish podcast, they had both Michelle and Bill on and they not as a debate, but as a. Just sharing both sides. And this was back a couple years ago, two years ago. And so I just wanted to share some just to set this up a little bit so that people understand why we're even talking about this, in my opinion. So this is. This first clip is from Michelle Stone and the next one is from Bill Real. So we can just. I'll just play these. Here is a list of all of
Mary Ann Clements the wives included by Wikipedia. The ones in red are the ones with deeds. As you can see, less than 25% of supposed wives were included on deeds. Among the 75% of wives that were not included on deeds are such well known wives as Louisa Beaman, Zina Huntington, Agnes Kulbreth, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Leitner, Melissa Lott, and even Eliza Snow. So we have to ask, if Joseph is deeding property to wives, why did he include only one fourth of them and not even his beloved Eliza? From all of the stories that she would later tell Yuma, can you summarize
Julia what point she was trying to make?
Nemo Yeah, I mean, I object to the way he says from all the stories she would later tell. There's an implication there that she doesn't believe Eliza when she talks about things. Right. Which I guess is Michelle's position is that anyone who says Joseph was practicing polygamy was lying or was under duress to say so.
Nemo It would appear to be. I don't want to sort of misquote her, but it would appear to be her position that anyone who gives a sort of witness testimony is for some reason involved in some sort of vendetta against Joseph or some need to say something that isn't true. But her position seems to be that if Joseph were giving this land to his polygamous wives, why is he not giving it to all of them? And that would be like saying, oh well, I noticed someone's giving Christmas presents to some of their kids but not others, therefore they can't be their children.
Nemo Really, Michelle, I don't think the relationship between people actually is founded or not founded upon whether they're given land. So I think she makes a point that you can't use it to prove his polygamy. And I think that's a fair point. You can't say, well, they must have been polygamous wives because he was giving them land.
Nemo But also, you can't say the inverse either. You can't say, well, they weren't his polygamous wives because he didn't give all of them land. And that seems to be then the extension she takes it to. Which you just can't take it there either. So that's how I would sum that up.
Julia Marianne, did you have any thoughts on that clip?
Mary Ann Clements I'll be giving a lot of thoughts later on, so. Perfect. I'll hold off.
Julia Okay. Okay. So I'll go. I'll go next to Bill Reels. This is the same Mormonish podcast episode. And I'll play that, folks.
Nemo Again, we should expect to find.
Mary Ann Clements Not the top three. Eliminate those. Those don't stand out.
Nemo It's those deeds to Sarah Ann Whitney Mirinda, Nancy Johnson Hyde, the Partridge Sisters,
Mary Ann Clements Sarah Scott Mulholland, Flora Ann Woodworth, Sylvia
Nemo Sessions, Helen Mark Kimball, Mary Elizabeth Rawlings Leitner Patty Bartlett Sessions, Elizabeth Davis Durfee, and a deed to Lydia Dibble Granger. We should expect to see about three. I'm sorry, one of these deeds, maybe two, maybe three. And instead we see, I believe, 14 of those deeds.
Mary Ann Clements And I'm okay, again, lowering that number. Raise that number. Lower the population. Raise the population.
Nemo We still have to figure out why so many people in Nauvoo have cancer. And the most reasonable, rational conclusion is Joseph Smith's polygamy.
Julia He used cancer as an analogy in that episode. That's why he's mentioning it. Not that people in Nauvoo had cancer, but that's just. It was just an analogy. What were you going to say, Nima?
Nemo Well, I was going to catch that and say, I'm pretty sure, building off the back of an earlier analogy about, you know.
Julia And I didn't. Yeah.
Nemo Even if one person has cancer, you start to work out why. Right. But again, that's to say, like, well, if you. Even if Joseph's giving one parcel of land to someone, you need to ask why. And that's a fair point. But again, the why may not necessarily be because he was married to them polygamously. So, for what it's worth, and I like Bill. I get on well with Bill. I don't know Michelle particularly well, but with both of them, I. My gut and I feel Like, Mary might agree with me. Marianne may be on my side here, but I feel like we're gonna get into why you can't reuse it either way.
Julia Correct?
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. Yeah. That is very fair. I don't know, Julia, if you wanted me to respond to Bill's.
Julia Yeah, go ahead.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, I mean, we're going to actually talk about many of those that he. That he highlighted, but so both.
Julia So.
Mary Ann Clements So Bill initially was using an argument of there's a higher proportion of these deeds that are going to plural wives than there should be. And so that's why Michelle is countering that. Well, okay, if you're arguing that he's giving land, why is he not giving it to this. The other plural wives? My point is going to be that that's kind of the wrong way to look at these deeds.
Nemo So.
Julia Yeah, yeah. So we'll just launch right into your. To your. What you've got. Marianne, do you want to talk about this one?
Mary Ann Clements Yes. So one of my big questions was, why are deeds associated with polygamy in the first place? And it really has to go Back to that July 12, 1843, journal entry by William Clayton. This is what my friend Cheryl Bruno says is polygamy revelation day. So in this journal entry, Clayton says, this morning I wrote a revelation consisting of 10 pages on the order of the priesthood, showing the designs and Moses, Abraham, David, and Solomon having many wives and concubines. After it was wrote, presidents Joseph and Hyrum presented it and read it to E, who said she did not believe a word of it and appeared very rebellious. J Told me to deed all the unencumbered lots to E and the children. He appears much troubled about E. Okay, so E, obviously, is Emma. So if we go to the next slide.
Julia Oh, sure.
Mary Ann Clements We'll kind of see what these assumptions that have been made. So Clayton says that Joseph Smith had dictated the polygamy revelation that morning. And then Hyrum takes the polygamy revelation to Emma, and then Emma rejects the polygamy revelation, and then Joseph tells Clayton to deed 60, ends up being about 60 plus town lots to Emma and their kids. So that's all in the journal. That's what Clayton documented. And so a lot. A big assumption that people have made is that, oh, wait, if Joseph. If Emma's mad about plural marriage and Joseph is trying to alleviate, like, pacify her and he's giving her land, Emma must have been worried about Joseph giving away other land to plural wives and that it actually. I mean, it makes sense to a certain extent.
Nemo He wouldn't be the first man to give his wife a gift after he's upset her, would he?
Mary Ann Clements Exactly. And if he's giving gifts of land to other women, then maybe he can pacify her by giving her gifts of land. Right. But there's two big problems with this. So if we go to the next slide, this was something.
Mary Ann Clements So the first problem is this draft deed to Hyrum Smith. And this was something I learned about actually from Michelle Stone's podcast. And what it is is it's a fully written out in pen deed that's complete. It's just waiting on Joseph Smith's signature and the signature of a witness. And basically it's almost all of the same 60 plus town, lots of. But the original intent was to actually deed them all to Hyrum Smith, and it's for the same amount of money for the $10,000. And so we're going through. So clearly the original intent was Joseph to deed all of these properties to Hyrum. And that's probably why Hyrum and Joseph and Clayton were meeting together that morning, was to go over this deed and to go ahead and sign it. So that actually lends him support to diary entry.
Joseph Smith Transferring Land to Family Members
Julia Do you have any thoughts about why he would give them to his brother? I don't. I didn't think about that.
Mary Ann Clements So around that time, they're having. It's clear that Joseph Smith's bankruptcy is not coming through. Like the filing is not coming through, whereas Hiram Smith's bankruptcy filing went through. So my best guess right now, and just before this, we have Joseph kind of almost like refinancing, making new agreements with all of the creditors out east. And so my thinking right now is he probably, he wanted to get all these properties out of his name so that the creditors couldn't come after him. Oh yeah. So my. That's my thinking right now is he needed to get these out of his name so that they would be kind of safe. Right.
Nemo I come into these cold.
Julia So.
Nemo And the reason I do that is so that I can then have thoughts like this and maybe appear stupid on the Internet, but maybe not and ask kind of questions from a sort of devil's advocate style position. It seems that the argument that was laid out on the last slide is Emma's rejecting polygamy.
Nemo And the. The idea would be that Joseph's giving this land and she's maybe noticed he's giving this land to other women. And so he goes, well, I can reassure her that she's still my number one priority. By giving her loads of land.
Nemo And to that argument, I'm not sure and I'd love for you to kind of push back on this. I'm not sure how it, having originally been intended for Hiram necessarily has any effect on that in that that's still land he can give to her to make that gesture. And she doesn't necessarily know where it was originally going to go or not. So it's not that she was worried that those particular 60 parcels were going to go to other women and he's reassuring her that they're not, they're going to her, but it's more a gesture of, well, you've seen me giving this stuff away to other people. Don't worry, you're still priority. You get this land and he's just taken it from Hyram and given to her instead.
Mary Ann Clements Right. And see, how I would interpret it is a little bit different. So the drafted to Hiram. So with the previous assumption, a lot of people, they would notice that, yes, among the people that Joseph is deeding land to include his plural wife. So that kind of confirms a fear of Emma's. But with this draft deed, none of these particular properties, and this is all of the unencumbered lots, these are the lots that are freely available to go to other people. Like, the fact that they're going to Hiram means they're not going to go to any of the plural wives. And that's why to me, like, I
Nemo guess my point is, like, these were
Mary Ann Clements all the available lots that Joseph could have deeded to other people.
Nemo Would Emma have known they weren't at risk? Was. It's kind of maybe what I mean.
Julia Right.
Mary Ann Clements And yeah. And my argument is Emma would have known that these were intending to go to Hiram.
Nemo Sure.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. I guess that's my assumption that I'm coming in here with.
Julia Well, I just want to ask too, if these were. If Joseph was trying to evade or trying to help with bankruptcy and giving them to Hiram, would giving them to Emma. And maybe this can play in later when you discuss women owning land. Would that have helped. Would it have helped Joseph to give the land to Emma in his bankruptcy?
Nemo Oh, yeah. Or would it still be seen as his.
Julia Yeah, that's what I mean.
Mary Ann Clements That's the issue. And that's why the second half the presentation is addressing if married women could own property in Hancock County. And the answer is, I mean, just kind of a teaser. Legally, no. However, it is clear that people at the time thought they could. And so Joseph, there's a very good chance Joseph thought they would be safe in Emma's name. Because then if Emma ever divorced him, then that's another reason some people have suggested for deeding giving her those lots in case that there was a divorce, she would still be able to keep that property. Unfortunately, if it goes to court, then if it's ever challenged, then the women don't actually own the property. The judge is like, yeah, that is not legal here. Well, and this in the Ms. Case, it was challenged and so it was all considered Joseph's property.
Nemo This actually does tie into our last episode where we were talking about green flake being given as tithing and a certain historian, I forget her name now, was arguing that, well, it wasn't legal.
Julia Sorry, theory O.
Nemo It wasn't legal to give him as tithing. So of course that wasn't what happened. And I think what we're seeing here is the same as we're seeing there. Just because it wasn't the way things could be legally done didn't mean the Saints didn't run around doing it as though they could make it work. Right?
Mary Ann Clements Yes. And we see that a lot.
Nemo They're practicing plural marriage, for goodness sake. Like they're not exactly letter of the law people. They're not going, ah, well, the law says we can't practice bigamy, so I guess we won't.
Julia Right.
Nemo You know.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. And it wasn't just the Mormons. It was, you know, people would try to get away with it. It's frontier America. Laws are much more lax and you can get away with it if it's not challenged in court. It's just we have some cases where things were challenged in court and that's why we know it wasn't legal.
Nemo There's a real big difference between de facto and de jure in this sort of time period. Right. There's loads of things going on in a de facto nature that were you to take them to court, wouldn't hold.
Mary Ann Clements Correct.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And that's the entire point, is that definitely people in the 1840s in Kanecock county acted like married women could own property.
Julia So.
Mary Ann Clements And I'll bring that up later on and I'll kind of show
Julia and.
Mary Ann Clements Okay, so the Hyrum Smith deed brings in this problem. And if you notice on that I showed where it's actually. It's Hiram Smith's name and we get that cross out in pencil where it shows Emma, etc. Because it's Emma and the kids. Right. So clearly this document is from that day and we have that change, which is also Kind of good confirmation for that Clayton journal entry.
Julia Yeah, that's really good. That's a really good point.
Mary Ann Clements So that's what, like, I was really shocked when this was on Michelle Stone's podcast and she was taking it in a different direction, but I'm like, oh, my gosh. That's why they're there. That's why they were there. That morning was so cool. Yeah, it's really cool. So you can see that decision, that change happening in real time.
Julia Yeah, it's right there. Like, yeah, Hiram. And then Emma's written over top of it.
Mary Ann Clements And then a screenshot of it four lines down. Yep. Down. It's right there as well.
Julia Here. This one. Yep. Such a tiny head. Right.
Mary Ann Clements Emma and then. Etc. Because it was to Emma and then all of the kids. Emma and Joseph's kids. So that's why, et cetera. Yeah.
Julia Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. And then what I'll go into, the first one is many deeds that Joseph Smith did issue just suspected plural wives have better explanations than polygamy. And we're going to go through some of those now. So, okay, so this was old school. So Nemo's way too young for this, but.
How Nauvoo Deeds Differ from Normal Property Records
Mary Ann Clements So one thing I wanted to point out is navu deeds are not like normal deeds. And that's one of the big problems I had when I was finally willing to listen to some of these podcast episodes. I'd already been kind of emotionally scarred about dealing with navu deeds, so I didn't want to initially get into it. So. But when I did finally start listening, the two big things that bugged me was people kept treating these deeds like normal property deeds, and they're not like normal property deeds. And two people kept saying married women couldn't own property. And I had already had research projects where it was clear people were acting like married women could own property. So let's go on to the next slide.
Julia Perfect.
Mary Ann Clements So normal assumptions that you would make with deeds is that the grantor, which is the seller, is the legal owner of the property on the date of the deed for the deeds we're talking about today. Yes. We're going to go ahead and assume that there are other instances where that's not the case. Okay. And then two, normal assumption is the date of the deed is the date that the grantee or the buyer becomes begins treating the land as their own. This is for sure not true for most of the property. In Nauvoo, many people made agreements to purchase land from church officials and immediately treated the land as their own official deeds.
Mary Ann Clements Often came years later, if they ever came at all. And this was because Joseph Smith had gotten into over a hundred thousand dollars in debt purchasing lands from Galland, from Hotchkiss, and from a guy, White. And so they needed to pay for the land before they could issue the deeds. And so he actually would wait for people to finish paying off the land. That's how he was getting his cash in order to pay the creditors, Hotchkiss, White, and Galland.
Mary Ann Clements And so that's why they wouldn't issue the deed until, like, a few years later. And then the last assumption is that the grantee or the buyer on the deed is the new recognized landowner. And this is actually clearly not true in several cases. And we learn of this through when we look at the tax records, we look at who's responsible for paying taxes, we look at who sold the property, and we find out, oh, it's a different person that was actually selling the property. So it's clearly.
Mary Ann Clements So that's the problem when you're just taking these deeds at face value. There's a whole lot of issues going on. Okay, let's go to the next one.
Julia Wait, Nemo, did you have any thoughts? You were giggling a lot.
Nemo The line generally okay to assume for Nauvoo in reference to the fact that the grand tour or seller is the legal owner of the property just makes me laugh because it's such an early Mormonism thing to be like, do you actually own the land that you're selling me? Well, not really, but fine.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. To be fair, it wasn't just the Mormons, but.
Nemo No, again, no. But my. As a Brit, my only sort of frame of reference for this time in America is Mormonism. Right. It's. It's that in my head, it's these images and it's. It's the Joseph Smith, prophet of the restoration, but just reframed through, like, these land deeds, him wandering around and being like, oh, I'm going to help you bat the dust out of the rug that you're hanging up on a pass of land that actually you don't own.
Mary Ann Clements Yes. Oh, yeah, yeah, I had issues, too. Okay. So this is. This is the project that scarred me initially with Nauvoo land deeds. So this was a family history project from about 10 years ago. So I'm part of. I'm a descendant of Theodore Turley, and I was volunteering with the Theodore Turley family organization, and this picture came up, and it's a two story brick house.
Julia Beautiful brick house.
Mary Ann Clements Yes. It's a brick house back when you
Nemo guys used to make houses out of brick.
Mary Ann Clements But it says it was Nauvoo's first home. And then that the couple in front is Christian Walter and his wife Martin, wife Margaret Messer. And that the photo was loaned to the newspaper. This appeared in a Keokuk newspaper in the 60s.
Mary Ann Clements The photo was loaned by their granddaughter. So I'm like, okay, so I can be pretty safe on the identification of the two people. But was that actually a home that was built by Theodore Turley? I know for sure that's not his. The first home, because Theodore did build. Once the Mormons came in, there were a few houses that already existed in Nauvoo, but he was the first person to construct a house. The first Latter Day Saint to construct a house and to finish it. But he described it, and he was proud of it, but it was made of logs and stone. So I know that's not this house.
Mary Ann Clements But as a descendant, I still want to know, hey, is this actually a house that the family lived in, that my ancestors lived in? And so I thought it would be fairly easy. I could look, hey, did Christian Walter and his wife own that property? Is it possible that this was Theodore's house? So now we can go to the next slide.
Julia Wait, so is this house still standing in Nauvoo?
Mary Ann Clements No, it's not.
Julia Because I've been there so many times. I wonder why. Because I don't know. But that I love. It's on the.
Mary Ann Clements It's on a later slide. We'll talk about it.
Nemo Because Americans are allergic to brick homes. That's my.
Julia I know.
Nemo We've got to rebuild it out of sticks, guys.
Mary Ann Clements Yep.
Julia Okay, so more on that.
Mary Ann Clements Right? So I found the deed from that Joseph Smith gave to Theodore Turley, and it was dated January of 1844. But I know that the Mormons came in, and I know that Theodore Turley mentioned in his journal in 1839 that he had built that first log house, that house of log and stone.
Mary Ann Clements And so right there, I'm like, wait a minute. But if he didn't move there until January of 1844, then maybe this isn't the right lot, right? Like, maybe I'm looking for a different property. And so I went. And based on his journal, I know he built that log House in 1839. I know he paid. I was able to look in the trustee land books, and I found that he did pay $55 towards the $250 price for that same lot 4 on Block 147 in September of 1839, just before he went to his mission to England. And then also, all the tax lists for 1841, 42, and 43 say that Theodore Charlie was a responsible party to pay taxes for that lot.
Mary Ann Clements And then it was sold by Theodore and his wife in February of 1846. So as far as I can tell, that is actually the lot that he did own. But for some reason, the deed is dated in January of 1844. So the deed is not reflecting the date of the actual original.
Julia Okay, so let me summarize. So he moves in 1839, he puts $55. But you said he doesn't get the deed. People don't get deeds until they're done paying it off. Is that what you had said?
Mary Ann Clements Either they're done paying it off, or sometimes they were never issued deeds at all, which is just awesome.
Julia So people are just living there and passing on their house and they don't own the deed.
Mary Ann Clements I mean, the trustees land books usually will say who owns what. They're like the. The land agents in Nauvoo were trying to keep track of who owned which land and, you know, whether or not they had paid on it. And so he had. I know he had made that initial payment, but I don't know exactly when he finished paying off on it, because my guess.
Julia My guess was maybe he finished paying in 1844. But. But certainly what you're saying here is that even though the deed. The date of the Deed was in 1844, he had been living there and
Mary Ann Clements treating the property as his own since 39. But he. He actually built that log house. He began building it in May and it finished in July. So. But yet he didn't. The trustee land books, they start in September, so.
Julia Oh, so even before that, what you're saying? Even before, yeah, in 1839.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, in May of 1839 is most of when people get up to Nauvoo, when Joseph Smith makes that initial. But he's building his house even as he's helping to survey all the lands and lay out all the lots and the streets. Wow. So, yeah, there's a simple difference in
Nemo modern Mormonism, which is, you know, there's all the affinity fraud in Utah. Right. Mormonism suffers from a trust me, bro sort of social media function that is probably an operation here. He's like, right, I'm gonna buy this land. And like, okay, well, then get building. Right. There's. There's a verbal agreement or maybe something in small writing that's not binding to say, okay, well, this lot's yours. Okay, cool. Well, I'll pay you when I get this lot of money that comes through here. Okay, that's fine. And you can keep paying. Like, it's this. It's as. It's as communal as Mormonism got. Right. Because the prophet was living amongst you. And, you know, it was this high trust society.
Mary Ann Clements Right. But also, remember, they're coming up from far west. So he's got a huge group of people, refugees, basically, who need a place to stay. Quincy is being nice to them, but they can't really stay there in Quincy. And so he's moving a whole bunch of people all up to Nauvoo. So everyone's basically kind of claiming some land and starting to, you know, living in tents initially, but, yeah, they're building homes.
Julia Okay. So you got this next one with a. It's the same image, but you have. So.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, so I was able to find out that. Yes, indeed. So the property that the Turleys owned was on the same lot as the mansion house. So I had to go through the nightmare of all of the estate sales because I was trying to find a good chain of title that would go from Theodore Turley to this Walters family. And it was just horrendous dealing with all of the nightmare, because the estate, the. The Joseph Smith estate, like, I was just trying to look, okay, everything on Block 147. And it just created this nightmare because it was part of the whole Joseph Smith estate, which you have court cases and just.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, eventually I found out, yes, this family did own that property. So, yes, this was a house that my ancestor built, but it was a house that was built later. It wasn't that initial log house. And then this little newspaper thing that is from 1934. And that's when the descendants of this couple, they actually tore down the house because it was in really disrepair, and it was actually kind of a safety danger. And so they had torn it all down, and so now it's just farmland. So the Charlie property and Nauvoo, it's just farmland.
Julia So it was on the same lot as the mansion house, which you can go visit today. Is that what you're saying?
Mary Ann Clements Yes, it's on the same block. So it's the big field to the east of the Mansion house.
Julia Okay, that's super fascinating. Okay. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements So then I finally started looking into it, and because people were claiming there was this polygamy angle, so we talked about. The Turley one was the example of why you can't trust the Dates on the deed. Right, Right.
Julia For sure.
Examining the Partridge and Quitclaim Deeds
Mary Ann Clements And now we're going to talk about why you can't trust the names of the grantees on the deeds. So here is the example that a lot of people will talk about with polygamy. And this is the deed to all the Partridge kids. And this is Eliza, Emily, Caroline, Lydia, and Edward Partridge Jr. And so this deed was issued on February of 1843. But what we find out when we look back into the records is that Edward Partridge had begun building a home on that lot shortly before his death in May of 1840.
Mary Ann Clements And then his wife, later in 1840, she gets married again. So she's the widow. She gets married to William Huntington. So William Huntington is listed as a responsible party to pay taxes on this lot. So the question is, did the Partridge kids really own it, or did the widow and William Huntington really own it? But clearly, the Partridge kids are getting this because it was the law assigned to their dad. Right. Like, because their dad had been building a house on it. So this is more likely an inheritance issue. This is not polygamy.
Julia Right, Right.
Mary Ann Clements Because it's going to all of his kids as the heirs of Edward Partridge.
Julia Right. But then he began building in 1840. Yeah. So that's.
Mary Ann Clements Began building on it. Yep. Because Eliza talks about in her journal that her dad was working on building the house, and then he dies, and he's exhausted, and so then the family moves into the little one of the buildings that he had already completed on the land.
Julia Okay, tell us about the quake claim deed.
Mary Ann Clements Okay, I haven't mentioned that. So what happens is, I was trying to figure out who the crap sold this land, but I could not figure it out. So I don't even know if anyone ever actually paid for this land or if this was given to the fatherless or widow by the church, but it was considered still belonging to the church, because the next word I can find about it is this quitclaim deed by Lewis and Emma Bidemann in January of 1848. And this deed that lists, like, oh, probably close to 100 properties where they're like, okay, we don't think we own these properties. But, like, so this what a quitclaim deed is, is that normal deeds are called warranty deeds, where the seller is like, I warrant, I can prove that I am the legal owner of this land, and now I am selling it to you.
Mary Ann Clements What a quitclaim deed is is when someone is trying to purchase property, but there's a potential that someone else might own it, and so he'll go to that other person and get them to issue a quit claim deed where they're like, we don't think we're the real owners of this land, but in case something comes up where we actually are the real owners, we're going to sell our interest to you. And so they're quitting any claim that they have on that property. So that's why it's called a quit claim. Okay, but. So, like, think they actually own it? But so basically no one knew for sure who owned this land in January of 1848.
Julia Okay. And so in the Saints, they left already, right? Brigham and the lot, they left. So the land, this is just empty, basically. Empty novels. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements A bunch of the lots were being sold at tax sales because people weren't paying taxes on them. Some of the lots, there was just confusion over who owned a bunch. And you'll see this same quitclaim deed will pop up later on where this may have been part of the church's property, but no one was quite clear on who owned the property at that point.
Julia Gotcha. Okay, so hang on, just to summarize this. So Edward starts. They move the partridges move in to Nauvoo. He starts building in 1840. Polygamy hasn't even really taken off. Like, he has a couple wives, but it hasn't really taken off in 1840. So people trying to claim later that this moves may be given to Eliza and Emily, who later did marry Joseph. Yeah. Seeing this as evidence of polygamy is incorrect because he had already been building
Mary Ann Clements what was already his. It's much more realistic to view it as they're basically inheriting land that their dad had already claimed.
Julia Right. Okay. So, yeah, this is not an example
Nemo of polygamy, but it's Joseph Smith giving the right.
Mary Ann Clements It could be. It wasn't clear if anyone actually paid for the land. And we do know that by the beginning of 1841, Joseph Smith had issued about the land agents estimated about $45,000 worth of land to widows and orphans and other people who they never expected to actually get paid.
Nemo Okay, yeah, Quick question here. I think it might be important. We discussed in the last episode also the way in which the church's money and Brigham Young's money were kind of an amorphous blob at times. Right.
Julia Yeah.
Nemo We're never sure whose was whose. Joseph Smith, being the grantor of this land, as the mayor of Nauvoo, as the commander, general, whatever that title was, he gave himself as all these things. Is it not reasonable to also think that he's giving this land in the name of the church rather than personally, I would say.
Julia Wasn't Bennett the mayor during this time?
Mary Ann Clements Do you see his grand tour? Do you see where it says, Joseph Smith, sole trustee and trust for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. So this is land initially, they're all under. The land is under Joseph and Emma Smith's name. So any deeds up to the end of 1841, you're gonna see it's Joseph Smith and Emma Smith deeding land to people. But then at the end of 1841, Joseph and Emma Smith deed all of the. The official church's land or whatever to Joseph Smith as the trustee in trust. They had learned that a church could actually own land as long as it was held in this trust. What they didn't understand at the time was you're only supposed to be able to own five acres, and this was much more than five acres. And that's something that John C. Bennett will bring up a little bit later.
Nemo I guess that is my point is. Yeah. That Joseph's acting as trustee and trust of the church. So the idea that he's just giving some of his personal land as like, perks to his polygamous wives is not necessarily what we're seeing here.
Mary Ann Clements No. And in fact, defining whether Joseph sees it as personal land versus church owned land, that's going to be very fuzzy.
Nemo Yes.
Julia Okay.
Nemo Like with Brigham Young and the finance.
Mary Ann Clements Exactly.
Julia I just want to ask one, one other thing because you've already talked about it, but William Huntington is on the tax list for this as being responsible in 1841, 42, and 43. But it's not deeded. The deed isn't dated until February 43. But. So even though he's paying taxes, he does own it, or he is seen as the owner, William Huntington, the responsible
Mary Ann Clements party for paying taxes because he's living. He married Edward's widow.
Julia Right.
Mary Ann Clements So he is basically the head of household that's living on that property.
Julia So even though. Even though it's going from Joseph's hand to the Partridge Children, it's like, this is kind of. Kind of confusing to me because, like, is William good, but then his responsibility, Right.
Nemo Yeah. His responsibility seems to end in 1843, as far as we can tell, when the deed then lands in the lapse of.
Mary Ann Clements Well, no, the 43 is the last tax list that we have for this particular area. Nauvoo.
Julia So. Not that he wasn't carried on. Okay. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Julia Because William's acting like the owner, even Though it's in Joseph's name. See, that's confusing. Exactly.
Mary Ann Clements It's just like with the Turley one. Right, right. Turley was the one paying the taxes for 1841, 42, and 43. And these are tax years. So, like, the 1841 tax year, this would have been at the beginning of 1842 that the tax list was created. Right. And so these people. And that. That tax list is helpful because then it's telling me. Okay. Who is seen as the recognized owner of this property, even if they don't have a deed issued to them. And that's why I'm using that word.
Nemo So William recognized occupant and responsible individual.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Nemo Even if de jour. In. In the law, they don't own it because it's. They've not got the deed yet because,
Mary Ann Clements yeah, technically, the church's trustee owned it before the deed was officially issued in 1843.
Julia Okay. I also like that you said that the churches could own land, but it was only. What did you say, five acres? That's super interesting.
Nemo But again.
Mary Ann Clements But that was something that the Mormons just kind of either didn't understand or they just kind of ignored.
Nemo Yeah, exactly. That's more evidence of this stuff we were talking about. Right. Where they just don't necessarily follow the law.
Julia Yeah, that's true. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. Okay, so here's the next one. This is Helen Markimbell. So you'll see her name listed as Ellen. This was usually British guys, either William Clayton, Thomas Bullock. They're usually dropping that H. And so I'm just saying that I've noticed it's usually the British guys. And my own ancestor, Theodore Turley, when he said Heber, he often would write in his journal, eber.
Nemo And we're saying herbs. And we're saying herbs. That makes no sense.
Mary Ann Clements I know, but I'm just saying. So when you see Ellen Kimball, oftentimes it's gonna be.
Julia It's.
Mary Ann Clements It's. Yeah. So just keep in mind that it's the same. It really is, Helen. Okay, so this is one that a lot of people talk about. It's Joseph Smith again, Trustee and Trust. He is dating it to Helen Mar Kimball. It's. It's part of the northeast quarter of Lot 2 on Block 118. So what we do know, though, is according to the trustee, Lamb Books, Heber C. Kimball had purchased that particular piece of land in 1842. In June of 1842.
Julia So he purchased it, but it wasn't in his name. It was in Joseph's Name or he was finished purchasing it.
Mary Ann Clements Well, he had purchased it per the trustee land books. That's the date that the trustee land books say that he had purchased it. And he actually purchased it from us from another individual, not from Joseph Smith.
Julia Well, so why is Joseph.
Mary Ann Clements But that other individual had never been issued a deed. Okay, so none of the deeds are being issued until later. Okay. Okay, so it's coming from Joseph Smith as theoretically the legal landowner. He is the last known legal landowner. So then it just jumps to whoever the current recognized owner is. On the 1842 and 1843 tax list, Heber C. Kimball is listed as a responsible party. But in case anyone's trying to go back and double check this, it's mistakenly written as a lot number one. But I promise it actually is lot number two. But I did want to point that out in case someone's trying to, like,
Julia push back or go.
Mary Ann Clements Yes, push back on that. But the big thing is that that particular property, Helen's portion, I mean, it was technically the East Undivided third, but Helen's portion, that property was sold by Heber C. Kimball and Philate Kimball in March of 1844. Well, and Helen's name is. No. Nowhere on that deed at that point.
Nemo She's only several months shy of her 17th birthday in 1844. So she's, you know, she's not even that old.
Julia Wait, are you saying that. Wait, why was she not on it? Because. Is it because she's a woman? Or, like, why was she not?
Nemo Well, I mean, she's not an adult.
Julia Is that the only reason?
Nemo I don't know. But, like, it's a point. She's not 18 yet.
Mary Ann Clements But. But we still have. At the end when they're all leaving Nauvoo, we do have Helen Kimball needing to return that deed to the trustees, where normally they're saying these are. This is a list of power of attorneys. But in her case, the land had already been sold by her parents. So she's literally just returning the deed because it's a piece of paper.
Julia So the land was never really hers. Like, it was not. Is that what I'm seeing?
Mary Ann Clements Okay, yes. That's the point.
Julia So it was in Joseph's name, but Heber bought it in 42 and he
Mary Ann Clements had bought it from another guy.
Julia From another guy, not Joseph. So this isn't Joseph giving land to this polygamous wife. Okay, yeah, this is.
Nemo He's giving land to her name for some reason. But her
Mary Ann Clements 7th of June of 1843, that is just before Heber C. Kimball is leaving to go on his mission. It's around the same time as the plural marriage is supposed to have happened. So it's possible there was some sort of trying to protect the land in case something happened to Heber. But it's all supposition. Right. Like speculation.
Nemo But the point is, it's not actually her land.
Mary Ann Clements The point is, is it's not actually her land because it was sold by her parents without any.
Nemo Bought by her dad, and it was
Mary Ann Clements purchased by her dad the year before.
Julia Is there a way to see polygamy in this? Could Joseph have been pretending? I don't. I don't want to say pretending, but like feigning giving this land to her, even though that's not really the case. I'm just trying to understand if there's
Nemo any way to pull money to her
Julia to make her feel good, Something like that.
Mary Ann Clements Well, yeah, because, like the actual deed, what's in the deed is the east undivided portion of this part of the lot. Right. So which means that theoretically, Heber C. Kimball should have received the west two thirds undivided portions of the lot. So it's just. It's weird. I think it's probably just to kind of protect it in her name. But.
Julia Yes.
Mary Ann Clements You could see it as possibly something for her to hold onto because she had now become a secret wife. Possibly. But I don't think it's.
Julia But she's not really holding anything. If her dad.
Mary Ann Clements She's not holding anything. Yes.
Julia And she's just giving the paper back. Yeah. I don't.
Nemo You'd be better off giving her a pocket watch.
Mary Ann Clements Exactly. Right. The nice. The nice watch that he. Flora and. Yeah.
Julia That's fascinating. So. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements So you really can't see it as Joseph giving land to help.
Nemo You would have to ask what purpose would it serve? Right, right.
Mary Ann Clements Right.
Julia Even when it's sold, it's not hers. So, like.
Nemo Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Right. And so this is one of those situations where I think a plural marriage may help explain why the transaction may have occurred. But I don't think the transaction proofs that the plural marriage occurred. Right, right. It's just. It's giving us a possible reason for. Factor in why it may have happened at the first.
Julia For sure. Okay. Sarah Ann Whitney.
Deeds Involving Minors and Alleged Plural Wives
Mary Ann Clements Sarah Ann Whitney is another one. In the case of both Helen Markimbell and Sarah Ann Whitney, we are dealing with minors. It was not legal to give land to minors. And we learned that based on later court happenings in Hancock county where the judges are like, you cannot do this this is not legal.
Nemo You can't give kids land. What are you doing?
Mary Ann Clements So there's no reason why these kids should own land. So in this case, the date of the deed is the 6th of September of 1840. And I want to say the plural marriage supposedly occurred around July, the end of July.
Mary Ann Clements But we find out that in 1841, Newell K. Whitney had apparently purchased this land. His name is listed in the trustees land books, but on the 1841 tax list, Joseph Smith is listed as a responsible party. On the 1842 tax list, it's Newell K. Whitney. And the 1843 tax list, it's Sarah and Whitney. However, when you look at the bottom of this, you can see that Newell K. Whitney's name was originally there and it was scratched out and Sarah Ann Whitney. Sarah A. Was put over it. There was also some land deeded to Newell K. Whitney's wife, Elizabeth. Ann. Or. Yeah, Elizabeth. And same situation where it's clearly Newell. Whoever originally wrote it wrote down Newell K. Whitney, and then they scratched it out and technically put Elizabeth.
Julia Interesting.
Mary Ann Clements So was it actually their land? Was it not their land? This is the same situation as the Partridge Family where I couldn't figure out who sold it later on. So I don't know if it was considered church land or not. Noel K. Whitney was the bishop. So it's possible that this may have been land given to him as opposed to actually that he actual purchased it. And so the next word I can find on it is a quit claim deed by Lewis and Emma Bideman in January in that same quit claim deed, where there's like 100 properties listed where they're like, we don't think we own this, but in case we do, we're giving over this.
Nemo Do we know what was on this block? What's on lot two of block 139? Do we know what was built?
Mary Ann Clements Okay, so lot two of block 139 is the. Where the Whitney's lived. That was the home of the Whitneys.
Nemo The Whitney home. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements As far as we know, it's just the residents.
Nemo Because the reason I ask is I wonder whether it's the idea that on some of these parcels of land there's perhaps a building that the church perhaps feels like it has more control over. So, like, I'd know where they're trying to do some sort of parsonage where, like, the bishop lives there. And so maybe that's.
Mary Ann Clements That's entirely possible. The question is, why was it put in Sarah's name? Yeah, that's like, why Is it put in the name of. I think she was 17 at the time. The. The two. I think there were two pieces of property that were given to or that were put in the name of Elizabeth that were deeded to Elizabeth. And both of those, I believe, were properties that the church was using for church purposes. So my best guess on these is that they were putting them in Sarah and Elizabeth's name to protect them from any potential creditors that would come after Newell K. Whitney, because he was a bishop. So that. That's where I would probably put these, is they're trying to protect the properties.
Julia Interesting. Okay, so. And there is a home still sitting there, but it's not the original for the new or it doesn't look original at all for the Whitney home. But.
Nemo Okay, so sorry to draw this back to the SEC debucture for a moment. You could argue that this, the church has still done this today where they will, you know, in, on paper, put something under someone's responsibility to try and diversify things.
Mary Ann Clements The shell companies.
Nemo Yeah, the shell companies. Right. They've got these managers who are just signing pieces of paper. You can imagine the same scenario where Sarah Whitney is just on paper, the person who's responsible for the tax of this property.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Nemo In case people come looking at those papers and trying.
Julia Even though she's a minor.
Nemo Even though minor, yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Well, it's not immediately obvious when you just have the name there, whether or not someone's a minor, because no one would actually deed property to minor. That's idiotic, because it's not allowed.
Nemo And the Mormons would never do something that's not allowed.
Julia So with this one, it's not so much polygamy, but probably to protect Newell.
Mary Ann Clements Is that most likely to protect the land? If people were coming after Newell K. Whitney as creditors.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements Which I guess it's what I would. I would.
Julia And is that what you said about Joseph deeding the land to Hiram? Is that kind of the same why he would be giving them?
Mary Ann Clements I think, yes.
Nemo But with Hiram, because he's a close, trusted.
Mary Ann Clements Well, Hiram, because Hiram's bankruptcy filing had gone through, so creditors couldn't come after Hiram for past days. So he was a much safer person to have that property.
Nemo Yeah.
Julia Okay, this is so interesting. Okay, so you've got a list here.
Mary Ann Clements Yes. So since we have been dealing with two minors, Helen Mark Kimball and Sarah Ann Whitney, Michelle had mentioned in her 132 problems, her edition, that possibly these were dowries because it was the 19th century, these were maybe dowries given to Teenage girls. Right. So in the, and this is just looking between 1839 and June of 1844, I only found six instances where a minor child was listed as a sole grantee. You do have a lot more instances, like in the case of the Partridge children, where it's like a bunch of kids are listed as trustees. But in this case I was just looking for minor children.
Mary Ann Clements And so there's three from 1841. One that's the son of Joseph and Emma. And then two, it's Brady's five. Right. So we've got age five. And theoretically he paid 500 for the property. It's like this five year old, did he? No, probably not. Like that's. The other thing is, on these deeds, you've got to understand that it's unlikely that these, the amounts on the deeds actually reflect any sort of cash handed over. Okay, so we've got Frederick T.W. smith. So we've got these three little boys in 1841, which does not scream dowry to me.
Julia So let me, let me just read them just for the people just listening. So you've got Brigham T. Young, he was only 4. This is Brigham's son with Marianne, and then again 500. Then you have Joseph A. Young, another a 7 year old son of Brigham and Marianne, and paying $50
Mary Ann Clements for this, for land in Ramos, also called Macedonia. So it's not even land in Nauvoo, but it is.
Julia Oh yeah, that one's Ramus. Okay. Yeah. But then you, and then you have the three women, you have Sarah Ann Flora and then Helen. Okay, sorry, keep going.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. Yeah. So obviously Sarah Ann Whitney, the thousand dollars, she's not paying $1,000. Like, I mean, this is, it's not reflecting reality. Helen Markimbell, that is actually much closer to a possibility. But again, her dad had already paid that money. Right. So it's unlikely that that reflects any money that Helen would have paid over at that time.
Nemo And you say here in all cases both parents were still living.
Mary Ann Clements Correct? Yeah, which is why. Okay, so that's the thing is we can have cases where a kid could own property if they had inherited it from a deceased parent or from another deceased relative. So what you have is. And then you have a legal guardian appointed to administer that property. But that would be the only situation where you would legally have minor children owning property is if it's been inherited. And that's why I was pointing out these are cases where both parents are still alive. These properties should not have been deeded to minor children. There's no Legal reason.
Nemo And the appointed guardian would appear as the individual responsible for tax on the property.
Mary Ann Clements Correct. And then at the time of the sale, if you were selling land that belonged to minor children, you'd have to actually go to the court to get permission to sell that land. And so then the court would give you permission. And then you have to go through all of these steps. You have to announce it in the newspaper, they have to have this public sale. And then you go back and it's listed in the court that you went through this. So, I mean, it's kind of. It's a pain to go through the process of selling land, but the idea is it's to protect the interests of those kids.
Julia Yeah, right. Okay. That's so interesting. Okay, so.
Flora Woodworth and Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner Deeds
Mary Ann Clements Okay, so now let's talk about Flora. Since we brought up Flora. Flora and then the next one, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner. These deeds drive me nuts, because I cannot. Okay, so we have Joseph Smith, sole trustee and trust. We have the grant grantees, Flora Woodworth. Again, we've got a minor child with living parents. This should not have happened. The date of the deed is the 13th of May of 1843.
Mary Ann Clements When we look at this property, we find out that this guy named Alvin Hoare had purchased this property back in 1840, but he wasn't for some reason responsible to pay taxes in 1841. That was Joseph Smith. But in 42, he is responsible for paying taxes. But then theoretically, it's deeded to Flora. But what we find out is at the end of April, Alvin had actually purchased some property elsewhere in Nauvoo for way cheaper. And so his agreement per the land books was. I'm trying to recall if it was like over a five or ten year payment plan that he had to finish paying off. So if he's purchasing this other cheaper property, he's probably not going to be paying off on that original lot 3 block 142.
Mary Ann Clements So this is a situation where I suspect Joseph Smith suddenly had this property available that he needed to shove somewhere out of his name. Because the issue is, is that Flora Woodworth never lived on that property. She was never associated with that property. She married a guy named Carlos Jove later in 1843. We know in 1845, Carlos Jove was involved in counterfeiting. And so when people were looking for bogus presses from him, they're looking at her parents boarding house up in Block 120. So they are not living on 142, as far as I can tell. I'm not even Aware she knew she was deeded this property.
Julia That's what I was going to ask. Because, like, if. If this is a gift of polygamy, then wouldn't Flora be made aware of it? Right.
Mary Ann Clements I mean, it is kind of within a couple weeks of, I think the plural marriage. I think I want to say the plural marriage supposedly was later in May, but I just. I don't see. Because Alvin had purchased the other property at the end of April, it almost seems like this is just a way to kind of shove property into someone else's name quickly. That's my best guess on this one.
Julia So that feels more like the SEC, like Shell Co. To me. That's kind of what that's reminding me of.
Mary Ann Clements Yes, yes. And then I would agree with that. And then, of course, this is one kind of like with the Partridge and the others, where I cannot figure out who actually sold it. The. The next I hear about it is in 1848 on that giant quick claim deed where Lewis and Emma are like, we don't think we own this, but in case we do, we're selling it.
Julia Okay, okay.
Nemo All right, let's. And then another one.
Mary Ann Clements Can you marry Rollins Lightner saying Mary Elizabeth. Sorry, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner. The date of the deed is the 5th of July, 1843. Lot 4, block, 145. So Mary Leitner and her husband, Adam Leitner come into Nauvoo beginning of 1842. Initially, they live with her father in law. Then they come down to.
Mary Ann Clements They live. They rent a place that's about three, four blocks east of this. And this is a little deceptive because people think that they must have lived here. They didn't. Based on taxes, I can see that they lived a few blocks to the east.
Mary Ann Clements So this deed is dated 5th of July, 1843. When you look at what the Rollins were doing, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner was informing Joseph Smith the day before that they were leaving town because her husband could not find work. And so they were moving to the northern end of Hancock County. So they were leaving town. And yet this deed gets issued to them within a few days of them leaving town, announcing that they're leaving town. So. And they do leave town. So as far as I can tell, they never actually lived on this lot.
Julia Wait, so I think. I think I recall a story in Todd Compton's book. I think it was her where Joseph was sobbing at the idea of her leaving. Y. I think that's what was happening.
Mary Ann Clements And he was insisting. So it's possible maybe he was offering this property to get her to stay. Convince her to stay. But in my mind, if she owned this property, they were so destitute. Like, wouldn't she have sold the property if, like, she actually owned it? Like, because he left. Because he sold it to get some money.
Julia Right, right, right. That doesn't make sense.
Mary Ann Clements So, yeah. So then when you look at the property history, you find out this guy named James Snow had purchased that lot back in 1840. But this was another one where we had a big, long payment plan. But when you actually look, James Snow had actually moved down to the Morley settlement down at the south end of Hancock or the north end of Adam. So he wasn't even living in Nauvoo by the end of 1840.
Mary Ann Clements So when the 1841 tax list we have, Joseph Smith listed. 1842 tax list we have James Snow. It's not found on the 1843 tax list. So kind of a similar situation where this guy is not living in Nauvoo. It doesn't look like he's going to be finishing his payments on that property.
Mary Ann Clements So I suspect this. This had been something found for the Leitner family, because William Clayton does mention in his journal, I believe it's from April of that year, that he's looking for property for the Leitner family. But the Leitners left town, so they clearly weren't anyway. And then, of course, next I can find is on that quitclaim deed where Lewis and Emma Bideman are. Like, we don't know. We don't know who.
Julia So. So she was never treated as the owner. She never lived there?
Mary Ann Clements Nope.
Julia So that's so interesting.
Mary Ann Clements So why was the deed. Why did the deed go through? Because at that point, they already knew she was leaving. So why record the deed in the Nauvoo records? Right? Like, it doesn't make sense to have
Nemo someone else's name on the books.
Mary Ann Clements To have someone else's names on the books is. Is my. Yes, that's what.
Julia That's what it sounds like.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Nemo I think all we need to be offering here right now is that there are viable other reasons for these deeds rather than. Because polygamy.
Julia Right.
Nemo Polygamy may be the relation between Joseph and this other person, but it's neither proof of that relation nor.
Mary Ann Clements Right.
Nemo Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements This is where polygamy might help us give a reason for the deed, but the deed itself is not proof of polygamy. Yeah.
Julia Right. Yes.
Nemo Okay, next one.
Mary Ann Clements Okay, next one. This is another one that Bill Real had mentioned. This is a deed to Lydia Double Granger this is a situation where Lydia's husband had previously owned the property. And so it's more likely that this was an inheritance issue from a dead husband.
Mary Ann Clements So the date of her deed is the 15th of March, 1843, on the west half of Lot 1 and Block 161. So back in 1839, Oliver Granger apparently had owned this property, and he agreed to issue a warranty deed, meaning that he believed he was the legal owner to Dimmock Huntington if he made a series of payments over time. And you can see one of those payments was in 1840. The next payment wasn't due until 1844.
Mary Ann Clements So when Oliver Granger dies in what? Oh, I didn't write it down, but he dies in, I want to say, 41 or 42. At that point, Dimick had only partially paid for that lot. And so the other portion of the lot, you could argue, still belonged to Oliver Granger. And so we have in March of 1843, which is also when the deed was given to Lydia, we have Joseph Smith issuing to Dimmock Huntington the east half of that lot. And then Lydia gets the west half of the lot.
Nemo So Joseph goes for King Solomon and splits the lot in half and goes.
Julia Right.
Nemo You can each have a half because
Mary Ann Clements Dimmock would have paid a good portion of the by that point, but he has an ish paying off on the lot.
Julia So Lydia would have indeeded just because she was married to Oliver is that kind of what.
Mary Ann Clements So that land would have still technically belonged to Oliver, and so she, as his surviving spouse, most likely would have inherited based on that.
Julia So not a polygamy.
Nemo Not a polygamy, because again, it's Joseph finally handing over the deeds to this land that would have all gone to Oliver had he survived, but instead gets halved up. And so Lydia gets it as. As Oliver's.
Julia And so that was March. So it was. It was deeded to Lydia March 15th. And then the other part was deeded to Dimmick March 7th the same year. So just.
Mary Ann Clements Right.
Julia Within a week of each other.
Mary Ann Clements Within a week of each other.
Nemo So this one doesn't necessarily have a polygamy connection at all.
Julia Yeah, it doesn't really look like that.
Nemo Yeah, someone's trying to buy the land, they die. So they're. They're the surviving spouse.
Mary Ann Clements And that's the thing. Oliver supposedly owned it by 1839. So it's more likely this was an inheritance from a dead spouse.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And then it was sold by the trustees. I can't tell if Lydia had given permission by the. To the trustees, but it was sold by church trustees. So I don't know if this was a situation where it was a widow. So I don't know. But. Yeah, but I wanted to put that in. So.
Julia Okay. Yeah, that's great. Okay. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Okay.
Julia Not.
Mary Ann Clements Not. Not polygamy.
Julia Not polygamy.
Mary Ann Clements This is another one that Bill Real had mentioned. For Sarah Scott Mulholland. The date of the deed is May of 18, 1843, and it's a quarter of lot three. So what we find out is Sarah's husband, James Mulholland, he had paid $30 towards the $220 purchase price of Lot 3 in Block 146. In October of 1839, he dies a month later.
Mary Ann Clements So then we have Sarah's brother, John Scott, lives on that lot. And so the full lot on the 1841 tax list, John Scott is listed as the responsible party. 1842, Sarah Mulholland is listed as a responsible party. And then we have, based on William Clayton's journal, they split the property so that John Scott gets three quarters of the property and Sarah gets one quarter of the property. And so then by the 1843 tax list, we have Sarah's new husband, Alexander Moliner, listed as responsible party for her quarter of that lot. Oh, okay.
Mary Ann Clements But we have. When eventually that property is sold, it's sold by Sarah Moliner. She's the primary owner, Late Mulholland and Alexander Mulliner, her husband in 1846. And it's important that Sarah is listed first. That was the one way that a married woman could own property is if she owned property before entering the marriage, then that was not covered by coverture. That was still considered her property.
Julia And on the.
Mary Ann Clements She's listed first.
Julia Okay. You have it quoted as. It's saying, it says late Mulholland.
Mary Ann Clements Meaning. So it's kind of previously named Mulholland. Yep.
Julia So by I just mean that, like, if he purchased it, if people would look back and see James Mulholland. This is her connection to that. Right?
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, because. Because her. The deed was previously issued to Sarah Mulholland. And so it's kind of nice later on when they sell it that it's like Sarah Moliner, who is that same person.
Julia Right, exactly. That was my point. Yeah. Okay, that's super interesting.
Nemo So again, just a case of money paid towards the land and then the deed gets given later.
Julia Okay,
Mary Ann Clements okay. Same situation. We've got Mercy Fielding Thompson. She's given a deed in 1842, but her husband, we have, according to land records, he had purchased that land in 1839. One thing is it can't have been in April 28, because they weren't quite in Nauvoo by that point. But maybe they just put 28th of April because that's when she was issued the deed. I'm not sure.
Nemo You said it starts in September, right? The book starts.
Mary Ann Clements The land book. Yeah. Starts in September. So. But on all the tax list, she's listed as a responsible party. And then she herself sells the. The property because she can. Because she's a widow by that point. And so widows were allowed to own property and to sell it. And again, this is her spouse. Her spouse dies, right, 41. Yeah, 41. And so in the 1841 tax list, by that point, that's beginning of 1842, she's a widow. So that's why she's listed as.
Julia And as Mercy. She later married Hyrum. Is that correct?
Nemo Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements So her sister was Mary Fielding. That was Hiram's wife. And so she ends up getting converted to polygamy based on the idea that she can then be sealed to her dead husband, Robert Thompson.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And then in time, she's sealed to Hyrum Smith. But Hyrum Smith has this dream that Robert comes to him and say, take care of my wife.
Julia Okay, that's very interesting, but this is not a case of polygamy. It's just. She was married. Yeah, she's just Roberts.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. Robert had previously been allocated or purchased that property. Yeah.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And like I said, widows and single people, they were allowed to purchase property on their own. And so Philinda Myrick, we know she was already living on this property by the end of 1841, because she's listed on that tax list as the property owner. And then In February of 1843, she gets married to a guy. And then a couple weeks later, when the 42 tax list comes out, that guy's listed as the responsible party because that's her new husband. So he's the head of household. But then again, later on, we don't know exactly. Or there's a quick claim deed by Lewis and Emma Bideman a little bit later on. But basically, she was a widow. She was allowed to purchase property and own right. In fact, she had purchased property in another part of Nauvoo prior to this. So.
Julia So. So I just want to ask legally, because you're going to talk about this in a little bit. Women owning land, if you were a widow, you could, I guess, because it's
Could Married Women Legally Own Property in Illinois
Mary Ann Clements from as long as you're over the age of 21. If you're a widow, you're fine. If you're single, you're fine. If you're divorced, you're fine. Owning land, it's the marriage element that we have, coverture, where a husband and wife are considered one entity.
Julia Oh, gotcha. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements So the wife's identity is subsumed under that husband's.
Nemo But if she bought land before then and then brings it into the marriage, she gets to keep it.
Julia Correct. Right.
Mary Ann Clements Or if she is married to him, but she inherits land from her relatives that's also considered her land.
Julia Okay.
Nemo All right.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements Nemo's losing interest really fast.
Nemo It's like, I just can't help but think it's like they almost got it. They almost got it that women could just own land. But, like. But unless you're married.
Julia Yeah.
Nemo And even then, sometimes. But just. Just not quite.
Mary Ann Clements Part of the issue was, is that there were certain protections put in place for married women. And for a guy's land, when a guy died, the widow would get a certain portion. It was called the widow's dower. And so because of that protection, it's like there were already legal protections put in place. And so women.
Julia Okay, right. Okay. I find all this super fascinating.
Mary Ann Clements So I. I was so proud. Only a few people were sleeping in my presentation, so but by the end, they were all back awake, so I was very happy.
Julia It was really good. I saw so many people taking pictures of your slides. So, yeah, this is great.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. And then this is a situation where you actually had two single sisters own the property. They had come in from the Philadelphia branch. They purchased property on July 12th of 1841, the north half of this lot. And then they were Sarah and Thomas and Downing. And then. So in the 1841 tax list, they are the ones listed as responsible for paying on this north half.
Mary Ann Clements But then they each end up getting married, so that by the time the deed is issued, they're listed. They're given the deed under their married name. But it would be incorrect to assume that. That they were married women getting deeds because they had actually already purchased that property as single. So they own the property going into the marriage. Right. So this is Sarah Downing Foster. This is one that a lot of people think is Sarah Foster, the wife of Robert D. Foster. But if you actually look at who sold the land, it's clearly Sarah Downing Foster. And then Thomas In Downing married George Woodward.
Julia So Thomas In. I don't think I've ever heard that name before.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, I'm not sure where it comes from, but. But, yeah, we can go on to the next part.
Nemo It'll be. It'll be common in Utah in a couple of years, I'm sure.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. And then this is just basically for people like Nemo who are, like, totally tired and sick of dealing with all this.
Nemo I have. I have followed.
Mary Ann Clements But this is basically a summary of this entire first part where we have the Partridge kids. We dealt with Emily and Eliza and Harrison, their siblings. The property was previously purchased by their deceased father, and then their. Their stepfather paid taxes. We have Helen Mark Kimble. The property was previously purchased by her father, and then it was sold by her father without her permission or without her input on the deed of sale.
Mary Ann Clements So it really didn't belong to her. We have Sarah Whitney. Where the property was supposedly previously purchased or was allocated by her living father. We have Flora Woodworth and Mary Rollins Lightner. These are the ones that drive me crazy, because there's no relation to the previous purchasers, but there's also no evidence the grantees ever owned or used the land. So I'm not even sure what's. And that's why, like, I kind of think that maybe it was just to park land under other names, possibly.
Mary Ann Clements So we have Lydia Granger, Sarah Mulholland, and Mercy Thompson. These were all properties that were previously purchased or allocated to their deceased husbands. Philinda Merrick. She was a widow. She was eligible to purchase the property on her own. And Sarah and Thomasin Downing. The property was previously purchased by these sisters while they were still single. So they were eligible to purchase the property.
Julia Perfect.
Mary Ann Clements So that's a summary of all the ones that we have gone into.
Julia Right. Okay. So polygamy might explain why maybe some of these names were chosen, but not explain anything about the land itself or the deeds themselves. Is that. Yeah. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. I would not call it as proof of polygamy in any way.
Julia Right. Yeah, it's certainly. Yeah, it does not look like that at all. Okay, so now we're getting into coverture.
Mary Ann Clements Yep.
Nemo Yeah. Cover.
Mary Ann Clements Okay, so could married women own property in Nauvoo? And legally, if you go to the next slide. No, Technically, no. And this is from the official Illinois courts website. In 1861, the Illinois legislature passed a Married Woman's Property Rights act, providing for married women to own land themselves. Prior to this time, coverture laws prevented married women from voting, owning land, bringing or defending lawsuits, entering into contracts, and acting as an agent. So, technically, no. But I had already encountered a case in 1850s Hancock county with non Mormon, no relation to Mormons, where a woman had purchased property, she died shortly afterwards, and she'd been married to this guy for decades.
Mary Ann Clements It went to her children. It was inherited by her children. And then her husband had to go and ask the courts for permission to sell the land that was in the name that had been inherited by his children. So if she, if she was unable to purchase the property in her own name, that land should have been her husband's. He shouldn't have had to go to the courts to get permission to sell it to her minor, to the minor heirs that had inherited it. So I was like, no, no, no, no. I know married women can own property in by the 1850s, but what I wanted to figure out is could they own property or did people act like they own property in the 1840s?
Julia Okay, this is, this is my favorite part.
Nemo That is a key distinction.
Julia Right.
Nemo Is acting like it versus legally being able to.
Mary Ann Clements Yes. So we already know legally, not legally, no. They cannot own the property. But when I looked among the lists, I was able to find 54 instances. And I actually found another one today.
Julia Oh, wow.
Mary Ann Clements Of in Hancock county between 1839, when the Mormons got there, and June of 1844 when Joseph Smith died, I found 54 instances of a married woman being issued a deed in her own name. And so, but the problem is, as I asked the session audience, I was like, okay, so does this prove that married women could own property?
Mary Ann Clements And I waited, and the answer is no, because we can't trust the dates on the deeds, and we also can't trust the grantees. And so we actually have to look at the individual deeds. And so what I end up doing is, so we have the deed that was issued, and now I'm going to start going through these and I'm going to look at when the property left their hands, when the property was sold, who was treated as the owner of the property.
Mary Ann Clements Ideally, we would also want to look at the tax list, but just for the sake of time, I was like, we're going to do this little shortcut method and see who is actually treated as the owner at the time of sale. Okay, okay. So these are people we've already talked about. So Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner. We don't know what happened at the time of sale. All we have is that quick clean indeed later on by the the vitamins Sarah Downing Foster and Thomas and Downing Woodward we already talked about, they had purchased the property as single women. So this should not count as a married Woman owning property. Okay, perfect.
Julia Okay, so they're off.
Mary Ann Clements They're off right now. I'm going to eliminate any other people where I just like with the Lightners, I don't know who sold that property. I don't want to deal with any of these quick claim deeds by the Vitamins or other deeds. If I don't know who sold it, then I'm going to take them off the list too.
Julia Perfect. Okay, so we remove those ones. Yep.
Mary Ann Clements Here we have several people who appear to have been either widowed or divorced at the time of sale. So they were eligible to sell that at the time. But it doesn't tell me whether or not as a married woman, they owned it. So Emma Hale Smith, she. There was one property that was sold by her husband as trustee that I couldn't. That had originally been given to her. So I couldn't figure out what was going on with that. But the rest of the time she's widowed when she sells the property. So that's not a good evidence of a married woman, you know, only property. So let's take those out.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And then the next ones. Okay, so these are three situations where Aim Bembo. Yep. So, yeah, her husband, John Benbow, was a wealthy guy. So we have these three situations. The property appears to have left their hands because of a court.
Mary Ann Clements There was a court case where someone lost the case. And so this property, a levy was put on the property to. In order to pay for whatever the person, the judge had decreed that the person needed to pay.
Mary Ann Clements And so then the property was sold in order to help pay that. In Jane Benbow's case, and in Marianne Young's case, it was a levy that was put because their husbands had lost court cases. But Margaret Butterfield is a different situation. So let's go on to the next. Next screen. Okay, so this is Margaret Butterfield. So according to the law, what we had read before, a married woman could not start a court case on her own. But here we have a case of Margaret Butterfield, who is a married person, and she starts a court case on her own. She sues a guy named Alexander Mills for some unpaid debts.
Mary Ann Clements So this is property. It was not given by Joseph Smith. It was property she'd purchased from the state. And couple, after she sued Alexander Mills for unpaid debts, she requested, for whatever reason, that the case be dismissed. And this was at the county level. But Butterfield, the plaintiff, was supposed to pay the court costs since she was the one that requested the case be dismissed. But she never ended up paying those court costs. So in July of 1845, Margaret Butterfield's property that she owned in her name was sold to pay her unpaid court costs. So that appears to be a case where a married woman not only brought a court case, but also her property was treated as her own.
Mary Ann Clements It was sold to pay her own debts. So I would say yes, that's an example of. Yeah, that's a married woman owning property or being.
Julia Right. Yeah. So even though legally she couldn't. She's legally, by the court system, I guess, is being treated as the owner.
Mary Ann Clements Is that owner. Yep.
Julia Right. Okay. Okay. So she's in red.
Mary Ann Clements She's in red. Because I consider that based on those two elements, the how the property left her hands, I can. That's a pretty good. And when the property was deeded, that's pretty good evidence that a married woman is being treated as a property owner.
Julia Right.
Mary Ann Clements So let's go on to three. So these three, These ladies died before the property left their hands. In the case of Janetta Richards, in the case of Lydia Taylor, they. Their husband sold the property. So I would consider that not a good case of a married woman owning property. But in the case of Charity Stoddard, we're going to talk about a little bit more because I think that is a good case. So look, we're going to go to the next screen. Okay, so here we have Charity Stoddard had purchased this property from the Sloans.
Mary Ann Clements And this is a property where her husband's tinsmith shop is located. And that apparently is a building that is still standing in Nauvoo. So then what we hear is that the next thing is the property is sold by Mary Stoddard to Sylvester Stoddard, whose charities husband. And it's sold by Mary Stoddard in 1845. And what we end up finding out is Charity had died in 1844. So when you're figuring out, okay, who's Mary and why is she allowed to sell Charity's property? So it turns out Charity had been married before Sylvester Stoddard. She'd been married to a guy named Jacob Nutter. And then she had had a couple children, one of which was Mary Nutter.
Mary Ann Clements But then Jacob died. And while Mary Nutter was still pretty young, Charity marries Sylvester. So Mary uses the Stoddard surname, the surname of her stepfather. So we have a situation where Charity owned the property. Charity died. So it went to her living heirs, which was her child. And so then Mary then sold the property to her stepfather because he was the one that actually owned the tinsmith shop. But that clearly shows that people considered that property belonging to Charity and then it went to her living heirs.
Julia Wow. Okay, that's. That's very interesting.
Mary Ann Clements So to me, that's good. That's a good situation where we have. Okay, clearly they were acting like this was Charity Stoddard's property.
Julia Right. And two women so far.
Mary Ann Clements That two women so far.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements Okay, next ones. So these are all situations where the women sold the property with their husbands, but we have a distinction. Sometimes they sold it where it was. Like with Julia Shumway. It was Julia Shumway. And so. And so Shumway, her husband. Other situations, it's Mary Ainscough where it's her husband and Mary Ainscough, his wife. Right. And so what I want to keep is all the ones where they were actually listed first and then their husband was listed secondary because that indicates that they were the ones seen as the primary property owner. And then Susannah Eagle, she's an interesting one.
Mary Ann Clements In the deed itself, she is the sole grantor. Her husband's name is not in the deed anywhere, and yet his name, he's. His signature is above her signature. And they do a typical release of dower. It's like such a strange deed on. That is weird. So I'm putting her in this category because her husband's name does show up at the signature and later.
Mary Ann Clements So anyway, so some of these women, I think, do qualify if they were the ones listed first. And a lot of these don't qualify. So the ones that were listed first and Susannah Eagle, I'm saying, yes, this is pretty good evidence that they were treated as property owners.
Julia Okay.
Mary Ann Clements And finally, we'll get to our last group. These are all women where we had situations. They were the only name listed on that deed when it was sold. We have. In the case of Patty Sessions, we had the deed given up, which. The only other time I've seen that deed given up was the case of Helen Markimbell, where she didn't actually own that. So I don't think this is good evidence that Patty actually owned it. Otherwise she would have given the people a power of attorney, like Louisa Stout did, where she gives the trustees a power of attorney so that they can sell the property on her behalf.
Mary Ann Clements So most of these, I'm going to say, yes, are good evidence. But Patty Sessions, I'm going to leave off the list because I don't think that's good evidence for a married woman owning property. So then finally, we get to the End. And we have 18 women that I think is pretty good evidence of married woman being treated as property owners in Nauvoo between. Or in Hancock county. Sorry, between 1839 and June of 1844.
Julia 18. Wow. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Julia So women could. On property, people were seen as.
Mary Ann Clements People were acting like women could own property.
Julia Right. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements It is funny. When the Mormons leave, you actually get a bunch more married women, both Mormon and non Mormon, buying property because it's so cheap, because it's all being sold sales and stuff. So I think you do get a few more women as speculators on that. So.
Julia Oh, gotcha.
Mary Ann Clements But yeah, okay. And then part. Okay, the other point that I was going to bring up, part of the original 54 women, most were Mormon. There were two that were non Mormon, though. So it was 54.
Julia Right.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. Heads up.
Julia Okay, that's interesting. Okay, so you have this quote again from.
Emma Smith, Property Rights, and Final Analysis
Mary Ann Clements I do have this quote again because I wanted to point out why is it important that people thought married women could own property. And it has to do with that Clayton diary entry again, on July 12th of 1843, when the decision is made to. From deeding the property to Hiram Smith, the decision is made to deed the property instead to Emma Smith. Because if you don't believe married women could own property, then that's just putting it back in Joseph Smith's pocket. Right. Because he's Emma Smith's husband. But if you do believe married women can own property, then that is a way for Joseph Smith to keep the property safe from him.
Mary Ann Clements He had been planning to give it to Hiram, probably to keep the property safe. But we have a situation where William Clayton tells us that Hyrum Smith had gone to Emma and had made her very mad over the polygamy revelation. Right. And then they come back and Joseph and Hyrum are then willing to give something of value to Emma. And it's not giving it back to Joseph, it's giving it to Emma in order as like a. You could see it as like a peace offering. But if Emma couldn't actually own it independently, then it's not really a peace offering. It's not really worth anything. So that's why it's important to understand that people thought married women could own property.
Mary Ann Clements And that's how Emma understood it. And that's why she was so mad later on in the estate, when everyone's coming after all those properties because they all consider it Joseph Smith's property and she honestly thought she owned those outright.
Julia Can you tell us a little bit More about that. I know we have a little bit more time, but, like, I just want to curious, like, because just hearing the ending of the story with Emma and this and these lots. So, like, the saints all leave. She thinks she has this or her husband dies, I guess. So she thinks she owns this land.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Julia Can you tell us more?
Mary Ann Clements Just that. So there's the initial run, where people are when the church leaves. There's a lot of, like Nemo was mentioning where it's unclear what's church property versus what's Joseph Smith's property. Emma's trying to protect herself, but ultimately a bunch of people come in and, you know, it was very normal at the time a person died. You needed to get all the creditors and the deb. The debtors in so that you could all come together so that the estate could be divvied out properly. And so you had a whole bunch of people coming in and saying, okay, Joseph owed me this much, Joseph owed me that much.
Mary Ann Clements And so by the time you get to about 1848, you finally get a lot of that resolved. But anything that was in Emma's name or her children's name was all considered Joseph Smith's property. So it all gets put in that pot of that estate that's being divvied out to all of Joseph's debtors.
Mary Ann Clements And everything kind of gets to a resolution point in 1848. But then in 1850, the steamboat Nauvoo case comes up again, and the judge ends up declaring that any property Joseph Smith distributed after June of 1842 should have been considered Joseph Smith's property at that time and should be used to pay the debt. So then suddenly all of the title to all of these properties are suddenly in doubt. And so you have another string of quitclaim deeds and confusion over who actually owns the property.
Mary Ann Clements And it's kind of. It's a nightmare scenario for Emma. So. Yeah. So she did not end up being protected like she thought she was going to be.
Julia So even though legally those 18 women are, I guess, were seen as the owners, this was not a guarantee for anyone.
Mary Ann Clements No. If it was challenged in court, which in Emma's case it was, it absolutely would be seen as her husband's property. Okay. And. And we saw that with some of the levies where the levy was against their husband and they were taking that property, they're like, okay, yeah, we don't care whose name that property is in. It's clearly your property, the husband's property. Right. And. And we had a court case come Up. And this is why I can say that the minor children. It was the same situation is we had a court case come up in 1848 with William Smith where property had been deeded to his two daughters.
Mary Ann Clements And the judge went through and was like, okay, clearly he's just trying to hide this property from debtors debt. These deeds are completely void. This never should have happened. And so, yes, this land is going to be sold to pay William Smith's debts. So we have situations where it was challenged in court and it was found to be illegal.
Julia Okay, Right. Okay. And then you have a summary slide.
Mary Ann Clements Okay. So, yeah, this was just a review. This was. This was what I told people to take a picture of. Basically, Nauvoo deeds do not behave like other deeds. You cannot take them at face value. The dates on the deeds may not reflect the original dates of purchase. In fact, they often don't reflect the original dates of purchase. The grantees may not reflect the actual publicly recognized property owners. In the cases of Flora Woodworth and Mary Rollins Lightner, there's no evidence that these women or their respective husbands ever lived on or were associated with these properties, aside from those deeds themselves. So, I mean, these are the two that drive me bonkers, like, because I cannot find any association between them.
Julia Right.
Mary Ann Clements And then also, although married women could not technically owned property In Illinois before 1861, the county records tell a different story. And that's where I say the 54 married women were sole grantees on deeds dated 1839 to June of 1844. 18 of these women were treated as owners of the deeded properties at the time of sale, despite still being legally married. And like I said, I eliminated anyone where the husband had died. Right. Like, this was what was not supposed to happen. But knowing that people thought married women could own property in Hancock is helpful in contextualizing that July 12, 1843, agreement, that deed to Emma Smith, because it does help you understand that people really did think that these properties were going to belong to Emma Smith and her children, that they were not going to belong to just Joseph Smith. Like. Right. They really thought these properties would be.
Julia Yeah. Otherwise it's an empty thing that he's doing. Yeah. Right. Okay, so how would you. So I really love all this information. I loved breaking all this down and just showing that it's more complicated than people seem to understand. So do you have any. What would you say to these people? Those clips at the beginning, people who use it for. I guess it's just for polygamy. Not really against Polygamy.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah. So the big thing is, is that one, you cannot take these deeds at face value. If you're treating them as normal deeds, then that's a problem. That's where people. Big red flags should be going off. So for each of these deeds, you really have to look at the people. What's going on with the people, like, especially if husbands are dying, fathers are dying, whatever. And you have to look at the history of the land itself, and it is annoying and it is time consuming, but it's more complicated than people realize. And then also, I spaced what I was going to say next, but just. It's complicated. But you also really need to understand that there's a difference between what was legal and what people were actually doing. And that's. That's why you really need to understand that people thought married women could own property.
Nemo Julia, could you go Back to Slide 17, please?
Mary Ann Clements Sure.
Nemo And bring that up on screen. Because I think when you said it's important not to take these at face value, I think it would be a good example for people just to have what it is and what it isn't. Right. So if you took this at face value that a deed of land was given to Helen mar Kimball on the 7th of June, 1843, then that's quite easy to read as a sort of polygamous dowry gift, right?
Mary Ann Clements Yep. Because it's right around the time of that plural marriage. It fits.
Nemo So that's what face value looks like. So that is essentially what individuals who are using this to say this is proof of polygamy are doing. They're saying Joseph Smith gave Helen Markimbell land on the 7th of June, 1843. He gave her the Northeast Quarter of Lot 2, Block 118. When you get into it, then what you have is actually Joseph Smith as the sole trustee and trust of the church. So it's not his personal land. It's not like a personal gift. He's giving land owned by the church he's distributing to Helen Mar Kimball's name, for reasons that could be speculated on, but we don't know, is putting in Helen Mar Kimball's name in 1843 land that was purchased by her father. The year before that he was responsible for on the tax lists. And when it was sold, he and his wife were the people named on the sale.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Nemo So all of a sudden, this gift to Helen Mar Kimball was never functionally hers. It was bought by her father before it was given to her by Joseph, and her name is on it for reasons unknown. Perhaps to do with securing land when he was he. Kimball went away on his mission, perhaps for other reasons. Who knows?
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Nemo But it was never actually land given to her because functionally it was always her father's.
Mary Ann Clements Yes.
Nemo Cool.
Julia Right? Yeah. So, like, I'm trying to see now, like, is there a way to see polygamy in this at all? Like. And I don't. I just don't really see any evidence.
Nemo Well, again, so we see there's a possible polygamous connection. Right.
Julia Because he married her the month before.
Nemo Yeah. Perhaps the reason her name went on this deed was to make her feel like such a grown up girl because. Whatever.
Mary Ann Clements Right.
Nemo Because he's married. Right.
Mary Ann Clements She's 14. Yeah.
Nemo Is she several months shy of her. Whatever. Birthday. So, you know, she said maybe it's something like that. Who knows? There could be a polygamous connection there. But what this isn't straight proof of is, well, the only reason Joseph would give this land to Helen is because he's giving her a polygamous gift. Because in reality he never really gave this land to her.
Julia Right.
Nemo Yeah.
Julia Right. And then I feel like that's the case in a lot of these, with a lot of these women. Like, was it Flora or even this one, the Partridges? Their dad already had it. So Joseph giving it to them. This line that their dad had already. Yeah.
Nemo Was building on the reason he was connected to Adam Mark Kimball was because of polygamy. Like, that much is there. The reason he's connected to this family is because he BC Kimball's an apostle and blah, blah, blah.
Mary Ann Clements Right. And that's where polygamy can help us explain the deeds.
Julia Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements But the deeds are not.
Nemo Do not explain the polygamy. Exactly.
Julia Yeah, yeah, that, that right there should be put on a poster. Yeah. Like so. Yeah, this was really, really great. Do you have anything else to add? I think the end of the slide.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, that was the end of my presentation. So no, just if you guys have any questions or whatever. I know you said you wanted to keep it under two hours, so. Yes.
Julia This is great.
Nemo I think that summed it up really well though, that polygamy can help us explain why the deeds are a bit odd.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Nemo But they are not evidence of polygamy in and of itself.
Julia Correct.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah.
Julia This seems like it would have been a lot of work because you're going through the tax list for all the years, you're going through all the paperwork. I just feel like this was so much, much research for you.
Mary Ann Clements It is. I mean, but like I said, I like Digging into theoretically property records. It's Nauvoo is kind of crazy, but I mean, that's what I do as far as genealogy wise. Right. Like I need to understand the people, I need to understand what's going on with the property. So this is all typical genealogy research I do. But it's just when people talk about these deeds, they're not going in and they're not actually looking at the background. They're not getting the information. They really need to understand these things.
Julia Yeah. Okay. This is so interesting. So I wanted to ask, so just really fast before we close. So you had some of the. A lot of these, you had the. A clip of the deans, like at the bottom. Yeah. Some of them you didn't. Were those because they weren't accessible or they didn't have photocopies of them or.
Mary Ann Clements I just. If I thought that it was helpful in understanding, like with the James Mulholland where it shows specifically that he. It's his name tied to that land, he's putting some money towards it. If I thought it was helpful and it was short and it was fair on the slide, then I put it there.
Nemo Crossings out and things.
Julia Right. Or like new.
Mary Ann Clements Okay.
Julia Yeah, but these can all be accessed on the Joseph Smith papers website and
Mary Ann Clements then the Joseph Smith Papers website. Yeah, Most of those are coming from the trustees land book, which is totally on the Joseph Smith Papers website. Okay. If you look at the individual people that were listed on there, usually that's among the documents. Like if you look at the little biographical on the Joe Smith papers website and you scan down, usually you'll find the deed, a link to the deed, and usually you'll find the trustees land book reference.
Julia Okay. I was just thinking about.
Mary Ann Clements They can just click on that in
Julia terms of show notes. Yeah, okay. For sure. This is great. Okay.
Mary Ann Clements The tax list. Some tax lists are on there. I don't know if all the tax lists are on the Joseph Smith papers. If they're not there, they're over at the church history library catalog.
Julia Okay, perfect. Okay, well, this has been so great. Thank you so much for coming on and sharing all this research with us. I feel like this is.
Nemo Thank you very much.
Julia Really, really good research to add to this. To this idea or discussion of Joseph Smith and polygamy.
Mary Ann Clements Yeah, it's a great way to muddy the waters. Yeah.
Julia Yeah, for sure. Yes.
Nemo Because at times I found myself going, wait, so am I now a polygamy denier? No. Okay. Polygamy did still happen. It's just this isn't Evidence for it. All right. Okay, cool. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements And like, and just in case people don't know my position, I do actually believe Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. I just don't like bad arguments. And I think it's a bad argument to try to use these to prove Joseph Smith practice.
Nemo And I think that is what LDS discussions is for, is for even when we're trying to get to the bottom of this dispassionately and neutrally or with neutrality, you could say. And so if we see bad arguments, even if we hold the position that Joseph did practice polygamy, if there's bad arguments to try and support that position, then we need to address them and look at them too. And I think this is a really good presentation for doing that. So thank you very much, Marianne.
Julia Yep. Yeah.
Mary Ann Clements Thank you.
Nemo All right, Julia, Shall I take us home?
Julia Yeah, take us home.
Nemo Perfect. All right. Well, thank you very much everyone for watching. Thank you very much specifically to Marianne for her time. If you liked this, there is a button specifically for that on YouTube and on most places where you would access this, you can hit a button that will let us know that you liked it. If you don't want to miss future episodes of the LDS discussion series, you can add this specific stream to your podcasting app or you can hit subscribe on YouTube and you will get it there as well. Wherever you consume this media, there will be a way to get it regularly to you.
Closing Thoughts and How to Learn More
Nemo So thank you very much everyone for watching. Remember that this work is only possible through the kind, donations and support of those who view. So if you value this work, please consider becoming a monthly donor@mormonstories.org I believe it's donate, but you get to the website and you'll get to the right place. Julia and I both work on this and are paid for our time and our research and putting all this show together. So you can also go support our own work individually if you like. I'm Nemo, the Mormon. Julia is Julia from Analyzing Mormonism. You can find us on all social media platforms forms apart from MySpace.
Nemo We're definitely not on MySpace. That joke will not get old. So finally, be good to each other, be kind to each other, and we will see you again on another edition of the Mormon Stories podcast and it will be likely an LDS discussions edition. Take care, everyone.
Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.