Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford July 20, 1833, a mob of angry men entered Par- tridge’s home at Independence, Missouri, where he was sitting with his wife and three-week-old son and namesake, Edward Partridge Jr. They dragged him to the center square, where they beat, tarred and feathered him. Three days later Partridge, along with five other men, offered their lives as a ransom for the rest of the Saints in an attempt to prevent further violence towards the Saints. Their offer was refused, and the men instead were forced to agree to leave Jackson County. A few weeks later, Partridge wrote to his friends in Ohio, “I feel willing to spend and be spent, in the cause of my blessed Master.”1 Beginning in November 1833 and continuing for more than two years, the leaders of the Church in Mis- souri tried to obtain help by sending many letters and petitions to government officials, including Missouri Attorney General Robert W. Wells, Missouri Gover- nor Daniel Dunklin and President of the United States Andrew Jackson. Although the Saints received many sympathetic responses, little help was offered to assist them in returning to Jackson County. Speaking of the responses from government officials, Parley P. Pratt stated, “When the news of these outrages reached the governor of the state, courts of inquiry, both civil and Edward Partridge military, were ordered by him, but nothing effectual was first Bishop of the Church ever done to restore our rights or to protect us in the least.”2 the courts, the Saints continued to petition government Twelve brethren did return to Jackson County to at- officials for help. They sent a letter to President Andrew tend a court of inquire on February 23, 1834. A group Jackson on April 10, 1834, asking for his assistance to of Clay County militia escorted them to and from Inde- return to their lands and to be protected until peace was pendence. While there, they met with Attorney Gener- restored.4 The letter was forwarded to Lewis Cass, the al, Robert W. Wells, and District Attorney Amos Reese. Secretary of War, who felt that no federal law had been Here the Saints were told that all hope of criminal pros- broken so the federal government could not intervene. ecution of the members of the mob had ended. Newel In July 1835, attorneys for Edward Partridge filed a Knight recorded: civil lawsuit against those individuals that had tarred “Thus were the officers of the civil law, even when and feathered Partridge two years earlier. The following supported by the military, awed by a mob, and the great are documents from that case. promises of the governor and Judge Ryland fell to the Footnotes: ground, and the strong arm of justice became weak and 1 Edward Partridge, “Dear Friends and Neighbors,” Latter fell powerless to her side… Thus did these two men, Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, vol. 1, no. 4 (Jan. with the circuit judge acknowledge that mob violence 1835), 61. The letter itself is dated Aug. 31, 1833. was superior, in Missouri, to both the civil and the mil- 2. Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt, 103. itary powers.”3 3. “Newel Knight’s Journal,” 90. Despite the setback of not obtaining redress through 4. History of the Church, 1:483-85.

1 Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford This civil case was filed in July 1835 at Richmond, Missouri. It lists Edward Partridge as the plaintiff and Samuel D. Lucas and others as defendants. This journal entry (page 225) is requesting that the court allow the plaintiff time to obtain depositions (testimony) from individuals currently living in Ohio. The court grants the request. Note: From Latin dedimus “we gave” or “I give”. In legal terms dedimus is a writ to commission private persons to do some act in place of a judge, such as to examine a witness.

225 July Term 1835 (¾ down the page) Edward Partridge Plaintiff vs Samuel D. Lucas and Others Defts In case now as this day came the said plaintiff by his attorney and made application for a Didemus (sp.) to take depositions in the State of Ohio on behalf the said plaintiff: It is considered that a didemus (sp.) be therefore granted according to the request of the said Plaintiff and is Issued in the cases aceordingly (sp.) George Woodward Clerk

2 Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford

The case is next brought before the court during November 1835 (journal entry page 229) and the attorneys have requested a continuance. It is unknown which attorneys made this request; however, the request is granted until the next term.

229 November Term 1835 (near bottom of the page)

Edward Patridge (sp.) Plaintiff vs Samuel D. Lucas and Others defen- dants Now at this day came the parties aforesaid by their attornies (sp.) and by consent, this cause is continued until (words crossed out) next term.

3 Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford During the March 1836 term the defen- dants requests that the statements taken by the plaintiffs in Kirtland, Ohio be suppressed. It is unclear whether or not this motion was accepted or denied by the court. (Journal en- try page 236.)

March Term 1836 236 (bottom of page)

E Patridge (sp.) vs S D Lucus & others The defendants filed here their motion to suppress the reading in (continued on page 237) evidence in this case the depositions of the said plaintiffs nitueser (sp?), taken in Kirtland Ohio.

4 Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford During this same March 1836 term the plaintiffs request a continuance and are also charged court costs for this action. By this action it is assumed that the court did not accept the statements taken by the plaintiffs in Kirtland, Ohio, and thus the plaintiffs need more time to prepare their case. This is the first journal entry that lists the charge of trespass. (Journal entry page 238.)

March Term 1836 238 (3/4 down the page) E. Patridge (sp.) vs Trespass S D Lucas & others Now at this day came the said parties by their attornies (sp.) and on motion of the said plaintiff this cause (sp) is continued until the next term of this court at the cost of the plaintiff.

5 Edward Partridge v. Samuel D. Lucas, et all by Les Langford This July 1836 (journal entry page 249) lists the charges as Trespass vi et armis. (Vi et armis, Latin for “by force and arms.”) Both the plaintiff and the defendants agree to allow Richmond, Ray County, Circuit Court Judge John F. Ryland to hear this case (no jury trial). The judge renders a verdict of guilty and orders the defendants to pay damages - one cent. Two years later, defendant Samuel D. Lucas would get revenge upon the Saints while serving as a Major General with the Missouri State Militia. On October 31, 1838, the militia arrested , , Parley P. Pratt, George W. Robinson and Lyman Wight at Far West, during the Missouri - Mormon Wars. The following day Hyrum Smith and were also arrested. General Lucas would convene his own military court that same night. Following a one hour hearing, Lucas found the men guilty of treason. Lucas sentenced these men to be execution by firing squad the following morning. Fortunately, Joseph Smith’s and the other Saints lives were spared due to the heroic actions of Brigadier General Alexander W. Doniphan.5 Notes: 5. History of Caldwell and Livingston Counties, Missouri (1886), 137.

249 July Term 1836 (1/2 down page) Edward Partridge (sp.) vs Trespass vi at armis Samuel D. Lucas & others Now on this day came the parties afore- said by their attorneys and neither party requiring a jury the said course is by consent of said parties here submitted to the court and the evidence being seen and heard the court here doth find the defendants guilty in manner and form as charged in the said declaration and assess the plaintiffs damages to one cent: It is therefore considered by the court here that the said plaintiff recover of said defendants the said sum of one cent for his damges (sp.) in this behalf sustained together with his costs by him in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have execution thereof: &c

6