By Jerald and Sandra Tanner

---

David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, stated as follows:

In June, 1838 at Far West, Mo., a secret organization was formed. Doctor Avard being put in as the leader of the band; a certain oath was to be administered to all the brethren to bind them to support the heads of the church in everything they should teach. All who refused to take this oath were considered dissenters from the Church and certain things were to be done concerning these dissenters, by Dr. Avard’s secret band. (An Address to All Believers in Christ, by David Whitmer, pages 27-28)

Mormon historians admit that the Danite band did exist, but they are unwilling to admit that Joseph Smith was connected with it. William E. Berrett (Vice President of the Brigham Young University) stated:

Such a band as the “Danites” did exist, as historians affirm; . . . The organization had been for the purpose of plundering and murdering the enemies of the Saints. (The Restored Church, 1956 edition, pages 197-198)

Dr. Hugh Nibley, of the Brigham Young University, admits that the Danites did exist, but he claims that Joseph Smith was not responsible for them. David Whitmer, however, claimed that Joseph Smith and Sydney Rigdon were responsible. In an interview, which was published in the Kansas City Daily Journal, David Whitmer stated:

. . . they issued a decree organizing what was termed the “Danites, or Destroying Angels,” who were bound by the most fearful oaths to obey the commandments of the leaders of the church. The Danites consisted only of those selected by Smith and Rigdon. They threatened myself, John Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and Lyman Johnson with the vengeance of the Danites . . . (Kansas City Daily Journal, June 5, 1881)

It is very interesting to note that Orson Hyde, one of the Twelve Apostles in the Mormon Church, became very upset at Sydney Rigdon after Joseph Smith’s death, and accused him of teaching murder when the Mormons were in Far West. The following statement by Orson Hyde appeared in the Mormon newspaper, the Nauvoo Neighbor:

Elder Rigdon has been associated with Joseph and Hyrum Smith as a counsellor to the Church, and he told me in Far West that it was the imperative of the Church to obey the word of Joseph Smith, or the presidency, without question or inquiry, and that if there were any that would not, they should have their throats cut from ear [to] ear.
(Nauvoo Neighbor, December 4, 1844, p. 1, column 4.)

This was a very damaging admission to make. Since Sydney Rigdon was a counsellor to Joseph Smith in the First Presidency, it would be almost impossible to believe that Joseph Smith was not aware of what was going on.

There is a great deal of evidence to show that Joseph Smith approved of the Danite band. We have just finished making a reprint of a book which should throw a great light on this subject; that is, Senate Document 189, 26th Congress 2nd Session. Showing the testimony given before the judge of the fifth judicial circuit of the State of Missouri, on the trial of Joseph Smith, Jr,. and others, for high treason, and other crimes against that State.

Juanita Brooks stated:

Some of the Danite leaders had turned state’s evidence; others had scattered.
(On the Mormon Frontier, The Diary of Hosea Stout, vol. 1, Introduction)

Sampson Avard was one of the Danite leaders that turned state’s evidence. He stated:

Sampson Avard, a witness produced, sworn, and examined on behalf of the State, deposeth and saith: That about four months since, a band, called the Daughters of Zion, (since called the Danite band,) was formed of the members of the Mormon church, . . . I consider Joseph Smith, jr., as the prime mover and organizer of this Danite band. The officers of the band, according to their grades, were brought before him, at a schoolhouse, together with Hiram Smith and Sidney Rigdon: the three composing the first presidency of the whole church. Joseph Smith Jr. blessed them, and prophesied over them: declaring that they should be the means, in the hands of God, of bringing forth the millenial kingdom. It was stated by Joseph Smith Jr., that it was necessary this band should be bound together by a covenant, that those who revealed the secrets of the society should be put to death . . . Instruction was giving by Joseph Smith, jr., that if any of them should get into a difficulty, the rest should help him out; and that they should stand by each other, right or wrong. This instruction was given at a Danite meeting, in a public address. (Senate Document 189, pages 1 and 2)

John Corrill testifies as follows:

I was afterwards invited to one of these meetings, where an oath, in substance the same as testified to by Dr. Avard, was administered. The society was ultimately organized into companies, and captains of tens and fifties were appointed. I took exceptions only to the teaching as to the duties of that society, wherein it was said, if one brother got into any kind of difficulty, it was the duty of the rest to help him out, right or wrong. At the second, or at least the last meeting I attended, the Presidency, (to wit: Joseph Smith jr., Hiram Smith, and Sidney Rigdon,) and also George W. Robertson, was there. (Senate Document 189, page 12)

John Cleminson testified as follows:

John Cleminson, a witness, produced, sworn, and examined, in behalf of the State, deposeth and saith: Some time in June, I attended two or three Danite meetings; and it was taught there, as a part of the duty of the band, that they should support the presidency in all their designs, right or wrong; that whatever they said was to be obeyed, and whoever opposed the presidency in what they said, or desired done, should be expelled from the county, or have their lives taken. The three composing the presidency was at one of those meetings; and to satisfy the people, Dr. Avard called on Joseph Smith, jr., who gave them a pledge, that if they led them into a difficulty he would give them his head for a foot-ball, and that it was the will of God these things should be so. The teacher and active agent of the society was Dr. Avard, and his teachings were approved of by the presidency

Speaking of a Danite meeting, Reed Peck testified:

I was present at one meeting when the officers of the society were presented and introduced to the presidency, each officer receiving a blessing from them. Avard stated that he had procured the presidency to come there, to show the society that what he had been doing was according to their direction or will; and while there, the presidency approved of Avard’s course in the society. (Senate Document 189, pages 17 and 18)

Burr Riggs testified as follows:

Mr. Rigdon said that the last man had run away from Far West that was a going to; that the next man who started, he should be pursued and brought back, dead or alive. This was put to a vote, and agreed to, without any one objecting to it. He further said, that one man had slipped his wind yesterday, and had been thrown aside into the brush for the buzzards to pick, and the first man who lisped it should die. (Senate Document 189, page 30)

William W. Phelps and many others testified in this investigation. There are 47 pages of testimony, which is very revealing.

In the book Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? we have included much information on the Danite band and the doctrine of blood atonement. As yet, however, we have not included a sermon by Jedediah M. Grant (who was a member of the First Presidency in the Mormon Church) which was printed in the Mormon paper, the Deseret News, on July 27, 1854. Since most of our readers have not seen this sermon before, we will quote from it in this issue:

“What disposition ought the people of God to make of covenant breakers” . . . I say what ought such a people to do with covenant breakers? “Why,” says one, “forgive them to be sure.” Very good, but what else ought they to do? What does the Apostle say? He says they are worthy of death. . . . I am inclined to believe his decision was a correct one

Then what ought this meek people, who keep the commandments of God do unto them? “Why” says one, “they ought to pray to the Lord to kill them.” I want to know if you would wish the Lord to come down and do all your dirty work . . .

When a man prays for a thing, he ought to be willing to perform it himself. . . .

Then there was another odd commandment—The Lord God commanded them not to pity the person whom they killed; but to execute the law of God upon persons worthy of death. This should be done by the entire congregation showing no pity. I have thought there would have to be quite a revolution among the Mormons, before such a commandment could be obeyed completely by them. The Mormons have a great deal of sympathy. For instance, if they can get a man before the tribunal administering the law of the land, and succeed in getting a rope round his neck, and having him hung up like a dead dog, it is all right; but if the Church and Kingdom of God should step forth and execute the law of God, O! what a burst of Mormon sympathy it would cause. I wish we were in a situation favorable to our doing that which is justifiable before God, without any contaminating influences of Gentile amalgamation, laws, and traditions, that the people of God might lay the axe to the root of the tree, and every tree that bringing not forth good fruit might be hewn down.

“What! do you believe that people would do right and keep the law of God, by actually putting to death the transgressors?” Putting to death transgressors would exhibit the law of God, no difference by whom it was done; that is my opinion.

You talk of the doings of different governments, the United States if you please. What do they do with traitors? . . . Do traitors to that Government forfeit their lives? . . . But people will look into books of theology, and argue that the people of God have a right to try people for fellowship, but they have no right to try them on property or life. That makes the devil laugh, saying, I have got them on a hook now; . . .

But if the Government of God on earth, and Eternal Priesthood, with the sanction of High Heaven, in the midst of all his people, has passed sentence on certain sins when they appear in a person, has not the people of God a right to carry out that part of his law as well as any other portion of it? It is their right to baptize a sinner to save him, and it is also their right to kill a sinner to save him, when he commits those crimes that can only be atoned for by shedding his blood. If the Lord God forgives sins by baptism, and there is another law that certain sins cannot be atoned for by baptism, but by the shedding of the blood of the sinner, . . . We would not kill a man, of course, unless we killed him to save him . . .

. . . If you shall thus advance, and then turn and trample the holy commandments of God under you feet, and break your sacred and solemn covenants, and become traitors to the people of God, would you not be worthy of death? I think you would.

Do you think it would be any sin to kill me if I were to break my covenants? . . . Do you believe you would kill me if I broke the covenants of God, and you had the Spirit of God? Yes; and the more Spirit of God I had, the more I should strive to save your soul by spilling your blood, when you had committed sin that could not be remitted by baptism. (Deseret News, July 27, 1854, p. 2, columns 1, 2)

In the book, Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? we show that some of the most powerful sermons on blood atonement were preached by Brigham Young himself.

---

---