On May 18th, 1843, Joseph Smith, when he met with Judge Stephen
Arnold Douglas (1813-1861) made the following prophecy:
I prophecy in the name of the Lord
God of Israel that . . . you [Stephen A. Douglas] will
aspire to the Presidency of the United States, and if ever you turn your hand
against me or the Latter day Saints you will feel the weight of the hand of the
Almighty upon you; and you will live to see and know that I have testified the
truth to you, for the conversation of this day will stick to you through life.
(History,
1838–1856, volume D-1 [1 August 1842–1 July 1843]: 1552-53)
In 1858, Douglas participated in a series of debates with Abraham Lincoln. It was generally conceded that Douglas lost the overall debate. For example, note the following from the Press and Tribune for October 29, 1858:
No fact has been more apparent in
the canvass than that Mr. Lincoln was more than a match for his opponent. In
all the elements of statesmanship, in close, compact, logical argument, in
gentlemanly amenity, in control of his temper under the severest provocation,
in an unfailing fund of good nature—in every quality, in short, that commends
itself to the approbation of the better nature of man, on every occasion he has
loomed above Mr. Douglas, immeasurably his superior. He has proved himself Mr.
Douglas’ superior in another respect also. He can do more work and bear it
better. Strictly correct in all his habits, simple and abstemious in his manner
of life, he has gone through the herculean labor of the canvass without
flagging in a solitary instance, all his physical powers in full and harmonious
action, his voice clear and ringing, and in all respects more fresh and
vigorous than when on the 9th of July he made his first speech from the balcony
of the Tremont. (The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858, ed. Paul
M. Angle [Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1958, 1991], 405)
While Douglas was the presidential candidate for the Whig Party in 1860, he lost. As one historian noted:
On the face of the election returns, Douglas made a sorry showing; he had won the electoral vote of but a single State, Missouri, though three of the seven electoral votes of New Jersey fell to him as the result of fusion. yet as the popular vote in the several States was ascertained, defeat wore the guise of a great personal triumph. Leader of a forlorn hope, he had yet received the suffrages of 1,376,957 citizens, only 489,495 less votes than Lincoln had polled. Of these, 163,525 came from the South, while Lincoln received only 26,430 all from the border slave States. As compared with the vote of Breckinridge and Bell at the South, Douglas's vote was insignificant; but at the North, he ran far ahead of the combined vote of both. It goes without saying that had Douglas secured the full Democratic vote in the free States, he would have pressed Lincoln hard in many quarters. From the national standpoint, the most significant aspect of the popular vote was the failure of Breckinridge to secure a majority in the slave States. Union sentiment was still stronger than the secessionists had boasted. The next most significant fact in the history of the election was this: Abraham Lincoln had been elected to the presidency by the vote of a section which had given over a million votes to his rival, the leader of a faction of a disorganized party. (Allen Johnson, Stephen A. Douglas: A Study in American Politics [New York: The Macmillan Company, 1908], 440-41)
In a letter dated November 27, 1860,
Orson Hyde, responding to the disastrous election results for Douglas, wrote:
Will
the Judge now acknowledge that Joseph Smith was a true Prophet? If he will not,
does he recollect a certain conversation had with Mr. Smith, at the house of
Sheriff Backenstos, in Carthage, Illinois, in the year 1843, in which Mr. Smith
said to him: "You will yet aspire to the Presidency of the United States.
But if you ever raise your hand, or your voice against the Latter Day Saints,
you shall never be President of the United States."
Does
Judge Douglas recollect that in a public speech delivered by him in the year
1857, at Springfield, Illinois, of comparing the Mormon community, then
constituting the inhabitants of Utah Territory, to a "loathsome ulcer on
the body politic;" and of recommending a knife to be applied to cut it
out?
Among
other things the Judge will doubtless recollect that I was present and heard
the conversation between him and Joseph Smith, at Mr. Backenstos' residence in
Carthage, before alluded to.
Now,
Judge, what think you about Joseph Smith and Mormonism?
ORSON
HYDE. (Deseret
News 10, no. 41 [December 12, 1860]: 2)
In volume 2 of the Comprehensive
History of the Church, B.H. Roberts noted the following about Douglas’
status at the time of the prophecy and how this was not an “obvious” prophecy
made by Joseph Smith:
BRIGHT PROSPECTS FOR MR. DOUGLAS
When Mr. Douglas first began to aspire to the
presidency, no man in the history of American politics had more reason to hope
for success. The political party of which he was the recognized leader, in the
preceding presidential election had polled 174 electoral votes as against 122
cast by the other two parties which opposed it, and a popular vote of 1,838,169
as against 1,215,798 votes for the two parties opposing. It is a matter of
history, however, that the Democratic party in the election of 1860 was badly
divided; and factions of it put candidates into the field with the following
result: Abraham Lincoln, candidate of the Republican party, was triumphantly
elected. He received 180 electoral votes; Mr. Breckenridge received 72 electoral
votes; Mr. Bell 39; and Mr. Douglas 12. "By a plurality
count of the popular vote, Mr. Lincoln carried 18 states; Mr. Breckenridge 11;
Mr. Bell 3; and Mr. Douglas one—Missouri! (History
of the United States, Stephens, p. 559) Twenty days less
than one year after his nomination by the Baltimore Convention, while yet in
the prime of manhood—forty-eight years of age—Mr. Douglas died at his home in
Chicago, a disappointed, not to say heart-broken man.
THE DOUGLAS CAUSE OF FAILURE
Though it may be regarded somewhat as a digression
here, let us now inquire into the relations between the prophecy and Mr.
Douglas' failure to become president of the United States. Fourteen years after
the interview containing the prophecy with which we are dealing, and about one
year after the prophecy had been published in the Deseret News, Mr.
Douglas was called upon to deliver a speech in Springfield, the capital of
Illinois. His speech was delivered on the 12th of June, 1857, and published in
the Missouri Republican of June 18th, 1857. It was a time of
much excitement throughout the country, concerning the "Mormon"
church in Utah. Falsehoods upon the posting winds seemed to have filled the air
with the most outrageous calumny. Crimes the most repulsive—murders, robberies,
rebellion and high treason were falsely charged against its leaders. It was
well known that Mr. Douglas had been on terms of intimate friendship with
President Joseph Smith, and was well acquainted with the other church leaders.
He was therefore looked upon as one competent to speak upon the
"Mormon" question, and was invited to do so in the speech to which
reference is here made. Mr. Douglas responded to the request. He grouped the charges
against the "Mormons" which were then passing current, in the
following manner:
"First, that nine-tenths of the inhabitants are
aliens by birth who have refused to become naturalized, or take the oath of
allegiance, or do any other act recognizing the government of the United States
as the paramount authority of the territory of Utah.
Second, that the inhabitants, whether native or alien
born, known as 'Mormons' (and they constitute the whole people of the
territory) are bound by horrible oaths and terrible penalties to recognize and
maintain the authority of Brigham Young, and the government of which he is the
head, as paramount to that of the United States, in civil as well as in
religious affairs; and they will in due time, and under the direction of their
leaders, use all means in their power to subvert the government of the United
States, and resist its authority."
THE HAND RAISED AGAINST THE SAINTS
Mr. Douglas based his remarks upon these rumors
against the saints, in the course of which he said:
"Let us have these facts in an official shape
before the president and congress, and the country will soon learn that, in the
performance of the high and solemn duty devolving upon the executive and
congress, there will be no vacillating or hesitating policy. It will be as
prompt as the peal that follows the flash—as stern and unyielding as death.
Should such a state of things actually exist as we are led to infer from the
reports—and such information comes in an official shape—the knife must be
applied to this pestiferous, disgusting cancer which is gnawing into the very
vitals of the body politic. It must be cut out by the roots and seared over by
the red hot iron of stern and unflinching law. * * * Should all efforts fail to
bring them [the Mormons] to a sense of their duty, there is
but one remedy left. Repeal the organic law of the territory, on the ground
that they are alien enemies and outlaws, unfit citizens of one of the free and
independent states of this confederacy.
To protect them further in their treasonable,
disgusting and bestial practices would be a disgrace to the country—a disgrace
to humanity—a disgrace to civilization, and a disgrace to the spirit of the
age. Blot it out of the organized territories of the United States. What then?
It will be regulated by the law of 1790, which has exclusive and sole
jurisdiction over all the territory not incorporated under any organic or
special law. By the provisions of this law, all crimes and misdemeanors,
committed on its soil, can be tried before the legal authorities of any state
or territory to which the offenders shall be first brought to trial and
punished. Under that law persons have been arrested in Kansas, Nebraska, and
other territories, prior to their organization as territories, and hanged for
their crimes. The law of 1790 has sole and exclusive jurisdiction where no law
of a local character exists, and by repealing the organic law of Utah, you give
to the general government of the United States the whole and sole jurisdiction
over the territory."
DOUGLAS' LOST OPPORTUNITY
I shall so far anticipate historical events, which, if
a chronological order were strictly followed, would belong to a later period of
our narrative, as to say that the speech of Mr. Douglas was of great interest
and importance to the people of Utah at the time it was made. Mr. Douglas had
it in his power to do them a great service because of his personal acquaintance
with Joseph Smith and the great body of the "Mormon" people in Utah,
as well as their leaders; for he had known both leaders and people in Illinois,
and those whom he had known in Illinois constituted the great bulk of the
people in Utah when he delivered his Springfield speech. He knew that the
reports carried to the east by vicious and corrupt men were not true. He knew
that these reports in the main were but a rehash of the old, exploded charges
made against Joseph Smith and his followers in Missouri; and he knew these
Missouri reports to be false by many evidences furnished him by Joseph Smith in
the interview of the 18th of May, 1843, and by the "Mormon" people at
sundry times during his association with them at Nauvoo. He had an opportunity
to befriend the innocent; to refute the calumny cast upon a virtuous community;
to speak a word in behalf of the oppressed; but the demagogue triumphed over
the statesman, the politician, over the humanitarian; and to avoid popular
censure, which doubtless he feared befriending the "Mormon" people
would bring to him, he turned his hand against them with the result that he did
not destroy them but sealed his own doom. In fulfillment of the words of the
prophet, he felt the weight of the hand of the Almighty upon him—Mr. Douglas
failed of his dearest ambition, the presidency of the United States, and on the
3rd of June, 1861, he died.
ALL THE ELEMENTS OF A GREAT PROPHECY IN THE DOUGLAS
INCIDENT
It was impossible for any merely human sagacity to
foresee the events foretold in this prophecy. Stephen A. Douglas was a bright
but comparatively an unknown man at the time of the interview, in May, 1843.
There is and can be no question about the prophecy preceding the event. It was
published, as before stated, in the Deseret News of the 24th
of September, 1856, about one year before the Douglas speech at
Springfield, in June, 1857; and about four years before Douglas was
nominated for the presidency by the Baltimore Democratic Convention.
Moreover a lengthy review of Mr. Douglas' speech was
published in the editorial columns of the Deseret News in the
issue of that paper for September 2nd, 1857, addressed directly to Mr. Douglas,
the closing paragraph of which is as follows:—
"In your last paragraph [of the Springfield
speech] you say: 'I have thus presented to you plainly and fairly my views of
the Utah question.' With at least equal plainness and with far more fairness
have your views now been commented upon. And inasmuch as you were well
acquainted with Joseph Smith, and this people, also with the character of our
maligners, and did know their allegations were false, but must bark with the
dogs who were snapping at our heels, to let them know that you were a dog with
them; and also that you may have a testimony of the truth of the assertion that
you did know Joseph Smith and his people and the character of their enemies
(and neither class have changed, only as the saints have grown better and their
enemies worse); and also that you may thoroughly understand that you have
voluntarily, knowingly, and of choice sealed your damnation, and by
your own chosen course have closed your chance for the presidential chair,
through disobeying the counsel of Joseph which you formerly sought and
prospered by following, and that you in common with us, may testify to all the
world that Joseph was a true prophet, the following extract from the history of
Joseph Smith is again printed for your benefit, and is kindly recommended to
your careful perusal and most candid consideration."
Then follows the account of the interview between
Joseph Smith and Mr. Douglas as recorded in the Journal of
William Clayton, as published in the Deseret News a year
before Mr. Douglas' Springfield speech, and as now quoted in this History. Also
it should be remembered that the above editorial in the Deseret News boldly
challenging Mr. Douglas on the matter of the presidency, preceded by three
years the election of 1860.
This was boldly challenging Mr. Douglas. He raised his
hand against the followers of Joseph Smith, despite the warning of the Prophet;
and his people in the chief organ of their church, reproduced the prophecy and
told him that he had sealed his doom and closed his chance for the presidential
chair through disobeying the counsel of the Prophet; and this three years
before the election took place. The presidential election of 1860, and the
death of Mr. Douglas in the prime of life the year following, tell the rest of
the story.
It may be that dwelling at such length upon this
incident I have wandered from the direct line of the historical development of
the history of the Latter-day Saints, but this remarkable prophecy, its no less
remarkable fulfillment, and the deep interest of it must be my justification. I
have nothing further to do with the career or character of Mr. Douglas than
pointing out the remarkable fulfillment of a prophecy which demonstrates the
divine inspiration of the man who uttered it.
Still, Smith's insight does seem a bit
precise, doesn't it? After all, weren't many men just as bright as Douglas?
Yes, but Smith here matches the feat of Jeane Dixon, who told Ronald Reagan in
1962 he would be President. Gary Bauer also claimed a similar
"premonition" about Reagan, and Bill Clinton's mother, who proudly
declared that her child would one say be President (see here), and George Bush,
who predicted that "W." would make President. Does this prove that
Smith was just as insightful as these folks?
With the exception of Bill Clinton, Holding provides no reference to substantiate any of the above. With respect to Clinton, the source is the Washington Post article from January 7, 1994, "The Woman Who Shaped the President." we read that Virginia Clinton, by the time Bill was in high school, "was already telling friends that her boy would be president someday." There is no source for this, too pre-dating the 1992 US election that Bill Clinton won. None of these are the same, unless one can provide better historical sources.
Further Reading:
Resources on Joseph Smith's Prophecies
