Despite being a member of the first Quorum of the Twelve, to most members of the church today William E. McLellin, if he’s known at all, is associated primarily with D&C 67. The revelation was received at the November 1831 conference, where the publication of Joseph Smith’s revelations was discussed in detail. JS asked the brethren present if they would testify of the commandments and revelations he had received, and when not all of those present felt comfortable doing so, D&C 67 issued a challenge for the “wisest” among them to reproduce “the least that is among them [i.e., the commandments]” (v. 6). McLellin, a school teacher, volunteered. JS later wrote that “Wm. E. McLellin, as the wisest man in his own estimation, having more learning than sense, endeavored to write a commandment like unto one of the least of the Lord’s, but failed; it was an awful responsibility to write int he name of the Lord. The elders, and all present, that witnessed this vain attempt of a man to imitate the language of Jesus” (PJS, 1:367). The failed experiment apparently convinced those present, and “the brethren arose in turn and bore witness to the truth of the Book of Commandments. After which br. Joseph Smith jr arose & expressed his feelings and gratitude.”

McLellin left the church in 1838, which probably contributed to his limited presence in popular Mormon historical consciousness. Those who didn’t make it West more often than not got forgotten or downplayed (IIRC, Harper doesn’t mention that McLellin was an apostle in his discussion of D&C 66 in Making Sense). However, within a few months of the November hearing, JS apparently asked McLellin again to seek and write a formal revelation. On January 25, 1832, McLellin asked JS to inquire about an important matter. JS replied:

Do you inquire of God and I will pray for you that you may obtain. I did receive and wrote it. And when I read it to him he shed tears of joy, and said to me, “Brother William, that is the mind and the will of God, and as much a revelation as I ever received in my life. You have written it by the true spirit of inspiration.” But from this circumstance I never was vain enough to supposed that “I was planted in Joseph’s stead,” nor that it was my duty or privilege to receive by revelation laws or regulations for the whole church. I knew better. But at that time I saw, heard, and felt what I wrote. Tere [sic] and then I learned a principle, and was put in possession of a power that I never shall forget. I learned to know the voice of the Spirit of God clothed in words. And if I had heeded its voice from that day to this, I should have missed many?very many difficulties through which I have passed? (McLellin to Orson Pratt, April 29, 1854, as quoted in Shipps and Welch, eds., The Journals of William E. McLellin, 301).

If McLellin’s memory is reliable here (I haven’t looked at the William E. McLellin Papers, so there’s likely some context I’m missing), then here’s an interesting example of JS encouraging his followers to receive formal, written revelations in a similar fashion to those the Prophet was receiving. Of course, McLellin makes the distiction clear that the revelation was only for himself, and not for the church as a whole, so this doesn’t fall into the same category as Oliver Cowdery’s Articles of the Church of Christ or Hiram Page’s seerstone revelations. As far as I know, we don’t have the text that McLellin wrote down in 1831, but we do have at least one he recorded in 1847 in Kirtland. But this makes me wonder how frequently this happened in the early church, that rather than JS receiving a written revelation for someone else (like JS had done for McLellin in D&C 66), JS encouraged that person to seek it themselves and write it down.

Mark Grandstaff, who I believe teaches at BYU, published a useful article on McLellin and the November 1831 conference in Dialogue that is worth reading in conjunction with this post.