1: What is your name?
Charles Johnson.
2: Where do you live Mr Johnson.
I live in South West City in this state.
3: What county is that in, – in what county is South West City?
It is in McDonald county in this state.
4: How long have you lived there?
Nine years.
5: Where did you live before you went to South West City?
In Richmond in Ray county over here.
6: Is that in Missouri?
I don’t hear. Yu will have to speak loud and very distinctly for me to hear you.
Missouri
Yes sir, it is in Ray County, Missouri, the county seat.
8: How long did you live there in Richmond in Ray county?
I lived there, well I went to Richmond in ’35 or ’36, and I stayed there until ’74, and then I went to Colorado for my health and stayed there six years, and then I came back to this section and went back to Richmond, and stayed there about fifteen months, and then I left Richmond and went down to McDonald County, and have been there ever since.
9: You mean you went to South West City in McDonald County?
Yes sir.
10: Did you ever at any time know the wife of Oliver Cowdery?
Did I know her?
11: Yes sir?
Well I should think I did.
12: When did you first become acquainted with her?
In Richmond in Ray Country.
13: You misunderstood my question, I asked you when you first became acquainted with her?
in 1836.
14: What relation are you to her, if any?
She was my mother-in-law. I should think I was acquainted with her for I took care of her for thirty-six years and her daughter too.
15: You married her daughter?
Yes sir.
16: And the daughter of Oliver Cowdery?
That is what I understood.
17: What was the name of the daughter you married?
Marie Louise.
18: Where were you married?
In 1856. I got acquainted with her in the spring, in April I guess, and we were married in September of that year, that same fall.
19: With whom did your mother-in-law live from the time you married her daughter until she died?
Old Dr. Johnson (referring to witnesses’s self). They lived with old Dr. Johnson. They never were separated a day in their lives, except that there was three days difference in their deaths. They lived with me from the day I married my wife, until they day they died, and my mother-in-law died three days before my wife died, and they never were separated three days in all that time, and I took care of them myself (at this point in the taking of the testimony of this witness, the witness displayed a great deal of emotion, and had to suspend the giving of his testimony for a few minutes).
20: Well they lived in your family, did they?
You bet they did. Yes sir they did, for I always took care of them all that time, from the day I married my wife until they were separated by death.
21: No I want to ask you another question Dr. I will ask you what other children of Oliver Cowdery were living at the time that you married Marie Louise?
What other children were living at tht time?
22: Ye sir what other children of Oliver Cowdery were living at the time you married his daughter Marie Louise?
There were none. I never seen any nor heard of any.
23: When did Mrs Olivier Cowdery die?
The sixth day of January I think.
24: Of what year?
This year.
25: 1892?
Yes sir.
26: When did Marie Louise die?
The 9th.
27: The 9th day of January?
Yes sir, the 9th day of January. 1892 the same month and just three days after her mother died.
28: Marie Louise Johnson in the daughter
Missouri.
Yes sir, it is in Ray County, Missouri, – the county seat.
8: How long did you live there in Richmond in Ray county?
I lived there, – well I went to Richmond in ’35 or ’36, and I stayed there until ’74, and then I went to Colorado for my health and stayed there six years, and then I came back to this section and went back to Richmond, and stayed there about fifteen months, and then I left Richmond and went down to McDonald County, and have been there ever since.
9: You mean you went to South West City in McDonald County?
Yes sir.
10: Did you ever at any time know the wife of Oliver Cowdery?
Did I know her?
11: Yes sir?
Well I should think I did.
12: When did you first become acquainted with her?
In Richmond in Ray County.
13: You misunderstood my question, – I asked you when you first became acquainted with her?
In 1836.
14: What relation are you to her, if any?
She was my mother-in-law I should think I was acquainted with her for I took care of her for thirty six years and her daughter too.
15: You married her daughter?
Yes sir.
16: And the daughter of Oliver Cowdery?
That is what I understood.
17: What was the name of the daughter you married?
Marie Louise.
18: Where were you married?
In 1856. I got acquainted with her in the spring, in April I guess, and we were married in September of that year, – that same fall.
19: With whom did your mother-in-law live from the time you married her daughter until she died?
Old Dr Johnson (referring to witnesses’ self). They lived with old Dr Johnson. They never were seperated a day in their lives, except that there was three days difference in their deaths. They lived with me from the day I married my wife, until the day they died, and my mother-in-law died three days before my wife died, and they never were seperated three days in all that time, and I took care of them myself (at this point in the taking of the testimony of the witness, the witness displayed a great deal of emotion, and had to suspend the giving of his testimony for a few minutes).
20: Well they lived in your family, did they?
You bet they did. Yes sir they did, for I always took care of them all that time, – from the day I married my wife until they were seperated by death.
21: Now I want to ask you another question Dr. I will ask you what other children of Oliver Cowdery were living at the time that you married Marie Louise?
What other children were living at that time?
22: Yes sir what other children of Oliver Cowdery were living at the time you married his daughter Marie Louise?
Thee were none. I never seen any nor heard of any.
23: When did Mrs Oliver Cowdery die?
The sixth day of January I think.
24: Of what year?
This year.
25: 1892?
Yes sir.
26: When did Marie Louise die?
The 9th.
27: The 9th day of January?
Yes sir, the 9th of January, 1892, the same month and just three days after her mother died.
28: Marie Louise Johnson is the
formerly known as Marie Louise Cowdery?
Yes sir.
29: And in later years known as Marie Louise Johnson?
Yes sir.
30: She was your wife?
Yes sir.
31: I will ask you Dr Cowdery, – Dr Johnson I mean, if Oliver Cowdery is living now?
No sir I expect not. I believe I said he was dead but I don’t know it for I did not see him die, and so I can’t say that he is dead, but I expect that he is dead, for I understand that he died five years before I married his daughter. I understood that he had been dead about that time when were married.
32: Dr do you know of his death simply by conversations with his wife, your mother in law, and your wife?
How is that.
33: You know of Oliver Cowdery’s death simply by reason of conversations you have had with your wife and her mother, Oliver Cowdery’s widow?
Yes sir and hundreds of her people. There is I suppose hundreds told me of his death, who knew he was dead. There was old David Whitmer, you might say, for he was a man that was very well thought of, and he told me that he was dead, and he was a man that had every bod’s respect.
34: He told you that Olivery Cowdery was dead?
Yes sir.
35: I will ask you Dr Johnson if you were of the same religious faith as your wife and your mother-in law?
No sir.
36: You did not belong to the same religious faith as they belonged to?
No sir, and I would be a better man if I had been, for I was not as good as they were.
37: What denomination, if any, do you belong to, Doctor?
Me?
38: Yes sir?
None at all.
39: What denomination, if any, did you belong to it any time during the life time or your wife?
Nono at all, and never did.
40: That is all?
41: Now Doctor you have been asked if you belonged to the same church that your wife, and your mother-in law belonged to?
No sir I did not.
42: And you say you did not belong to the same denomination they belonged to?
No sir I don’t belong to any church, and never did.
43: You don’t, and never did?
No sir, I never did.
44: Now to what church did your wife and mother-in-law belong?
I can’t tell you only from that they said, but then in the first place they belonged to what is called the Mormon church, but they left that.
45: That at first belonged to the Mormon church you say, and they left it?
Yes sir, that is what I understood.
46: They left the Mormon Church?
I don’t think when they died that they belonged to any church at all, but their belief I believe was with the Latter Day Saints. I don’t know what you would call it for we did not talk much about it betwixt ourselves, for I let my wife believe as she had alike to and she did me the same and we got along all right, for we did not live by quarreling, or fighting, we lived peacably.
47: Did you ever meet with either of these gentlemen (referring to E.L. Kelley and P.P Kelley) before you came here to-day?
Which gentlemen?
48: Either of the Mr Kelley’s?
Yes sir I met with one yonder.
(witness refers to Mr E.L. Kelley)
49: Did you ever see the other one?
No sir, I met that gentleman (Mr P.P. Kelley) for the first time last night.
50: Which one has been to your house?
The further one (Mr E.L. Kelley)
51: He has been to your house?
Yes sir, he was there once.
52: When was he there?
I can’t tell you that exactly, but it was a year or two agao, – it has been some time ago, but I can’t say exactly when it was.
53: Well about when was he at your place?
I say it was a year perhaps two years ago, but as I said I can’t tell the time exactly only that it was two years ago – I think about that long ago. I don’t recollect just what time it was, for I never paid much attention to it, only I think it was about two years ago. Maybe it wasn’t quite that long ago.
54: Are you, or were your wife and mother-in-law any relation to him?
To who?
55: To Mr Kelley?
No sir, oh no, no relation at all that I know anything of.
56: What was the purpose of the meeting?
Of his coming there?
57: Yes sir, what was the object and purpose of Mr Kelley’s visit to your place?
How?
58: What was the purpose of their meeting?
You sit up here and tell me what he says (speaking to Mr P.P. Kelley whom witness desires to repeat the questions to the witness, for the reason as the witness states he is deaf and cannot hear the question propounded by counsel for the defendant)
I can’t hear what you say?
59: Well I will try and ask my questions so that you can hear them, and I don’t want Mr Kelley to help you, – we can probably get along without him? I asked you what was the purpose of Mr Kelley’s visit?
He was therefor the purpose of buying a quit claim deed to the temple lot.
60: What temple lot?
What is called the temple lot here in Independence. I never saw it, but it is what is called the temple lot here in Independence.
61: Well did he buy it?
Yes sir.
62: You gave him a deed to it?
Yes sir, we gave him a quit-claim deed to it.
63: Well did he buy it?
Yes sir.
64: From whom did he by it?
From me and my wife. He got a deed to it from us.
65: What was the consideration for that deed?
He gave me one hundred dollars for it, – for that deed we gave him.
66: Was ther any other consideration?
Yes sir, a little.
67: Well what was the other consideration in addition to the hundred dollars?
68: Now you said there was another consideration?
Yes sir, –
69: Well what was that consideration?
Well I considered that my has or had an interest in a large amount of property, -i n a great deal of property here in this section of country, and he was to go on and settle it, and see how it came out you know.
70: He was to go on and settle it?
Yes sir.
71: How was he to go on and settle it?
I don’t know for I have paid no attention to it, but I suppose it would have to go through court. I hardly know how it was for you know I haven’t heard hardly from it at all until lately.
72: How was the quit-claim deed which he obtained from your self and your wife to settle your other property interests at Independence?
Well I looked at it this way, – if that was settled it would settle it all for it was the hull thing, -it was all the same, and if this was settled it would settle the whole thing at once. That was the way I looked at it.
73: How much did you quit-claim at that time?
I only gave him a quit claim deed to two acres or thereabouts.
74: Now how would a quit claim deed to two acres or thereabouts settle your property interests in this county?
Well I don’t know I can’t say for I am no lawyer, – I am a doctor and know more about medicine than I do about law. I only spoke that way, and I don’t know that I meant any thing in particular by what I said.
75: Well what I want to know is how that would settle other property interests which you and your wife had here in Independence?
76: Well go ahead and tell your story?
Well I owned a great deal of property, –
77: Just answer his question Dr. Let the reporter read the question to you, and answer it. Let the record show that the attorney for the plaintiff insists upon the witness answering the question asked him and nothing else?
78: Go on Dr and answer the question. Mr Notary take down the attorney for the plaintiff’s direct to the witness, and you can repeat the question to the witness? (the following question was repeated to the witness) Well what I want is how that would settle other property interests, which you and your wife had here in Independence? Do you understand that question?
I think so.
79: Well then go ahead and answer it?
Well supposing there was sixty or seventy acres all in that one thing. What I was going to say was I have a hull block in that town there, – that is here, – and when we got the abstract of the title, one man wanted an abstract and undertook to get it for one lot out of the whole block, and
80: What is that?
One man got a deed for one lot and he had to get an abstract for it, and when the abstract came it covered the hull thing you see, – that is the abstract covered all of it.
81: Now then listen to my question Doctor, – is this what you mean, – Is this what you mean, – that if the Re-organized church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or Mr Kelley the bishop of that organization, or any other agent of the reorganized church, should be able to recover the two acres of the ground that you quit claimed to them, known as the “temple lot”, then you expect that will vindicate your title to the whole seventy acres?
That is the way I looked at it, but as I said I am not lawyer but it looked that way to me.
82: It looked that way to you?
Yes, sir.
83: Was that a part of the consideration for the deed that you made to them?
He was just to go on and go through with it, but there was nothing said about that part of it, or anything further than that, but what steps he would take to recover this property would have a tendency to be in my favor you know. That is all I know about it.
84: And you accepted that as a part of the consideration for the deed?
Yes sir.
85: In this consideration Doctor of which you have spoken, did you include in your own mind, any other land except the seventy acres?
Yes sir.
86: Did you include some other land?
Yes sir.
87: Of which the temple lot is a part?
Yes sir.
88: Now much more?
A good deal more.
89: A good deal more land?
Yes sir.
90: Where does that land lie?
I can’t tell you that,
91: Where does that land lie doctor?
I said I cannot tell you but some of it is here in Jackson County all the same.
92: It is in Jackson County “all the same”?
Yes sir.
93: A large body of land not far from Kansas City?
Yes sir.
94: Dr Johnson were you and your wife apprised of the fact that you had any title to the property of which you were asked to make a quit claim deed, and the other property referred to, before you saw Mr Kelley?
Yes sir. A good deal before that we knew of it
95: You knew of that before the time you were asked for this quit claim deed to the temple lot, or the piece of ground here that is referred to as the temple lot?
Yes sir, a good while before that, and we received pay quit claim deeds to some of it too. That was outside of this.
96: Was that property in Jackson County, or in Ray county, for which you received pay?
In Jackson county, not very far from here.
97: It was in Jackson County?
Yes sir.
98: And you are sure of that?
I am sir when I talk I mean business and I know what I say, for I am no dog.
99:
I never got anything from Ray county, although there was said to be considerable of it in Caldwell County.
100: But you never received any pay, – any way, – for quit claim deeds on any such property in any other county than in Jackson county?
No sir, not a bit. Not any Nary a dollar.
101: Doctor when did you discover that your family had any rights in real property here in Independence, or in Jackson County?
I expect it has been thirty years. Thee has been lots of lawyers tried to get me to let them take hold of it, and work it for me, but I had enough to eat and so I did not bother about it.
102: Then Doctor it is a fact that when the opportunity presented itself for the plaintiffs, the re-organized church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, to work it for you, you did not object to their doing so? Is that not the fact Doctor?
Well it was before anything of this ever came up that they were after me for it. When this first came up there was nothing in the church about it at all. The church had nothing to do with it at first.
103: What do you mean by that?
I mean that it came in the first place by lawyers in Kansas City. They were after me to let them do something with our property here, and I did not want to do anything, and would not have done anything about it if they had not urged it on me in the first place, – and it took a good deal of urging to get me to do anything too. There was nothing about the church at all when I got hold of it first, – not a bit of the church in it at all.
104: Though it is a fact, is it not Doctor that you were glad of the opportunity of getting some body to work it out for you?
Well I don’t care much about that either way.
105: But it was a part of the consideration that caused you to sign the quit claim deed was it?
How is that?
106: It was never-the-less a part of the consideration that caused you to sign the quit claim deed?
Yes sir, it was a part of it.
107: Did you Doctor, – did you or your wife ever see any deed to you and her, or anybody to that property, – the property in question?
No sir.
108: Are you now in possession of her effects?
Yes sir.
on the ground that it is immaterial and not cross-examination.
Certainly I am. Who should be but me?
109: Is there any deed amongst her affects for any property here in Jackson County?
Not that I know anything about.
I did not heat that, for I am very hard of hearing, and it is very awkward for me to be so I assure you.
110: I did not ask you a question doctor, I was simply formulating an objection that was all. Now I want to ask you Doctor a question, and it is to the effect if there is any agreement, between you and E.L. Kelley, or was at the time this deed was given by which he agreed to settle the interests of yourself and wife in any property in Jackson County?
No sir, not a bit in the world. I could tell you something, well I have answered what you asked me, and if you ask me more I will answer that.
111: Yes sir, answer only want I ask you. That is right. Now Doctor I will ask you if it is not a fact that Mrs. Oliver Cowdery from the time you first knew her, up to the time of her death, when reference was made to it at all, claimed that this particular piece of property was church property, what, if any thing did she say in reference to that?
What is the question?
112: I asked you doctor if it was not a fact that at all times before her death when Mrs. Oliver Cowdery would refer to this particular piece of property, whether or not she would refer to it as church property. What did she say in reference to that? No I will waive that question Mr. reporter, and ask the doctor this question. What if anything, Mrs. Cowdery said to you at the time of the execution of this deed by yourself and Marie Louise Cowdery her daughter, and your wife, I should say Marie Louise Johnson, as to the nature of the property here in Independence about its being church property or the latter?
I never heard her say anything about it, nor never heard it mentioned as church property or anything of the kind. The fact is that there was very little went betwixt us about these things for many years, but after these men began to come there to see me you know, a long time ago, and said that Oliver Cowdery owned a great seal of property in Jackson County, and some in Caldwell, and some in Ray county up there, and this man that told us this wanted to take the matter up you know and see what was in it, but I just laughed at him, for I was no thief you know, so I just paid no attention to it you know.
113: Well then do you mean Doctor that by the consideration between you and E.L. Kelley at the time of the execution of the deed, was simply that E.L. Kelley would force a settlement as to this particular piece of property? That is what you mean by the consideration you referred to is it not?
Yes sir that is all. there was nothing outside of that at all sir. Not a thing only that
114: Now on your cross-examination doctor you said it was about two years ago that R.L. Kelley was down at your place?
Yes sir I think it was about that long ago, but I don’t say it was that time postively. I think it was about that time, but I may be mistaken about it. It is all guess work with me as to the length of time ago it was that he was done there, for I declare I cannot recollect when it was.
115: Well now I will ask you if it was the time when you executed the deed that he was done there?
When he was there?
116: Yes sir?
Yes sir.
117: So the date on the deed will show the date that he was there, – that is the time he was there at your place?
Yes sir, the very time.
118: Was he ever there at any other time?
No sir, I never saw him there but the one time, and that was the time. I never saw him but the one time until I saw him here to-day, and the other time I saw him before to-day was the day that he was done there at our place in Mc Donald County.
119: Did you ever meet Mr Hall down there at your place?
Yes sir. If that is Mr Hall over there I did.
120: Well that is the gentlemen I referred to?
Yes sir, I saw him down there.
121: How much did he offer you for this particular piece of property?
He did not offer me anything. He did not make any offer at all.
122: What did he say he was willing to give you for a dee?
I don’t think he said he was willing to give anything, or made any offer for it at all.
123: What was he there for?
Well if you just come down to it I couldn’t tell you exactly. I didn’t know what it meant and I did not either, and I don’t know yet what he was there for.
124: Did Mr Hal have any conversation with your wife and your mother-in-law?
Yes sir, I think he did a little.
125: What was it? Was it about this particular piece of property?
I could not tell you for I don’t know. Now there did not appear to be any thing secret about it at all, for I just kept on doing what I had to do? I was out a good deal of the time when he was there, and he would talk to them when I was out, and of course what he said to them is something I don’t know anything about, but then there was nothing secret about what passed there. I think that Mr Hall stayed there with us all night. Didn’t you?
126: Did he, – that is did Mr. Hall, make any claim to the property at that time?
Well I don’t think he did. I think, well as nearly as I can come at it to tell the plain truth, I can’t understand it and I think he was there about that piece of ground and wanted it or something, but I don’t understand your churches well enough to know the difference between them and so I can’y say just what he was doing. I remember that I told my wife that and she said she did not understand it either exactly. I don’t know what he wanted, for he never made any offer for the property.
127: Did Hall claim when he was there, that he was the head of the Latter Day Saints church?
I don’t think he did.
128: On your cross-examination Doctor you said, that a good many years ago you found out about your interest in this property
Oh yes, – that was a good many years ago.
129: I will ask you if thirty or thirty five years ago you did not
get an abstract of title to that property, or have a lawyer look into it?
No sir not that long ago.
130: Well how long ago was it?
Well I guess it was five or six years ago.
131: I have another question to ask for an explanation merely. Now Doctor when in your testimony you have spoken of this particular piece of property, what property do you refer to?
I refer to the temple lot.
132: You mean the temple lot?
Yes sir, I mean the temple lot, what is called the “temple lot” here in Independence. Now that is what I mean by I want you to understand that I don’t know anything about it on earth.
133: Do you mean by the temple lot, the two acres or thereabouts which you quit-claimed, or do you mean the seventy odd acres of which it is a part?
I mean the two acres.
134: When you speak of the temple lot you refer to the two acres?
Yes sir.
135: Now then when you speak of the other property in the same tract of which it is a part, do you mean property covered by the same deed?
Yes sir.