18 – Hiram Rathbun

1: Please state your name to the reporter?
Hyrum Rathbun.

2: Mr. Rathbun you may state where you live?
At the present time?

3: Yes sir.
At Landsing, Michigan.

4: Where did you live prior to going to Lansing?
I lived in the town of Onedia, Eaton County, Michigan. Grand Ledge was my post office address.

5: What is your age at the present time Mr. Rathbun?
I was seventy one my last birthday. The third day of April last I was seventy one.

6: What has been your profession Mr. Rathbun?
Do you mean as an avocation of life?

7: Yes sir.
The procession of medicine.

8: How long have you been practicing medicine?
Well since from about the last of 1846 up to about two or three years ago.

9: You followed the pursuit of the practice of medicine until recently then?
Yes sir, until up to the last two or three years, I did, but since then I have not been practicing any to amount to anything much.

10: Did you ever live in the State of Missouri?
I did.

11: When, first state when you first came to the State of Missouri to live?
It was in the latter part of the summer, very late in the summer of 1831, and I remained there, or rather here in the State of Missouri until in the month of November 1833.

12: What county did you live in?
In the county of Jackson.

13: At what place in Jackson Country, did you live Mr. Rathbun?
At Independence.

14: Here in the City of Independence?
Yes sir, but it wasn’t a City at that time, it was just a small town or village, for there was not a great many people living here at that time, the country was not very thickly settled.

15: Who else was here at that time that you were acquainted with? Name some of them if you can Mr. Rathbun?
Well there was Peter Whitmer, and David Whitmer, and John Witmer. there was a number of the Whitmer family living here at that time, but I would not pretend to state all of their names, nor would I say that all of them were here, but at any rate there was a number of the Whitmer family here at that time, there was enough of them here to make what was called the “Whitmer Settlement”, six or seven or eight miles, or such a matter from the village, and there was also a number of others here. I can’t begin to remember the names of all that were here, but I remember that there was one William Waterman Phelps, I believe his given name was William Waterman Phelps, it was W.W. Phelps any how. Oliver Cowdrey was also here, and a Mr. Gilbert. It rather strikes me that his name was Sidney Gilbert, but I wouldn’t be positive about his given name, but it was a Mr. Gilbert, and he kept a store down here on the square somewhere. A good many of the people that were here at that time. I can’t now remember but I remember the ones I have mentioned all right, and there is probably others that I would remember if my memory was refresh.

16: Do you remember a man that lived here at that time by the name of Edward Partridge, if there was such a man?
Who did you say?

17: Edward Partridge?
Yes sir, I was quite well acquainted with Edward Partridge.

18: What was his business?
Well he was a bishop for the church here at that time.

19: He was a bishop for the church you say?
Yes sir.

20: Of what church was he the bishop?
The Church of Christ of Latter Day Saints.

21: He was the bishop of the church as it existed at that time?
Yes sir.

22: Now did all the other persons you have mentioned and named belong to that same church?
I believe they were members of the church. Yes sir, all that I have named belonged to that church, but there were some citizens here outside of those that I have named that belonged to the church, but I can’t remember their names and there were others living here too, that did not belong to the church. I don’t remember many of the people who lived here at that time but some of their names I do remember.

23: Was your father here at that time?
Yes sir.

24: What was his name?
Robert Rathbun.

25: He belonged to the church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints did he not?
Yes sir.

26: What was his business?
He was a blacksmith. He was a blacksmith by trade, or followed that as an avocation of life.

27: Were you a member of the church at that time?
Yes sir.

28: When did you become a member of the church?
I joined the church in the month of November 1831.

29: Where were meetings held here by the church at that time?
Well they had a log house that they used as a school house and meeting either there on the temple plot, or very near by it. I would not say positively that it was on it, but if it wasn’t on it, it was nearby it, and in pleasant weather in the summer time and the fall when they were having two days meetings at a time, for they would have two days gatherings, and they had them on the temple plot in the west.

30: Where did Edward Partridge live at that time?
He lived in a log house there on the temple plot, I call it plot, some people called it the temple lot, at any rate he lived in a small house there on the temple lot or plot or close by it, for I wouldn’t say positively it was on it, but if it was not on it it was close by it.

31: Where abouts was it as nearly as you can remember?
Well that has been a great many years ago, and I was quite small at the time I remember well where his house was, and believe I could go to it if the town was now as it is then, but things have changed so much I can not say as to that. I am under the impression that it was on the temple plot, at any rate if it wasn’t on it, it was very close to it. I could not say really whether it was on the temple plot of ground, or whether it was this side of it a little, but he lived down there near it, if not on it.

32: Since you have been in the city of Independence at this time, have you seen what is called the “temple block”?
Yes sir.

33: When did you see it before?
Yes sir.

34: I asked you when you had seen it before this time? How long ago, before this time has it been since you saw it?
In 1850, I mean in 1885 I was here, and saw it.

35: In 1885 you were here and saw it?
Yes sir.

36: Wen before that did you see it last?
In 1833. That was the last time I was here before 1885.

37: Now is this piece of ground, this piece of ground that you have seen since you come here this time, known as the “temple lot” the same piece of ground upon which the church held meetings from 1831 up to 1833, when they held outdoor meetings?
Well so far as I can see in regard to the direction and locality, it appears to be that. As far as I can judge from the locality it must be the same ground, but of course I can not say postively that it is the same. Of course at that time, – that is the time you refer to in your question from 1831 to “33 this ground was in the woods and it is not cleared and that makes a great deal of difference, but the locality is the same so far as I can now say, it seems to me to be the same, the same direction and the same distance and all, and as far as I can say basing my opinion upon the best of my judgement it is the same.

38: Dr. Rathbun you may state, if you know, whether the people or members of the church were living here about that time, – that is from 1831 to 1833?
Yes sir.

39: Well were they living here about that time?
They left here in the month of November 1833.

40: What was the occasion of their leaving, if you know?
They had to leave.

41: Why had they to leave?
They were driven out of the country.

42: By whom were they driven out?
By the citizens of Independence and the vicinity. They were driven out by the people round about here.

43: You may state what you know Dr. Rathburn about this occurence?
About what occurence?

44: Their being driven out of the country?
What gave rise to it?

45: Yes sir, or the cause of their being driven out?
Well as I understood it,

46: Just answer the question, and pay no attention to his objections. He is merely making the formal objection, and you need pay no attention to it?
Well the people here became dissatisfied and displeased with citizens here known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints, – that is the citizens that did not belong to that church or organization became dissatisfied with the citizens that did belong to it. The had some peculiar sentiments that were anti-slavery, while those here were proslavery, and then their religious sentiments were different from those of other people here, and that excited some friction. There was a difference between the religious and political sentiments of the class of citizens that belonged to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints and the citizens that did not belong to that organization, and that difference eventually led to friction, and finnaly the citizens who objected to the people that belonged to the church became so dissatisfied that they rose up in what we called mobs, or in rioutous manner, and met together and held some meetings, and passed resolutions, and proceeded to such extremities, that finally they drove them out. They met finally and done a good deal of damage and mischief to the people. There was several instances of mob violence, and on one instance they stoned the peoples houses here, –

47: What houses, – the houses of what people?
The houses of the people that belonged to the Latterday Saints church. They stoned them at night after dark, – I know that for amongst the others that were stoned was the house of my father, and they did that although at the time my father was away with some of the others in council I know not where, but our house was stoned and the door was broken open, and one stone as large as my double fist struck my mother, and she screamed murder, and then they run away at her screaming, and we could hear the houses being stoned all over the village and the next morning very early, before sunrise I was up, and went through the village, and I found Mr. Phillip’s house torn down, and the printing office was in an upper room of I think it was a brick house, and there was a stairway on the outside that went up to the printing office, and the printing press was broken, the type and all the furniture of the office were thrown down into what we might call a jamb piled together, and the printing press broke, and the little boys came around and carried off the type and other things as they saw proper, and Mr. Gilberts store was broken into, and his goods taken out on to the street, and the bolts of factory and calicoes and cloth and so forth were unrolled. It had the appearance of having been taken by the end and running off with it until they would unwind them, and the streets were al over covered almost, literally almost covered with those pieces of cloth that were unrolled in that manner, and other goods scattered around. My fathers shop was broken into and his tools thrown out on the street. And the vice screwed up until they had screwed the thread off it, and by some means, probably with a hammer, they had broken the horn off the anvil, and had cut the bellows all to pieces. That was the condition of things one morning after this violent demonstration or out-break. Things were in a state of great confusion for every one was greatly excited at the time, but things run along for a couple of days, and then they caught some of the elders of the church here, and among them my father, and brought them up here to the square to tar and feather them, and my father made his escape, but he was the only one that did escape, and the others were tarred and feathered. I know that for I stood out a short distance away, could see it done. If my memory serves me right, there was three tarred and feathered. There was Bishop Partridge, Edward Partridge, and then there was a man after him, I think his name was Allen, the other names I do not remember, and I am not certain this man’s name was Allen bet I think his name was Allen, and he was the man that was tarred and feathered after Bishop Partridge. I remember very particularly in regard to Bishop Partridge and the manner is which he went away, the solemn manner in which he walked off and went home. Well finally the women and the household goods of the Saints here in the village were taken to the temple lot or plot and piled up there on the temple plot in the woods and we were there, I think it was three days, I would not be positive, but I think it was about three days we were there in the woods. And they were yelling and hollering and swearing and shooting around there day and night. We could not go to sleep at night until we sunk down from exhaustion, least that was my case, and our predicament was a terrible one in that respect at any rate. It was as bad as bad could be from almost any point of view. I could not go to sleep until completely exhausted, and that was the case of my mother and of many others. I may say all of them that were there, until the time came when we were to move and cross the river. We crossed the river down here about three miles or such a matter, and I shall never forget how much relieved we felt after we crossed the river, and got over on the other side. Now these are about the out lines of the particulars regarding the expulsion of the Saints from here as well as I remember them.

48: You left Independence and crossed the river through fear of violence then?
Yes sir.

49: You say you crossed the river to the other side through fear or violence, of receiving violence if you remained?
Yes sir and to save out lives, and I might say that after we had crossed over a while the river froze up, and they sent out a proclamation a printed proclamation, and we got one with the rest from Independence from the merchants, stating that if we wanted to trade with them that we were to pass over the repass unarmed, or unmounted and under this proclamation my father and I came over here to Independence, and father done some trading in the store where Mr. Gilbert had his goods but at that time it was in the possession of some other gentlemen.

50: What was this man’s name that was in the store there at that time?
I don’t remember his name. He was selling goods there in the store that Mr. Gilbert had before that but I don’t remember his name at this time. Well as I said father went into the store and I with him and commenced buying some goods there. And pretty soon there was about a dozen men came and some of them accosted him very abruptly, swearing at him and threatening, and the clerk then told him to come and get his salt weighed out, for the salt was in the back room, and then the merchant himself stepped up to the crowd and told them he wished they would not disturb the house, and they said they would not disturb the house, but they would attend this they said with an oath, that they would attend to the damned Mormons, that was what they said, after he got through and got out of the place. Well I was frightened and I started out of the door and I saw seventeen whips from the woods, that had been cut in the woods, I should think about eight feet long or there abouts. Some longer and some shorter.

51: How many of them did you say there was?
There was seventeen of them piled up there, and I supposed they were for the purpose of giving father a thrashing, and I don’t know whether they calculated to take me in or not, for I was young, but whatever their calculations or intentions were I did not give them an opportunity to put them into effect for I made for the river, and after I got started along a piece I see my father ahead of me, and then in a double quick step I overtook him, and we crossed the river, and about the time we were three-fourths or say two thirds of the way across the they came to the bank on the other side, and we supposed they shot at us. For they shot anyhow, but we were at too great a distance somehow or other for the range of their guns in that day, and they didn’t hit us. They did not hit us I said anyhow, and that was violence that I consider was of an extreme character.

52: Where did you go when you got on the other side of the river?
Well my father rented a house not far from the river, maybe two or three miles from the river. He rented that house for a while, but a short time, and then he went into Liberty, and rented a shop there, and set up his business there, but he worked a while before he set up his business independently, for a man by the name of Hopewell.

53: Were all the members of the church driven from this side of the river, so far as you know?
So far as I know they were all driven away.

54: What county were you in when you crossed the river?
We were in Clay County.

55: You were in Clay County?
Yes, sir.

56: When did you go to far West, if you went there at any time?
When did I go to far West?

57: Yes sir?
Well we staid there in Liberty a short time, and then Mr. Arthur I believe his name was, engaged my father, – he was a prominent citizen there, and he engaged him to do some work for his mill, – the iron work in his mill, and Mr. Durfy to do the wood work and we staid there about a year or such a matter, –

58: Staid where?
At Liberty, – we staid there about a year or such a matter after we crossed over the river, and then some of the citizens got uneasy about our being there, or seemed to be, and there was an agreement made between some of the leaders of the Latterday Saints and General Doniphan, General Atchison, Colonel Wallace and Colonel Thornton, and some others whose names I cannot remember, but those I have mentioned I was personally acquainted with. Well the arrangement that was made, was to the effect that the Latterday Saints should go into a new country, – into Caldwell County and they should not be disturbed, and so they went over there. My father was called to Kirtland Ohio, at the time of the dedication of the temple there, and I hired out with a man by the name of Newberry, and with him I was one of the first to go to Caldwell County to make a location in sight of Far West, or near Far West.

59: What did the people who were drive across the river from Independence, – where did they generally go from Clay County?
Those that were driven across.

60: Yes sir?
Now let me see that you want, – do you want to know where they went after they crossed the river?

61: No sir, – my question is where did the people go that were driven from Independence across the river into Clay County?
Well they went into Caldwell County, and they built up a city there called Far West, and there was another location at what is called Hahn’s Mill.

62: Give as nearly as you can the number that went from Clay County into Caldwell County?
Well I could not state the number precisely, but there was a reckon, – they were generally reckoned to be about twelve hundred.

63: What was the number that were driven from Independence here as nearly as you can get at it?
Well about the same number, – that is the number I refered to that went into Caldwell County, but afterwards there was a great many others that came into Caldwell County from the East.

64: Thee was about twelve hundred that went across the river then?
Yes sir, I think about that number.

65: Did you know a man by the name of Oliver Cowdery at Far West?
Yes sir.

66: Was it the same Oliver Cowdery who formally lived here?
Yes sir.

67: Did you know him also while lived here in Independence?
Yes sir.

68: How long had you known him before he went into Caldwell County?
Well I had known him for, – well I had just simply seen him once or twice before my father moved to this country in 1861, –

69: You don’t mean 1861 do you?
I say before, – but I think it was in 1860 that I saw him in Ohio, – I think it was in 1860, but we came here in the summer of 1861, and it might possibly have been early in the year before 1861 that I saw him before I came here.

70: You say “1860”, but you mean “1830”, do you not?
Yes sir. That was a slip of the tongue, for when I said “1860”, I mean “1830” all the time. Understand me, all the time I mean 1830 and ’31.

71: So then you say that the first you saw him was in 1830 or 1831?
Well sir that was a mistake of mine for I did not mean to say 1860 at all. I meant to say 1830 and 1831.

72: You refer to Oliver Cowdery in these answers?
Yes sir.

73: Did he have any family at the time you knew him?
Not when he first came here I think. I think he was married here, and at Far West he had some family.

74: Wee you acquainted with his family, – his wife and what children he had?
Well how many children he had I couldn’t say, for I don’t remember but three.

75: What three children do you remember?
John, Joseph Smith, and Jane.

76: What year was it when you saw Oliver Cowdery in Far West?
What time did I see him there?

77: Yes sir, in Far West, or in Caldwell County?
Well I see him off and on there from ’30, – I think about the last of ’35 anyhow, and during ’36, ’37 and ’38 he was there.

78: Well that was the time you saw him in Caldwell County?
Yes sir along at various times off and on during these years I saw him there if I am not very mistaken.

79: His family, were they there with him in ’38. Were they there with him at that time?
I think they were. That is my recollection that they were there with him at that time.

80: how long did the people remain there at Far West and it that country, – Caldwell County?
Well they remained from the time thy went in there. I am not sure but that they began to go in there at that close of ’34, – anyhow in ’35 they began to go into Caldwell County. They began to settle in there at that time anyhow, and from that time they began to settle in there, they remained in there until the fall of ’38.

81: What was the occasion of there leaving Caldwell County?
Well there were drove out from there also. They were driven on out of Caldwell County, as they were driven out of Jackson County.

82: How, – That is in what manner were the driven out? Was it through any orders of the Govener of Missouri?
Yes sir.

83: What was the occasion of it, if you know?
Well there were some instances that occured along. You know, that gave rise to trouble. I recollect one very distinct incident that created quite a distinct impression on my mind, – I may say a very distinct, – impression on my mind, – and impression which I have never forgotten, and that was the election that was held after they got the country organized there. They came to elect an representative to the state legislature, and there were two parties that had nominees in the filed, – one was the Whig party, and the other was the Democratic party, and I saw both these gentlemen that were nominated for the office, and heard them speak at Far West, and the gentlemen on the Whig ticket was quite a talker, and the other one on the Democratic ticket was not so much of a talker, but was a candid citizen living at Kingston. They wanted to know of the gentleman that was running on the Whig party ticket, if he was elected, what he would do for the Latterday Saints, – if he would do any thing in the legislature to secure their rights to their lands, especially in the County of Jackson, and he was disposed to make any promise of any kind that he thought would bring him votes, and the other man he was ready and willing to make the promise that if he was elected and any measure came up in the legislature in which they were interested he would use his influence in favor of that side of the measure that they would be personally or collectively interested in, and he furthermore promised, that he would introduce a measure or bill for the security of their rights, or rather the restitution of their rights, and this became known among the Latterday Saints, and they all took to this man when they came to vote, without regard to their previous political affiliations or associations or sentiments. That did not play any part and they all voted for this man, – for this one man, – I have forgotten his name, but he lived at Kingston, and he was a Democrat, and they elected him, and the other man was of course left quite in the shade, for the country was filled up with Latterday Saints, and the way they went was the way the country went. Well from that moment there was never any let up on the persecution to which the Latter Day Saints were subjected, for it some how or other excited a spirit of total unrest and it did not subside until they were driven out of the county and country, or state I should say. There were several incidents that occured later on, but that was the one that first caused trouble. Now I do not remember the names of these men who were candidates for the legislature at the time, but I remember right well how they looked. They gentlemen that ran on the Whig party ticket was a tall slim man, and he was a very talkitive fellow, and I don’t know but what he was a lawyer, – I rather think he was, – and the other was a rather short heavy set fellow, but he seemed to be a little more frank and candid in expressing his ideas than t the other fellow was, and did not promise so much.

84: Well now what was done towards making the people leave Far West, and Caldwell Point?
Well one thing that caused trouble, – I might say the primary or immediate cause of the troble that finally led to their expulsion was this. There was quite a num- ber of people encamped there on Crooked River, and they were foraging off the Latter Day Saints there. They were taking sheep, hogs, or swine, chicken and bees, – for we had a good many bees in those day, and they took our bees and were subsisting on us, and there is where I blame the Latter Day Saints for their action. They raised a party, –

85: Who did?
The Latter Day Saints raised a party at Far West, and sent them out, under the head of Mr. Patton, I believe his name was if I recollect right, and they went out in the night and surprised them, – that is surprised these people where they were camped, and they rather demoralized them for they ab- sconded and left their camps, and whatever they had taken from the Latter Day Saints that could be found there in their camps and identified was taken back. The Latter Day Saints took what they knew belonged to them, – cattle and swine and sheep, and one thing and another, – they took it back again. Well they sent notice at once to the govener in regard to this claiming that the Latter Day Saints had broken in upon them and shot at them, and the govener called out some six-thous- and men, and came on to Far West with them. I think it was about six-thousand men that were called out if my serves me right, and they came onto Far West and when he came there he ordered them to surrender, and Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon surrendered, and their arms were taken, – for they hadn’t only the commonest arms, – rifles and shot guns as a defence as common citizens would have. That was all they had in the way of arms and when the demand was made that they surrender they did surrender and delivered up their arms. Well this force that came with the govener took their arms they took their prisoners, and held a court martial over Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, and sentenced them to be shot the next morning at four o’clock, and Govener Boggs, – for he was the Govener of Missouri at the time, – he issued a proclamation of extermination of the Latter Day Saints, men, women and children, from the state, and General Atchison raised a mutiny to this, or what we called a “mutiny”, and called out his men, and stated he was no butcher, and took his men home; but General Doniphan remained with the army that had come there, with his men, and when the heard the court martial sentence of these men to be shot, he refused to sign their decision, and told them that he and his men were not murderers of persons that were commiting but only defending themselves from unlawful violence, and he said they were entitled to suit in in the civil courts under the civil law, and if they had commited any crime to be punished under the laws of the state. Govener Boggs would not hear to that, and it run on through the day until General General Doniphan got his men a little excited, and he was one of these kind of men that when he got a little excited over any thing he was very liberal in the expression of his ideas, and so he told Govener Boggs plainly that he and his men were not murderers, but that they were soldiers, and unless they released these men forth-with and gave them a trial in Circuit Court, the next morning at four o’clock they would find out that he and his men were soldiers, – I believe that is the way he stated it to me.

86: Do you know this or your own knowledge?
I am stating it as I had it from his own lips, – as I had it myself from the mouth of General Doniphan in 1885 at Richmond.

87: In 1835?
No sir, – In 1885.

88: Well never mind that, that is not evidence, – just state what occured there in Caldwell County at that time to your knowledge, – what you know occured there, and nothing else, for any thing ese that you heard or that General Doniphan told you would be hear-say and not proper evidence?
Well I am stating it as I know it to be for I was there at the time and saw most of it.

89: Well do not state anything that was said to you after you left the county the first time?
Well finally the Govener gave them three months to get away in, and on those conditions they agreed to go, and went. Now as regards these, – what Govener Boggs done at that time, that is the fact, for I was at the scene of operations and witnessed these things myself, and afterwards I had the statement from the lips of General Doniphan himself, and which harmonized with the scenes I witnessed myself, and which I knew to be true for I heard them at the time.

90: Were you in Caldwell County at some point outside of Far West at any time when there was a row between the two parties?
I do not remember of having been at the election outside of the city of Far West, where any row occured particularly – I know what you refer to I think, but I was not there. I heard of it, but I was not there.

91: Where did the people go from Far West?
They went to Illinois.

92: To what point in Illinois did they go?
To a place that was afterwards called Nauvoo.

93: That is all. You may cross-examine. No wait a moment, – there is another question I will ask the witness? – Were you ever at Hahn’s Mill in Caldwell County?
Yes sir.

94: When was that?
Well that was in 1865.

95: ’35 you mean?
I was there in 1835. Don’t misunderstand me, – whenever I saw “65, – I mean 35 every time. It was in ’35 when I saw those things. There is some incidents in my life that impress me with that date, – 1865, – and I cannot hardly help refering to it on every occasion and I cannot get it out of my mind, but I refer to ’35. In the latter part of ’35 and in ’36, ’37 and ’38 these things occured.

96: Now you say you were there at Hahn’s Mill at one time?
Yes sir.

97: Were you there at the time of the massacre?
Yes sir.

98: You may state how that occured, if you know?
Well under the proclamation of the Govener to exterminate the Mormons, Nehemiah Comstock, a military captain of the militia with whom I was aquainted, raised about two-hundred and fifty men, and came down here to Hahn’s Mill, and on his way there he stopped at my uncle’s house, and they went in there and wanted their arms, and there was nobody there but women, – my sister and her, – that was after my wife were there, and her sister and her mother. Well they stopped there and wanted their arms, – their guns I believe they demanded, and a gentlemen by the name of William Mann, – he always went by the name of Bill Mann. A large man that weighted about three-hundred pounds I should think, he saw a gun and reached for it, and got hold of it and the woman grabbed it too, and the old lady, – her that was my mother-in-law afterwards, took a butcher knife, and told him that if he did not let go of that gun she would cut his hands off, and wouldn’t let go so she struck down and cut one of his fingers off, and he hollered “murder!” Nehemiah Comstock cam in, and he saw no one but Bill Mann and these women tussling together, and so he went out, and they wanted to know what was the matter, and he said nothing was the matter, but there was some women in there that were cutting up old Bill Mann to make a pot of soap out of him, and so bill had to leave the gun there and they went along and left the women in the possession of the gun. They did not take their arms, but went on down to the Mill, where we all were, and when they cam up the first thing we heard, was “fire”, and they did fire, and some screamed they were killed, and they kept on firing, and one Evans, I think his name was Evans, a Latter Day Saint, and an elder ran out and held up the white flag and hollered to stop shooting that we surrendered, but they kept on shooting away, and he found he was in danger of his life so he ran along with others to get away, and while they were running they shot down some of them who were attempting to escape, and so we all run into an old blacksmith shop that was there made of logs not notched down closely, but with cracks between the logs big enou- gh for a cat to crawl through, and they kept on shooting and shot them down in there. My uncle saw that they were going to kill them all in there, so he ran out and ran down below the mill-dam and took across the crick and they shot after him, and a man by the name of Kelley followed him, and he got over the fence on the other side, and went up Shoal Creek until he got out of the way. Well after the shooting was over and these militias that did it had done away the ones that escaped came back and took care as best they could of the wounded and the dead. At the commencement of this affray I was afflicted myself for I had got hurt in my right limb, but it had got about well so that I was about but I couldn’t run very well, and so my father grabbed me on his back and carried me out into the woods, and laid me down and went off and left me, and all at once every thing got dark, and I knew nothing more until my sisters, I came too, and found my sisters were rubbing me with camphorated spirits and I found that my limb had been shot through, and the blood was running out from both sides of the wound. Well after they got through taking care of the others my father and uncle came with a litter they had made and put me on to it, and carried me into the house, and from this wound I am more particularly crippled to this day, for it rendered me a cripple for life.

99: Was there a regular fight there?
No sir, there was no fight for there was no resistance made at all.

100: No resistance made upon whose part?
There was no resistance whatever made upon the part of the Latter Day Saints.

101: How many were killed?
Nineteen were killed, history does not state but eighteen as having been killed, but I know there was nineteen according to the names of the ones that were killed I know that for I was personally acquainted with every one of them and I carried the names in my mind for great many years, but they have gone from me now, but my clear recollection is that there was nineteen that were killed there.

102: When did that occur Dr. Rathbun?
It occurred in the fall of 1838.

103: Was that the time of the trouble around Far West?
Yes sir, that was the time.

104: Dr. Rathbun I will get you to state to what church you belong now?
I believe it is known as the reorganized church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

105: How long have you been a member of the reorganized church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints?
Since the 26th day of October 1884.

106: I will get you to look at “Exhibit E”, page one hundred and fifty-four, paragraph one, and read it to the reporter?
Which one?

107: Paragraph one, section twenty seven in Exhibit “E”?
The first paragraph?

108: Yes sir.
“Hearken O, ye Elders of my church, saith the Lord your God, who have assembled yourselves together, according to my commandments in this land which is the land of Missouri, which is the land which I have appointed and consecrated for the gathering of the Saints; wherefore, this is the land of promise, and the place for the city of Zion. And thus saith the Lord your God, if you will receive wisdom, here is wisdom, Behold the place which is now called Independence, is the center place, and the spot for the temple is lying westward upon a lot which is now not very far from the fort house; wherefore it is wisdom that is land should be purchased by the Saints; and also every tract lying westward; even unto the line running between Jew and Gentile. And also every tract bordering by the prairies, inasmuch as my disciples are enabled to buy lands. Behold this is wisdom, that they may obtain it for an everlasting inheritance”. It is a little dark here and I can not read as well as I can at other times, but I carry along with me another pair of spectacles for a time like this.

109: Doctor I will ask you what lot is refered to in that revelation?
I under stand it to be the temple lot down here.

110: The same block or lot that is in controversy in this suit?
Yes sir.

111: You may examine the witness Mr. Southern?
 

112: Doctor you have just read form this book, – the book of Doctrine Covenants, and testified concerning what you have read have you not?
What is that?

113: You have just read from this book?
Yes sir, I believe that is the book.

114: And testified concerning what you have read?
Yes sir.

115: Have you ever seen that book before?
Yes sir.

116: You have seen this book before?
Yes sir. Now understand me I do not say that I have seen that identical book, but I have seen many just like it before to-day, but I may not have seen that volume.

117: What book is it?
It is a book called the Doctrine and Covenants.

118: Examine that book (handing witness exhibit E) and state what it is?
This is the book – the book of Doctrine and Covenants.

119: Look for the title page in that book Dr. Rathbun, and state what you find?
(Witness examines the book).

120: Do you find the title page?
I don’t find any title page here.

121: You do not find any title page in it?
No sir.

122: What do you find there?
I find the preface here though, –

123: But no title page?
No sir there is no title page in it.

124: Do you find a place where the title page should be?
I do not see where there has been any.

125: Would you know the title page of the book if you were to see it in another book of the same edition?
Well in those books (refering to exhibit E) all the title pages are the same I suppose, for they are all of the same edition. Have you one there?

126: My question is would you know the title page that ought to be there if you were to see it in another edition of the same book?
Yes sir.

127: You would know it?
Why I think I would. I don’t know of any reason why I would not.

128: Look at the book I now hand you, and see if that is the title page that belongs tot hat book?
“Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Latter Day Saints, carefully selected from the revelations of God, and compiled by Joseph Smith, Junior, Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams, presiding Elders of said church, Kirtland, Ohio, etc.” This seems to be the title page that should be here, –

129: Read the whole of the title page Doctor Rathbun?
“Printed by F.G. Williams & Co. for the proprietors, 1835”. Why yes sir this seems to be the title page that should be here.

130: Now is that which you have read there, and which the reporter has taken down as you read it, what ought to be the title page of exhibit “E”, which you hold in your hand, – is that the title page that belongs to that book?
This is.

131: Well it is the title page that belongs to that book?
I believe it is. It beard the same date, and commences the same way and I don’t see any thing irrelevant to the regular title page.

132: What do you mean by saying it commences in the same way?
I mean that by comparison I see the books both commence in the same way so far as they are entire, and I do not see any reason to why this should not be the proper title page for this book (Exhibit E) I believe that is the title page that is missing, -or I mean to say that this book if it had the title page would be exactly the same as the other one. Both books are just alike with the exception that one has the title page and the other has not, -that is all the difference I can see in them. The preface is the same, all but the title page. The title page is not in this book (Exhibit E) and it is in this one. I do not say that this book ever had a title page, -I don’t say that,- It is admitted that the title page as read by the witness and recorded above from the edition of 1835 of the book of Doctrine and Covenants is the title page that properly belongs to exhibit E, which as been destroyed in some manner, and which is now missing.

133: Now you spoke of the name of the church?
Yes sir.

134: At the time you were in Jackson County, Missouri?
Yes sir.

135: And I don’t whether I understood you accurately in stating the name or not, therefore I will ask you to state what the name of the church was at that tie?
At the time it was in Jackson County here?

136: Yes sir?
The church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints.

137: You state that was the name of the church at that time?
Yes sir.

138: What time did you say you were in Jackson County?
From ’31 to ’33.

139: This book was published in 1835?
Yes sir.

140: Is that the name of the church as set forth in this title page that you have just read?
The “Jesus Christ” is left out here. It simply stays the “Church of Latter Day Saints” here. The words “Jesus Christ is left out of that title page.

141: Now will you look at the Exhibit “E” the book from which the title page has been torn, or missing or has dissapeared,- will you look at that book.-
 

142: Look at the first page that book, – at the reading matter on it, and state what is the style of the reading matter therein contained, -read the style, -?
On the first page?

143: Ye sir?
What is it I am to read?

144: Read the whole page?
“Preface. To the members of the church of Latter Day Saints, – Dear Brethren; -We deem it to be unnecessary to entertain you with a lengthy preface to the following volume, but merely to say that it contains in short, the leading items of the religion which we have professed to believe. The first part of the book will be found to contain a series of lectures as delivered before a Theological class in this place and in consequence of their embracing the important doctrine of salvation, we have a ranged them in the following work. The second part contains items or principles for the regulation of the church, as taken from the revelations which have been given since this organization, as well as from former ones. There may be an aversion in the minds of some against receiving anything purporting to be articles of religious faith and in consequence of there being now extent; but if men believe a system, and process that it was given by an inspiration, certainly the more intelligently they can present it the better. It does not take a principle untrue to print it. Neither does it make it true not to print it. The church viewing this subject to be of importance, appointed through their servants and delegates the High Council your servants to select and compile this work. Several reasons might be adducted in favor of this move of the high council but can only add a few words. They ? that the church was evil spoken of in many places, its faith and belief misrepresented and the way of truth thus subverted. By some it was represented as disbelieving the Bible, by others as being and enemy to all good order and uprightness, and by others as being injurious to the peace of all governments, civil and political. We have therefore, endeavored to present, though in few words our belief, and when we say this, humbly trust, the faith and principles of this society as a body. We do not present this little volume with any other expectations, than that we are to be called to answer to every principle advanced in that day when the secrets, of all hearts, will be revealed, and the reward of every mans labor be given him. With sentiments of esteem and sincere respect, we subscribe ourselves your brethren in the bonds of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Joseph Smith, Jr.; Oliver Cowdrey; Sidney Rigdon; F.G. Williams Kirtland, Ohio. February 17th, 1835.”

145: Who is that preface you have just read addressed to?
To the members of the Church of Latter Day Saints”.

146: The words “Jesus Christ” are not in there?
No sir, that is not in there.

147: Are you familiar with the book of Doctrine and Covenants of the 1835 edition?
I am not so familiar with that as I am with the later editions. Formally I knew more about it. I might say that I was pretty familiar with it, but you must remember that was a good while ago. I was familiar with it then but I cannot state that I am as familiar with it now as I am with the later edition.

148: Do you know about the time that you first saw the book?
No sir I cannot state when I first saw it. I couldn’t say when I first saw that book.

149: Did you ever see a book of any other name or authority in the church in those early days?
Yes sir, there was a book called the “Book of Commandments”. I believe that was what it was called.

150: Have you ever seen that book?
Yes sir, I have seen it but I can’t recollect much about it at all.

151: You have seen it you say?
Yes sir, I have seen it, but I cannot say very much about it, for I never owned one.

152: Would you or would you not be able to identify one, if you were to see it?
I could not say I would not under take to identify one at this time, although I have seen one or two, maybe three or such a matter.

153: Do you know what the name of the church is specified to be in that book?
In what book?

154: In the Book of Commandments?
Well I think in that it was called the Church of Christ if I am not mistaken.

155: Do you know whether or not, whether or not that was an earlier book. First I will ask you if you know whether or not that book of commandments was a book for the guidance of the Church?
Well the used it, but they seemed to hold it temporarily for the time being, so to speak.

156: Was that after or prior to the book of Doctrine and Covenants was published in the year 1835?
Well I have it in my mind that it was prior to the book of Doctrine and Covenants.

157: Do you say it was before the publication of the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
I say I have in mind that it was before, – Yes sir I am pretty positive it was before.

158: Dr. I believe you stated that the name of the church in 1831 when you were at Independence was the “Church of Christ” of Latter Day Saints.
Yes sir.

159: What is that?
I stated that it was the “Church” of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”. Now that is my recollection of the name of the church at that time, but it is barely possible that the name was settled on at a later day than that, for the first onset of the church it was simply called “the Church of Christ”. That was the name it was known by among the Saints, and then it was called the Church of Latter Day Saints, and finally the name was changed or settle on, as being “the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

160: Doctor do you know when that latter name you have mentioned was settled on?
I don’t know just when it was settled on, but I think it was on a later date than 1831. I think it was a later date than that. I am quite sure it was.

161: Was it not as late as, – ?
Let me complete my answer please.

162: I beg you pardon I thought you had finished?
But there were many of the leading Elders of the church calling themselves the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.” and the “Church of Christ” and the “Church of Christ of Latter Day Saints”, and in view of the discrepancy among them so to speak, regarding the name of the church, and to avoid confusion and error, they finally at a later date, settled on what the name should be in full.

163: Can you mention the time that that was done, – wasn’t it about 1838, or as late as that?
Oh no sir it was, – it might have been in ’32 or ‘3, or some wheres along there. It might as a matter of fact have been as late as ’34, but I don’t thin it was any later than 1834, anyhow.

164: Then the fact is Doctor that when you were here in ’30 and ’31 for I believe you said you were here in ’30 and ’31?
Yes sir I so stated.

165: You were probably mistaken as to the name of the church?
I am not mistaken as to the name they called themselves. The leading Elders of the church, – such as the Bishop and Oliver Cowdery, and some of those, – and there was some, – well the Whitmers for instance they were disposed to all themselves the “church of Christ” and there were others that called them selves the “Church of Latter Day Saints” or the “church of the Latter Day Saints,” and to tell you the fact the matter of this confusion amongst the saints as to the name or title of the church was made the subject of a special prayer by Joseph Smith himself, and he got what he said was from the Lord, a revelation, that the name should be “the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”, and that finally settled it, and established the name universally among the saints, whereas it had not so been universally known among the saints before that.

166: Can you give the date of that revelation by Joseph Smith to which you refer?
No sir.

167: You an not give the date of it?
No sir. I cannot give the date of it.

168: Now Doctor do you know of any branch of the Mormons existing at the present day or time, of the same name that they were called when they first came to Missouri in 1830?
Yes sir.

169: What is it?
I know a Church that is called the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”.

170: You know a branch of that name?
Yes sir.

171: Do you know of any branch that call themselves the “Church of Christ”, just as they called themselves in 1830 when they first came to Missouri?
I haven’t known, and do not know of any regular established church of the name. If there is such a church so calling itself I have not been in possession of that knowledge. I have known of some members, – some individuals, – I will say, – at different places calling themselves by that name, – or calling themselves the “Church of Jesus Christ”, but I have not known of a regular established church calling themselves by the name of “Church of Christ”, with the exception that I have heard here more recently that a church or organization that was formerly known as the “Campbellites”, now call themselves the “Church of Christ”.

172: Then you are not now aware of any sect of the Mormons calling themselves the “Church of Christ” is that what you wish to be understood as saying?
I will tell you what I have heard about that. I have understood that there were a few in this vicinity, that was calling themselves the “Church of Christ”, but I supposed it was just a transient matter that did not amount to any thing. I did not hear that they had any organization or body that entitled them to a name. There ware several places where you find people who call themselves the “Church of Christ,” and their doctrines will differ widely. I know some people up in my state of Michigan that call themselves the “Church of Christ,” yet they are not a regular established and organized church.

173: These parties or members you refer to here in this vicinity as you referred to them, call themselves the “Church of Christ”. Do they not?
Yes sir, – so I understand.

174: And do they not profess to believe just what the “Church of Christ” believed in 1831?
What is that?

175: I asked you if these people in this vicinity calling themselves the “Church of Christ” if they did not profess to believe what the “Church of “Christ” taught in 1831 at the time you were here?
I am not aquainted with their faith at all, and I am not familiar with it, nor have I ever heard one of them expounding, preaching or talking, and I have never had any conversation with any of them. Now it does seem to me that in 1885 when I was here I saw one of them and had some talk or conversation with him on the temple lot, but it was nothing to speak of. It was for but a few moments, – and it was a kind of friendly chat, and was nothing in relation to the church.

176: Doctor do you remember whether sice 1830, ’31 or ’32, there has been any thing added to the doctrines of the church to which you at that time belonged? Anything added I mean that was not identical, – that was not the doctrine of the church at that time?
I do not know of any additional doctrines that have been added to the church from the first day to the present. Not in the “Church of Jesus Christ” to which I formerly belonged, and the church to which I now belong.

177: There has been nothing added?
No sir, nothing, – there has been some elaboration, – but nothing added, – the doctrines are identical.

178: Do you know whether there has been any thing added to that book of Doctrine and Covenants published in 1835, since the time of its publication, by revelation?
Yes sir.

179: What?
There has been additional revelations gives since the first, – the church believes in the doctrine of continued revelation and direction from God.

180: Are they included in the books now used by the “Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”?
Yes sir.

181: Well you know that the name is not now the same as it was in 1830 and ’31 do you not?
It is the same.

182: Identically the same?
It is, or has added to it, prefixed to it, the qualifying word “re-organized”. I know it has the work “re-organized in it.

183: You know I suppose, do you not, that that is an applicable prefix?
An “applicable prefix”?

184: Yes sir?
Yes sir.

185: Applicable to the church?
Yes sir, and if you will allow me to state I will say that I believe it would have been applicable, – and applicable prefix when it was first organized, in 1880.

186: But how was the name obtained in 1830 if you know?
Well in 1830 they called it then the “Church of Christ,” and from that time on for a few years it was so called, but I think it was about ’33 or ’34 that the matter of the name of the church was made the subject of special prayer by Joseph Smith, and a revelation was received changing or fixing the name “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”. Now prior to this time that name had been used by some of the Saints in referring to the title of the church, and the matter of the name of the church was a matter in confusion up to that time.

187: I belive you stated you could not refer to that revelation fixing the name of the church?
Yes sir.

188: The name was settled upon finally in this manner?
Yes sir.

189: You do not under take to give the date when it was so settled?
No sir.

190: Now to go back to the questions I ask you a while ago, and which you did not answer, with reference to the name of the church in 1830, – my question is how did that get the name that they had then?
I do not think the name was authoritatively fixed or settled until it was settled with the name of the “church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”.

191: And you stated yo would not under take to give the date when it was so settled?
No sir, I couldn’t do that, but it is in the late book of Doctrine of Covenants when it was given. If I am not mistaken it is in there.

192: Are you familiar with the doctrine of Baptism for the dead?
I know of that doctrine.

193: Was that the doctrine of the “Church of Christ” when you were here at Independence, Missouri? In 1831, ’32 and ’33?
They believed in it just as it is stated in the New Testament.

194: Did you ever hear it preached, or taught, or spoken of in this time?
What time?

195: Do you ever hear it taught, preached or spoken of in those days, – that is during 1831, ’32 and ’33 while you were living here at Independence Missouri?
Well they were not in the habit of preaching it publicly as a rule, or preaching on that subject, but it was a matter that was talked of among the members and elders of the church, but was not the matter of public discussion or teaching from the platform or pulpit.

196: Had there been a revelation establishing it as the doctrine of the church, or one of the doctrines of the church up to that time?
I do not remember about there coming a revelation that established it as a doctrine of the church up to that time. I do not recollect as to that, but I am not sure, there was not one. I am not sure, but that there was one. I would not say there was or was not one that was given to establish it as a doctrine of the church as far as that is concerned.

197: You don’t know whether as a matter of fact there was any revelation on this subject prior to 1840 do you?
Well I do not know that there was one before that.

198: Well just prior to 1840 did you know of one?
I do not remember I do not remember of one being given before that time, or even at that time.

199: How were the doctrines set forth in the book of Doctrine and Covenants obtained if you know?
Well as a rule in the book of Doctrine and Covenants they came by revelation.

200: Was there any specified head or authority through which they came?
Yes sir.

201: What?
The president of the church.

202: Who was that?
Joseph Smith.

203: Was he the president of the church?
Yes sir, at that time he was. He was the first president of the church.

204: Was there any head or authority through which they must necessarily come?
Well through the first presidency, which was Joseph Smith, – as a rule it was through Joseph Smith the President of the Church they came although they could come through the first Presidency of the church.

205: I do not unde know that I under stand that answer?
I said as a rule they come through Joseph Smith who was the president of the church, but not necessarily for they could come through the first Presidency, but they had to come through these mediums.

206: How do such doctrines come now to the “Re-organized church?”
In the same manner, – through the Presidency of the church.

207: Is it enough to have a revelation placed in the book of Doctrine and Covenants to show that it had come through the Presidency of the Reorganized church?
It is not enough in the abstract.

208: What else is required?
In the Reorganized church?

209: Yes sir?
Neither was it primarily.

210: What else is required in the Re-organized church?
Well when a revelation is received by the president it must first be submitted to the first presidency, and if approved by the first Presidency unanimously, it is then presented to the quorom of twelve and if excepted and adopted unanimously by them, it is then presented to the quorom of high priests, and then to the quorom of the bishops, and finally it is presented to all the quoroms and members of the church present at a general conference, and a final vote taken by the whole after it is decided on by one quorom after another from the Presidency down to the whole body assembled together.

211: Do you know whether there are any revelations in the book of Doctrine and Covenants that never took that course?
No sir I do not know of any in the book of Doctrine and Covenants but what went through that course.

212: Well do you know of any where?
No sir.

213: Where did you ever know of any any where that did not follow that course?
I never knew of any revelations any where that came from Joseph Smith.

214: I mean revelations that were not submitted to the quoroms?
I understand.

215: You do not know then I am to under stand you as saying, – you do not know of any revelations that are in the book of Doctrine and Covenants without pursuing that course?
No sir I do not know of a revelation that came through Joseph Smith as is found in the book of Doctrine and Coventants without it first passed all the quoroms and the body of people in the manner I have stated from the first Presidency down to the body assembled in a general conference. That course had to be pursued before they became the law of the church.

216: Now you speak of these revelations being finally submitted to the general conference?
Yes sir.

217: Do you mean by that the general conference, or general assembly?
The general assembly, general conference, or general council it makes no difference to me what you call it, but the church calls it the general conference.

218: When did it get the name “general conference”?
Oh well, they have always had the name of “conference”? a district conference or branch conference, – a district conference or a general conference, – they have always been called conferences.

219: Is there a general assembly provided for anyone in the Re-organized church?
There has not been one called, – there has never been one called to my knowledge, but the authority is there to call one at any time, just the same as formerly.

220: The authority is there to call one you say?
Yes sir.

221: Is it not a fact that the re-organized church has authority given them in their various books to do certain things, which they have never done, – that they never avail themselves of this authority?
Authority is given there, –

222: Is it not a fact that they have authority there which they never use?
In the re-organized church?

223: Yes sir?
I do not now think of any. If there is any I do not think of it, – any further than the calling of that assembly, – they have authority to call that assembly together but they have never used the authority, – although they have the authority to do so when it is necessary.

224: Is there any thing of that nature in the re-organized church with reference to any other matter? another from the Presidency down to the whole body assembled together.
 

211: Do you know whether there are any revelations in the book of Doctrine and Covenants that never took that course?
No sir I do not know of any in the book of Doctrine and Covenants but what went through that course.

212: Well do you know of any where?
No sir.

213: Where did you ever know of any any where that did not follow that course?
I never knew of any revelations any where that came from Joseph Smith.

214: I mean revelations that were not submitted to the quoroms?
I understand.

215: You do not know then I am to understand you as saying, – you do not know of any revelations that are in the book of Doctrine and Covenants without pursuing that course?
No sir I do not know of a revelation that came through Joseph Smith as is found in the book of Doctrine and Coventants without it first passed all the quoroms and the body of people in the manner I have stated from the first Presidency down to the body assembled in a general conference. That course had to be pursued before they became the law of the church.

216: Now you speak of these revelations being finaally submitted to the general conference?
Yes sir.

217: Do you mean by that the general conference, or general assembly?
The general assembly, general conference, or general council. It makes no difference to me what you call it, but the church calls it the general conference.

218: When did it get the name of “general conference”?
Oh well, they have always had the name of “conference”, a district conference or branch conference, – a district conference or a general conference, – they have always been called conferences.

219: Is there not a general assembly provided for now in the Re-organized church?
There has not been one called, – there has never been one called to my knowledge, but the authority is there to call one at any time, just the same as formerly.

220: The authority is there to call one you say?
Yes sir.

221: Is it not a fact that the re-organized church has authority given them in their various books to do certain things, which they have never done, – that they never avail themselves of this authority?
Authority is given there,

222: Is it not a fact that they have authority there which they never use?
In the re-organized church?

223: Yes sir?
I do not now think of any. If there is any I do not think of it, – any further than the calling of that assembly, – they have athority to call that assembly together but they have never used the authority, – although they have the authority to do so when it is necessary.

224: Is there any thing of that nature in the re-organized church with reference to any other matter?
 
What is that?

225: Do you not call any to mind?
How?

226: You do not call any to mind?
I don’t under stand what you mean.

227: I ask you if there was any other latent authority in the present book of Doctrine and Covenants?
NO if you will please let me explain a little bit in regard to myself. I would be under an obligation to you. The explanation I wish to offer is in regard to myself. I have just passed through a very severe attack of what is commonly called the “la grippe”, and I am just getting around after it. It has afflicted my hearing, and while I can hear the sound of your voice when you speak loud and quick, I head all the sound but I don’t get the articulation of the word. Now that is the difficulty that I am laboring under, and if I am a little hard or difficult of being made to under stand what you say, you must attribute it to the true reason and not the design. I wish you would bear with me when I throw out this statement, that I don’t get the articulation of the words you utter.

228: Well sir I certainly do sympathize with you for I know how you fee, and I certainly though you were doing very well for a man of your years, to say nothing of your recent sickness or physical condition. I thought you were doing very well indeed. Now Doctor, you spoke of the “temple plot” did you not?
Yes sir.

229: You called it the “temple plot” did you not?
Yes sir, that is what I called it, but some people called it the “temple lot” I believe.

230: What do you mean by the word “plot”?
What do I mean by that?

231: Yes sir?
Well I simply meant that piece of ground down there that is called, – well some times it is call the “temple plot”, and sometimes the “temple lot” but usually I call it the “temple plot”.

232: In speaking of that with reference to the year 1830, ’31 and ’32, do you limit yourself to what is not termed “the temple lot”, as it is designated in this litigation, – that is do you limit yourself to that special ground when speaking of the “temple plot” in 1830, ’31 and ’33?
Is meaning only this?

233: Yes sir, did you speak of it as meaning only this?
No sir.

234: Did you not speak of it as meaning only this particular piece of land in controversy here?
No sir, not as I understand it.

235: Well what did you speak of it as meaning?
When I speak of the “temple plot” I speak of it as meaning not only this piece of ground but a good deal more, – considerably more, inclusive.

236: Well sir you have shown your self to be a man of a good deal of accuracey of statement in this investagation, and I would therefore like to elict from you some thing like the number of acres which you have in mind in this designation, – in what you designate as the “temple plot” as it was in the years I have referred to?
Well now I have got two ideas in my mind.

237: Well give us both of them please?
I have one idea lying or lodged in my mind, that it was fifty seven acres, and the other is that it was seventy five acres.

238: Fifty seven or seventy five acres?
Yes sir.

239: That many accres?
Yes sir, or thereabouts. I do not say that that was the number of acres, but that is the idea that is in my mind.

240: Then it is a fact that when you speak of the “temple plot” you mean fifty seven or seventy five acres or there abouts?
Yes sir that is the amount I think there was of it primarily, – that is in the first, place, – originally, – there was that much according to the best of my recollection, but as I said I would not state positively that that was the amount, – that is simply the ideas I have in my mine, but I may be in error as to that.

241: Of which the property not in controversy here forms a part?
Yes sir, that is the way I wish to be understood.

242: Now I believe you stated that on this “temple plot” as you term it there was trees?
Yes sir.

243: Will you state whether there was any prairie on it or bare spaces at that time?
I cannot remember of there being any prairie on it. There may have been, but I do not recollect of any if there was. If there was any prairie on it it might have been at the extreme end of it to which I might not, perhaps, have went at any time. I know I was on it a good many times, and I could tell you some instantces in relation to any being on it, which I remember. If I give you an incident, –

244: Well you were on it, and you do not recollect whether there was any prairie on it or not?
No sir. I was on it a good many times, but I was always in the timber part of it, and if there was any of it that was prairie I do no know of it. I don’t say that I was all over that lot or plot of ground at any time.

245: Do you remember a ravine that run through it, or depression of any part of it, – that is a depression of the surface that was in any part of it?
Yes sir, and I think there was a ravine that went through a portion of it. Yes sir I think that there was a ravine that went through a small portion of it some where, but I can not tell where, or any thing about that now.

246: Do you remember whether there was a rock quarry on it, or not?
I do not know as to that.

247: You do remember though that there was timber at every point on it that you recognized as belonging to it?
I do not wish to express myself in the fullness of your question. Your question is to broad in its scpoe, and I do not wish to express myself in these terms, –

248: Then I would be glad if you would express yourself in your own language on that point?
Well sir there was timber over this lot. It was what was called a timber lot but there was a small spaces on it that there was no timber, but taking it generally it was a timber lot. Now that is my recollection of it based upon the extent that I was on or over it. I do not know that I have been over the whole of the plot of ground but I think I have been over most of it, possibly all of it, and it was timbered where ever I have been over it in those days, to the best of my recollection.

249: You do not say that you were over it all?
No sir, I do not say that I was to the extreme end or edge of it at any time, to know where its limits were. There might have been some places on it what there was no timber, but they were just small spaces, and the major part of it was covered with timber. I know there was a part of it I visited about every week of my life and on that part there was timber, – every week of my life I visited it while I was here, and I remember the character of that part quite well, and that part of it was in the timber I know.

250: Now will you state how you are able to locate that particular piece of prpoerty, as that property referred to in the revelation which you have read here?
Well by the distance from the center of the village here. It was a village then, but it is now a then, but it is now a city. It is about the right distance from the court hours, or the center of the city as well as I remember, and I used to travel down to it the time we resided here and I have been down to it several times since, and the distance corresponds with my recollection of the distance. The distances seems to me to be about the same so far as I can or could see, to the place where they used to worship on the lot.

251: Is it not a fact Doctor in your experience, that as we get older the distances does not appear the same as they did when we were many years younger?
Yes sir, sometimes that may be the case, but my recollection on this is so distinct in regard to the distance from the court house down to the temple lot as being about the distance I then traveled and now it appears to be about the same that I don’t think I could be mistaken about that.

252: Are you sure the court house was here then?
There was a court house plot here and some kind of a place where they held court, but I do not remember what kind of a place it was.

253: Are you sure it was at this point?
Yes sir, it was here in the center of the village.

254: You think so?
Yes sir, I think it was here in the center of the village.

255: Can you state upon which side of the road running west from Independence the “temple lot” was located?
I do not know. I do no think that when we first began to go there there was any road cleared to it, only as it was cut out. I myself in going down there hardly even went by the road, for I used to go across the field, – there was a field that I use to cross, and go over in the woods, and go up to where they held the meetings; but in the process of time there was a road that they had cut down through there to the temple plot, and if my memory serves me right the temple lot was on the left hand side of the road as we went from here down to the temple lot or plot.

256: Do you know where the present building of the re-organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is located?
Yes sir I know where that is.

257: Is that on any part of the temple lot?
It is not now on what is called the temple lot, but it would not be a matter of surprise if it would prove to be on what was a part of the temple lot primarily, – that is on a part of what in these days was known as the temple plot. It is on ground that I think primarily the temple plot would embrace, yet it is possible that I may be mistaken in that surprise or impression. I think how ever, that it is on what was primarily a part of the temple ground. I know that when I have been down that way, I have wondered in my own mind if that house was not built on what was primarily a part of the temple ground when I saw it. Now that has been a wonder in my mind ever since I saw it, –

258: Do you know whether or not the temple lot may not have extended north of that church, as indicated in the revelation of which you are speaking?
No as we go past the house from here down there, – past the front of the house, which way are we going. I knew of course once the direction, but a few years ago I got turned around in longitude and latitude, and when I am in a place now where I am not familiar it is a little bit difficult for me to get the points of the compass. I am lost and do not know latitude and longitude, so will you tell me which way I am going when I am going on the road that runs along there between the church building?

259: Well I suppose the gentlemen will not object to my saying you are going in a westerly course?
Yes sir, that is right. Now that is what I thought. Now sir in answer to your questions, I would say that I think it is possible and probably that the temple lot would have embraced land north of that, but I would not say positively as to that, for I do not attempt to describe its boundaries. I do not attempt to do that, and would not attempt it either, for I do not know and never did know the exact boundaries of the temple lot.

260: You said in your examination in chief that the witnesses were here at that time?
What time is it that you refer to?

261: In 1831, ’32 and ’33?
Yes sir.

262: And members of the church, – I presume you would say the “Church of Christ” at that time, – that is the same church of which you became a member?
Yes sir.

263: For both belonged to the same church?
Yes sir.

264: You joined the church at this point did you not?
Yes sir, I was baptised by Oliver Cowdery down there in a little branch that was damned up to get water to baptise people in in 1831.

265: What time in 1831 were you baptised?
In November, Mr. Brackenbury has showed me the place where it occured since I have been here this time. Of course I do not know that that was the same place but I am under the impression that it is, – at any rate I was baptised here in November 1831.

266: And the Whitmers, as you say, were here in this county at that time?
Yes sir, there was quite a number of them. I do not know or recollect all their names at this time, but there was quite a number of them, enough to make what was called “The Whitmer Settlement” out here for a few miles.

267: They lived out here west beyond the temple lot did they not? Yes sir, out west some where, – I take it that it was out on the Blue they lived, – it was out near the blue some where for we had to cross the Blue to get there, I remember that for I was there several times on foot when I was a lad.
 

268: The Whitmers were members of the church at the time you were here?
Yes sir.

269: Can you state whether the Whitmers or any of them are members of the Re-organized Church, or ever have been?
I do not know that they are. I do not know that they are or ever have been.

270: That is you do not know that they ever have, – any of them, – belonged to the Re-organized church?
No sir.

271: Do you know to what church they belonged all along?
Well I am not aware that they claimed that they belonged to any church any more than that they held to the faith, – as I under stood it the original faith is thier claim.

272: The original faith of what?
The Latter Day Saints.

273: That is to say in after life they did not join any movement of the Re-organized church?
No sir.

274: That is what you mean?
Yes sir, that is one thing I mean, and I mean also that they did not in a late period belong to the original church.

275: Do you know when they left the original church, or any thing about that?
Yes sir, I know some things about it. I know some things about it, and somethings I do not.

276: Well what do you know?
“Uncle David” as we used to call him. and John Whitmer and Mr. Phelps. They got into some little trouble in the church, – that is to say that were appointed here in charge of the church in the west, at Far West, and their administration was so arbitrary, that my father and some others entered complaint against them, and in view of this consideration it ultimately resulted in their being rejected from the church. Now that is the way they got out of the church, but all of the particulars about it, I cannot give you. All I know is that these facts occured at this time, and I learned it through my father.

277: Was Oliver Cowdery in that number?
I am not sure that he was that number at that time?

278: Was Oliver Cowdery after the time of which you have spoken, when the Whitmers and others were excluded or cut off from the church, himself excluded from the church?
I do not think he was at that time.

279: You say you do not think he was excluded from the church at that time?
No sir.

280: Well when was he excluded from the church, if at all?
Well if he was at all it was at a date later than that and beyond my knowledge. You must remember that I have no knowledge of the operations that occured there at Nauvoo in Illinois, – I do not profess to know any thing about the affairs or occurences there at all.

281: Then you do not know whether Oliver Cowdery was excluded from the church while it was in this state or not?
No sir, I have no knowledge of that at all.

282: You say you were aquainted with Oliver Cowdery?
Yes sir.

283: In Jackson County Missouri you knew him?
Yes sir.

284: At about what time in Jackson County did you know him?
In the hears of ’31, ’32 and ’33.

285: That was when you were residing here in Jackson County?
Yes sir.

286: What position did he hold in the church here at that time?
Well at Independence here, we under stood that he had the superintendency of the church here at this point.

287: Did you know his wife?
Well I can’t say that I was personally aquainted with her very much, any more than to say I saw her several times. I saw her a few times, and knew her when I saw her.

288: Were you ever in his family?
I was in his family enough to pass the time of the day, but as I was young I felt rather delicate about having any more to do with them than I had to. I did not have much to do with them, only as I had business with them.

289: What was your age then?
Well of course I was ten in 10 ’31, eleven in ’32 and twelve in ’33, – that was my age, ten, eleven and twelve when I was on this side of the river.

290: Did you say you know the same family in Clay County?
I knew them in Far West again.

291: You did not know them in Clay County, but you did in Far West?
Yes sir, I knew them when they were in Caldwell County, but I do not remember that I remited them while they were in Clay County.

292: Did you visit them in Far West or Caldwell County?
Yes sir. I have seen them while they were in Far West, – I have seen him and his family at Far West.

293: At what time was that?
Well that was in 1835, ’36, ’37 and ’38, – in ’38, ’37 and ’36 I will say. I would not say that I saw them there in 1835.

294: Did you see enough of them to know what was his pursuit or business there in Far West?
I do not recollect his special avocation of life. I do not recollect the avocation of life that he followed there at all, and I do not pretend to state that.

295: What was he doing in the church there?
Well he was one of the, well I believe he was but I would not say positively, but I believe he was one of the twelve in the church, and then he had the superintending care of the church. He looked after the church there I think, but that was, – Well I don’t think he had the superintending care of the church there either. I think that belonged to David Whitmer and John Whitmer and Phelps, and they were afterwards excluded from the church as I have already stated. I think that Oliver Cowdery’s official relation to the church was perhaps an apostolic relation. That is the best of my recollection or rather my impression at this time, but I could not say positively for it has been so long ago that I cannot remember distinctly as to that.

296: Do you know when he left Clay County, – or Caldwell County I mean?
Well it has been in my mind always that he left there in the Spring of ’39. Some of my friends here have thought me in error in regard to that, and that it was in ’38 that he left there, but it is in my mind that he left in the Spring of ’39.

297: Then you have been talking with persons here concerning that fact since you have been here this time?
They asked me about it you know, and I told them when I thought he left, and some of them rather dispute me about hat, but any way that is the date that is in my mind and always has been, that he left in the Spring of 1839.

298: In the spring of 1839 you think he left Caldwell County?
Yes sir.

299: When did you leave?
Well I left quite a bit after that.

300: When did you leave there?
Leave where?

301: Leave Caldwell County?
It was in 1842. It was some time in 1842 that I left.

302: Where had you been living or residing up to 1842?
Well I had an uncle there my father’s youngest brother that lost his wife about the time of the troubles here, and he got married again in process of time. He married a lady of the state of Missouri who was a resident here and he was welcome to stay and I made it my home with him in Caldwell County, on what is know as “Mid Creek.” He bought himself a farm there. It was three eighties of land, – that is three tracts of land of eighty acres each, and I made my home with him for I was only a boy or quite a youth at the time. I made my home with him there mostly.

303: Where was that from Far West?
Well that must have been some twenty miles from Far West, – I should think it was in the neighborhood of twenty miles from Far West to where he lived at that time.

304: When did you go there?
When did I go there to Mud Creek?

305: Yes sir?
I went there I think it was in the fall of 1839.

306: What point did you leave to go to Mud Creek?
Well I was up to about Hahn’s Mill at the time I went down there to Mud Creek.

307: Where is it from Far West?
Well that is about, I should judge about the same distance from Far West.

308: About the same distance from Far West that Mud Creek was from Far West.
Yes sir, I think it was about twenty miles from Far West to Hahn’s Mill, and I think when I reflect ever that it was a little farther than that from Far West to Mud Creek. Well I think in a straight line it was about twenty miles from Mud Creek where my uncle lived to Far West.

309: At that time where did Cowdery live?
Well he lived at Far West as I under stand it, at the time he left there. I know I saw him there occasionly when I was in the place. I most always called on him when I was in Far West especially as I always had a kind of a high regard for him. I always thought a great deal of that man, –

310: Where was that you did that?
At Far West.

311: Then he lived in Far West at that time?
Yes sir.

312: Now state when you wee shot at Hahn’s Mill?
In the fall of 1838.

313: Did you see Cowdery after that?
Yes sir.

314: How long after that did you see him?
How long a period of time?

315: Yes sir, how long was it after the time you were shot at Hahn’s Mill? In the fall of 1838 that you saw Cowdery at Far West?
Well it was as much as three or four months, – some where along there I should think. I should think it was three months anyhow after that that I saw him there. 316 (Written as 516)

315: Where did you see him then?
It was at Far West that I saw him that time. I saw him there almost every time I think.

317: Well you say you saw him at Far West three or four months after this trouble at Hahn’s Mill?
Yes sir.

318: Did you ever see him at Far West after that time?
No sir.

319: Did you ever see him after that time at all?
Yes sir.

320: Where?
I saw him in the state of Ohio after that time.

321: Where did you see him?
I saw him in the state of Ohio.

322: That was the next time you saw him after the time you say you saw him in Far West three or four months after you were shot or wounded at Hahn’s Mill?
Yes sir.

323: Where about in the state of Ohio did you see him on that occasion?
I saw him at Tippin City, Ohio, and also at Findlay City, Ohio.

324: Where else?
I saw him at Tipping City, Ohio, and also at Findlay City, Ohio.

325: When was that?
That was in the latter part of 1844. I saw him in 1845 and in 1846.

326: When did you land at Nauvoo?
At Nauvoo?

327: Yes sir?
Never, only as we passed through there. Well I did not pass through it. I passed by it on the river, and looked off the boat at it. I saw it in that way, but was never in it.

328: Where were you going as you passed by it?
I was going from Iowa to Ohio.

329: Then you have never been at Nauvoo?
No sir, I have never been there, and I do not profess to know any thing about what occurred there. I do not profess to know any thing about Nauvoo at all.

330: You say you left this state when?
When did I leave Missouri? Is that your question?

331: Yes sir?
About 1842 I think.

332: What time was it in 1842 that you left Missouri?
In the latter part of the year, I think it was in the latter part of 1842 that I left Missouri.

333: I believe you stated in your direct examination that the people that lived at Nauvoo belonging to the church, – I mean the people at Far West, when they left there went to Nauvoo?
Yes sir.

334: And that was in 1838?
Yes sir as a mass they went in ’38, in the fall of ’38 the most of them left, but they were going all through the winter, for they had three months to get away in, and some of them did not leave until along in ’39, but the mass of them went in 1838 in the fall of the year. As I said they had three months to get away in and most of them left in the fall and during the winter, but there was now and then one of them that did no go at all, -they never went.

335: I believe also that on you direct examination you also stated that they were ordered to leave?
Yes sir.

336: What was the date of that order?
Well I dont remember just the date of Governor Boggs order. I don’t remember that date exactly, but it was some time in November if my memory serves me right in regard to that, – I think it was some time in November.

337: What church did you belong to after left Far West?
After I left Far West.

338: Yes sir?
In the state of Missouri?

339: Yes sir?
I did not belong to any only the one I had belonged to

340: Was it here?
How?

341: Was it here?
The church?

342: Yes sir?
I do not understand you?

343: Was the church here in Missouri at the time?
No sir.

344: Well the church as not here in the state of Missouri after it left Far West?
No sir.

345: You still belonged to it, however?
Yes sir. I belonged to it to the church in general, but I speak of it as it existed some where else.

346: Where did you have your fellow-ship?
I had no particular place of fellow ship.

347: You had no particular place where you fellowshipped with the church?
No sir,-so to speak, I stood alone.

348: How was it with you in Ohio when you went there?
I had no fellowship with any body so far as religion maters were concerned for there were no Latter Day Saint there, and I did not hear much of them only as I heard it though the papers.

349: How long did that condition with you remain?
Well I cannot say – that condition however continued for quite a while.

350: Well about how long?
Well I was rather active in the work for I was young and much more active than I am now, and I helped meetings in the state of Ohio independent of any religion organization. I held meetings and got up quite an interest around me. There was the united brethren and I ministered to what was known as the “United Brethren in Christ”, for they came in there and organized a church of about one hundred of what was known as the youngerly people that were brought to be religious through me and my labors. there.

351: Did you belong to the church with them.
I finally consented to unite with that church.

352: Well did you united with them?
Yes sir.

353: And how long did you remain with them?
I remained with it, – well my letter of dismissal from the conference will show when it was. I have a letter for me and my wife for 1860 but I did not get out of the church fully at that time, as I held a relation in their conference until 1862, – until October 1862; and I hold letters that are in my possession and very sacred to me, and will show my standing with them when I left them.

354: Well what did you do then?
Well then over and above following my avocation was a phycian, – for that was my avocation of life I did what some folks call preaching, – that is what I tried my hand at over and above following my avocation of life.

355: In what church?
In nobodys church in particular, – I just went around trying to do what I considered was best in the way of winning souls to repentance and salvation, – it was not in any bodys church for I stood alone.

356: Well when did you become a member of the church again?
I becam a member of the “Re-organized Church here, that I now am a member of, after about three years investigation of it to know and satisfy myself that it was clean from the Utah apostasy, and identical, so far as I could see with the church as it was primarily. And after about three years investigation of these matters and principles I became satisfied that it was following the doctrine of the original church, – That is the primary church, – and then I joined it.

357: When did you become a member of the Re-organized church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, – that is the question?
I united with the re-organization on the 26th day of October 1884.

358: Had you prior to that time belonged to any other sect of denomination professing the Mormon belief?
No sir.

359: You had not?
No sir, I had belonged to no faction at all. Some folks sometimes call me a Mormon when I was preaching, – they would call me that after I got through preaching, but I did not belong to any sect or faction of the church at all.

360: Some people called you a Mormon you say?
Yes sir.

361: Well did you object to it?
Well sir I always stated my case in this way, – if believing in Jesus Christ, the bible and the gospel as it came from Christ and his apostles, made me a Mormon, why then I was a Mormon.

362: How is it you remember so distinctly the name of Cowdery’s children?
Well these are the names of his children I got from him when I saw him.

363: Saw who?
Oliver Cowdery?

364: When you saw him where?
In Ohio.

365: When you saw him in Ohio he told you that?
Yes sir.

366: Those are the names you got of him when you saw him in Ohio?
Yes sir, at Fort Findlay and Fort Defiance.

367: In what year was that?
Well that was in the year of, – well it was in the latter part of 1844, 1845 and 1846. Those were the years he told me that.

368: Was he then a member of the church?
I do not think he was. I am not postive to that, but I do not think he was.

369: What was his avocation of life at that time?
He was in the legal profession at the time. I was living in Fort Findlay at the time, and I commenced the practice of medicine at the city of Findlay, the county-seat of Hancock County, and if I could I always made it a practice to attend court for I liked to hear it, it pleased me especially in listening to the interesting cases, and occasionally Mr. Cowdery was there in court.

370: Were there any other persons of your peculiar belief in that church with which you became connected in Ohio?
Any other persons.

371: Yes sir, any other persons in that church that entertained your peculiar religious belief besides yourself?
Do you mean the “United Brethren in Christ”?

372: Yes sir?
Oh yes, there was a good many people belonging to that church.

373: Did any of them style themselves, or claim to belong to the church to which you had originally belonged?
No sir.

374: There was no one else in the church besides yourself who claimed to belong to the church or to have belonged to the church to which you originally belonged?
Oh yes, sir, there was one. There was one minister amongst them that had belonged to it, but he had been excommunicated and had joined them.

375: Who was that?
His name was D.P. Hurlbut or Hurlburt, I do not know which it was but it was one or the other of those names. I would not be positive which way he spoke his name but that was about it or something like that.

376: Did you know William Strang, J.J. Strang?
No sir. I was not acquainted with Mr. Strang personally, but I have heard a great deal about him.

377: Did you know Jason W. Briggs?
No sir I was not personally acquainted with Jason W. Briggs either.

378: Did you know Joseph Smith?
Which one do you refer to. Do you mean the martyr Joseph Smith as we call him?

379: Yes sir. Joseph Smith the “martyr” as you call him?
Oh yes sir. I know him. That is I did use to know him, and have heard him preach.

380: When did you first meet him?
Well I think it was in 1830 before we first came to this country at Hyrum.

381: Where?
At a city known as “Hyrum” in Ohio.

382: Where next did you know him?
At Far West when the church was in this state.

383: You met him at Far West again?
Yes sir.

384: Where next did you see him?
After he left Far West I never saw him any more after that.

385: Now you said you knew a man by the name of Partridge?
Yes sir. I knew Partridge.

386: What was his name in full?
Edward Partridge.

387: That word id “Patridge” is it?
Well that is the way I understood he spelled his name, “Edward Partridge”. I know the man you refer to, he was the bishop of the church at that time.

388: Did you know his family?
I did not know so much about his family, but I know him.

389: Did you know his family as well as you did Oliver Cordery’s family?
No sir.

390: Did you know how many he had in his family?
“Patridge?”

391: Yes sir?
No sir.

392: Who else of the church that was at Independence in 1831, 1832 and 1833 is in the re-organized Church at the present time, that you know?
Well I don’t know as I could say without hearing their names called over. If I heard their names called I might be able to answer that question. But I can’t do it unless that is done.

393: Do you know of any one?
That was here at Independence at that time?

394: Yes sir?
I know persons that were here at Independence that were members of the “Re-organized Church, but whether they were members of the church at that time. I know one that was in the church at that time, but I do not know know whether he was here in Independence, but he was on the other side of the river.

395: Who is that?
That is Mr. Brackenbury.

396: Did you know him at that time?
Yes sir, I was aquainted with him and his boy on the other side of the river, and I understand that they were here in Independence at the time.

397: Were you aquainted with him here?
How?

398: Were you aquainted with them here in Independence?
I can not say that I was really aquainted with him here in Independence. He did not live here in Independence, for his folks lived up at the Whitmer Settlement, and I was only up there occasionly as they had meetings or something like that, and so I do not know that I was aquainted with them at that time, but I was over the river.

399: Well do you know of a single person, know a member of the Re-organized church excepting yourself, who was a member of the church at this place in 1831, ’32 and ’33, when you were here?
I do not know of any, or can not call any to rememberance now that were here, but I have no doubt but that there are members in the church that lived here at that time.

400: Wouldn’t you have been apt to have found out such people for the purpose of talking over old times and renewing old aquaintances if there were any such?
Well I have talked with a good many about old times, but it referred more to old times on the other side of the river that on this side. Now there is an old sister at Lamoni, – I forgot her name, – but it seems to me that it is Marks now, – at any rate it is a different name than the name that she bore at that time I knew her, and she was a member of the church in Caldwell County, –

401: The you did not know her here?
No sir, it was in Caldwell County, and I don’t know that she was here, but she was there in Caldwell County.

402: Well if you can’t mention any names it is unnecessary to pursue this line of investigation any further?
Remember that was a long time ago, sixty years ago, and that is a long time, and about all the members of the church that were here at that time have paid the debt of nature are gone to their last rest. Now that is the way it is. I would not undertake to mention any names, but if the names were called off to me of any such members of the church I might be able to recognize them, whether they had been here or not.

403: Well if you cannot mention the names of any persons who were members of the church at the time you were here in the years you have mentioned, and who are now members of the Re-organized Church will you please state the names of all you can remember of persons who were in Clay and Caldwell counties up to the year 1838, who were at the time members of the church, and who are now members of the Re-organized Church?
I would not be able to do that because my memory for names in late years has filled me, – that is the names of persons that I have heard a year or two or three years ago is not clear and distinct in my mind like names that I have heard twenty years ago, or thirty years ago.

404: Well I am calling for the names of persons that you knew forty or fifty years ago? Can you give any of them?
Well now I would not under take to recall any names that I knew other than the names I have given on my direct examination, for it has been so long ago that I cannot remember. It is considerable over fifty years since these things occured about which you asked me, and that is a long time to remember things like that. You ask me for the names of persons that belonged to the church then that belonged to it here and who belong to the Re-organized church now, and that is something I could not under take to give you. If I heard their names called I would probably recognize them at once, but I would not undertake to give any names as an act of my memory.

405: Well at what conference were you admitted as a member of the Re-organize Church?
What is called the Northern Michigan conference.

406: Where was it held?
It was held at Vassar Michigan.

407: Were you over baptised more than once?
No sir.

408: Were you ever baptised for the dead?
No sir.

409: You were not?
No sir, – Unless I was called the dead myself.

410: What office or position do you hold in the Re-organized church?
I am an Elder in the church.

411: Do you belong to any of the quoroms?
Yes sir.

412: What quorom do you belong to?
The High Priest Quorom is what I belong to.

413: When I suppose you are a High Priest? Is that the fact? Are you a High Priest?
Yes sir.

414: You are a High Priest?
That is what they call me.

415: When were you ordained as a High Priest?
That was at the Kirtland conference on year ago this spring.

416: Is an Elder of necessity an High Priest?
How?

417: Is an Elder of necessity an High Priest in the church?
No sir, but an High Priest of necessity is an Elder in the church, but not an Elder an High Priest.

418: An High Priest is of necessity an Elder in the church, but an Elder is not of necessity an High Priest?
Yes sir, that is the way it is, – you have it right.

419: Did you hold any position in the church here at Independence or in the church at Far West?
Did I what?

420: Did you hold any position in the church here at Independence or in the church at Far West?
Not at Independence any further than being a simple lay member, but at Far West in the month of November 1837 my father choosed to set me apart as an Elder in the church when I was sixteen years old.

421: Your father did that?
Yes sir.

422: Did you do that at the church or at home?
At a conference that was held at Hahn’s Mill that he had charge of.

423: A conference that was held at Hahn’s Mill you say?
Yes sir.

424: What kind of a conference was that?
District conference.

425: Was that done at his, – on his own motion exclusivly and entirely?
I do not remember that it was done on his motion entirely, but it was not done without the consent of the conference. Thee was a vote taken on it of the number present, – that is in regard to it?

426: You remember that was the case?
Yes sir.

427: That there was a vote taken?
Yes sir.

428: That you should be an elder?
Yes sir.

429: And it passed the conference?
Yes sir.

430: And your father ordained you?
Yes sir.

431: When did your father leave the state of Missouri?
Well I would not say whether it was the fall of 1842 or in 1843. That is the time he left the state I think, but he had left that part of the country before that and had gone down into the village of Madison in Monroe County, and he bought some property there, in my name and still he held it in my name.

432: What is that, – I did not quite under stand that?
I said he went to the town of Madison in Monroe County, and bought some property there, and when the deed to it was made out it was made out in my name, for he did not know how soon he would be ordered away from there so he bought the property and had it in my name, and then he built a blacksmith shop on it and a small house on it, and staid there a little while, – not a great while, and then he left there and went up in Iowa.

433: I believe you stated in your direct examination that you were back here in Independence after you left the first time?
Yes sir I was back here a few years ago.

434: I believe you also stated that it was in 1835 that you were back here?
In 1853?

435: Yes sir?
No sir, I did not make that statement.

436: I was under the impression that you stated you were here then?
No sir, your impression is an erroneous one. I was never in Independence. I was in Kansas City but I never was in Independence from the winter of 1834 I believe it was, – the last visit I had here was the time that my father came over here to the town from Clay County on the investigation of the merchants to trade, and had the difficulty I spoke of yesterday, – that was the last time I was here before 1885 when I came here and attended to the conference. I had been in Kansas City in the interim but that was the first visit I paid to Independence in all these years that intervened.

437: When were you at Kansas City?
Oh, I have passed through Kansas City several times.

438: Well when was it?
I could not say for I do not remember. I have passed through Kansas City and have got our in Kansas on a trip of recreation for my health for a visit of a couple or three months at a time, then I would come back again.

439: Well in what years did you make these trips? – was it in the 1850’s any time?
Oh no, it was later than that. Let me see it was, – well it must have been in the 1870’s some where that I was up in there.

440: Have you been at any time over in Clay County or over in Caldwell County in this state since that time, – that is since you left here in ’38 or ’39?
I was at David Whitmer’s and General Doniphan’s in Richmond in Ray County in 1885 and I was also at the same time in Caldwell County and visited there in several places in Caldwell County in the same year.

441: That was in the year 1885?
Yes sir.

442: Did you know one Doctor McClellan in the early days when you were here?
I have heard of such a man.

443: Well did you know him?
Well it was this way. I knew him by name and I have seen him, but I did not see him enough to be able to describe him, – that is to describe the man, but I know enough of him to know that he was a man that caused difficuly, and gave rise to litigation in the minds of some of the Saints about some trouble they had. I know that much about the man, but that was from hearsay, and not what I knew on my own knowledge, –

444: You know this man then?
Yes sir, I know him when I see him, but I know him better by hearsay. I know there was such a man but I cannot describe anything about Doctor McClellan. I knew more of Doctor March than I did of Doctor McClellan.

445: Who was the govener at the time you left this state in 1842?
Who was the govener of the state?

446: Yes sir, if you remember, you may state who was the govener?
I do not remember.

447: Do you remember anything about the time when Boggs was the govener?
Boggs.

448: Yes sir?
Well yes I know he was the governer in 1838. I know he was he govener then. I remember that right well for that was the time that they made the raid on the Saints there at Far West.

449: Do you know whether or not after his term expired there was any more such orders issued as he had issued, by any govener of Missouri, or any authority?
No sir, I never knew of any other orders being issued by any one, such as he had issued. I never knew of any such orders being issued by any other Govener but him.

450: Do you know of any other prosecution or deprivation of their rights or property of the people whom you have termed “Latter Day Saints” after the death of Boogs in this state or in this section of country?
I don’t know of any thing of the kind occuring here of course, not I was not here and I do not know that there was any of the Latter Day Saints here; and after they left Missouri I do not remember that there was another persecution. There was some hard saying about them sometimes, but I do not remember anything further about that in the way or persecution. It is not likely there was though for it is my under standing there was none of the saints left in the state to persecute.

451: Do you know why, if they had rights, – if the members of that church that was here and in Clay County, and in Caldwell County, had rights to property in those respective counties, – do you know why they never asserted these rights in the courts of the states?
You want to know the reason why they did not assert their rights in the courts?

452: Yes sir, – do you know why they did not?
Well I understood that, – I will say I have understood so far as history is concerned, that they are different times did assert their rights at certain places, but never obtained any hearing.

453: Do you make that answer apply to the courts of the state, or the courts of the United States or both?
Well I will make that apply first to the United States. I will not say in regard to their making personal efforts in the civil courts of the state of Missouri to secure their rights, but I think it is fair to assume that viewing the way they were treated, and knowing what I know of the feeling that existed during all the time I was hear in the state, that justice could not have been obtained. I would not say that personal efforts were made by individuals in that respect in the civil courts of this state, but if my memory serves me right I believe there was some effort make with the Governor, or one of the Governors of the state of Missouri to obtain redress or compensation for the loss and damage sustained, but I would not say positively about that. That is something I do not know of my own knowledge, and after I went out of the state of Missouri I did not hear much more about the Latter Day Saints, unless I heard it through the papers. I heard that Mr. Young went off into Urah with his faction and took a good many with him, and raised this trouble, this terrible apostacy in regard to polygamy, and what I heard of the church was evil, and only evil and that continually and indeed there was a time for quite a while, quite a number of years that I supposed the Latter Day Saints had all gone off to Utah with Brigham Young to the devil. Now gentlemen that is just what I supposed.

454: Well was that a fact?
What?

455: Was that a fact that they had all gone to the devil?
Well if it wasn’t a fact it was pretty near a fact. I think it was pretty near a fact.

456: It was?
Yes sir I think so. There isn’t much doubt in my mind on that point. I say that because I have studied the matter and I have stated it publicly in the history of my life, that I would rather that all the devils in hell after me than one woman devil, and it seems that he had a good many of them after him.

457: That was one objection to polygamy in you mind?
Yes sir.

458: Because it was uncomfortable?
It would be for me.

459: Do you feel interested in the result of the suit in which you are testifying here?
Well so far as having a final disposition of it, fairly, righteously, honorable and legally I am. Nothing beyond that however.

460: Do you know why an effort has not been made by the church to which you now belong to bring about this litigation long before this time?
No sir, I don’t know they reasons why that has not been done.

461: I presume you have no connection with the management of this case or of this suit?
No sir, I have no connection with the management of it all.

462: You say you want to see it legally and righteously and honorable settled? And all that sort of thing?
Yes sir.

462: Well is it not a fact that you have a preconceived motion of what would be a legal and honorable settlement of it?
I would not without hearing the law and evidence. If you present me the law and the summing up of the testimony, I would then give you my judgement of the matter and not until then.

464: Do you know anything as to the claims of the re-organized church for other lands in this county and in other counties in Missouri?
I do not.

465: That is all
 

465: Doctor Rathbun you stated on your cross examination that some time in your history after you left Missouri you mad up your mind that about all the Latter Day Saints had gone with Brigham Young?
Yes sir, that is what I said, and that was the idea I had in my mind, –

466: Hold on I have not finished the question, – you stated that you thought they had all gone with Brigham Young to the devil?
Yes sir.

467: You stated that in substance?
Yes sir.

468: And that is what you thought too is it not?
Yes sir. I made that statement.

469: I will ask you not if afterwards you found out that your opinion or idea in that respect was well founded, or was not well founded and a great many of the Latter Day Saints, as you term them never went with Brigham Young at all?
Yes sir. 470 (Written as 447)

469: You may go on and state how that knowledge came to you?
In 1880 I was living then in Eaton County, Onedia, – Grand Lodge was my post office, and most of the time from 1849 up to the time that I moved to Lansing I was living there. Well as I stated while I was living there in 1880 my mail came in one day, and amongst the mail, or the papers that I received by mail was a newspaper called the “Detroit Echo,” and it was the weekly edition of that publication, – or rather I should say it was a weekly edition of the evening news, and on the title page of the paper I noticed in capital letters the word “Mormons”, and as I was in the habit of reading in every and any paper I could get my hands on anything that referred to Mormonism, I stepped right out of the door, for the papers were handed me as I was standing in the door, and I read this article. Well the article that attracted my attention when I came to read it I found it went on to explain that there was a re-organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and that was about thirty-thousand of them, and that they had missionaries in Europe and in Australia, and in the South Sea Islands and various other parts of the world, – I can’t say where all for I do not remember all the places where the article I referred to stated they had missionaries; but I recollect that it went on and stated that they had a conference in nearly every state and territory in the Union, and in the state of Michigan they had a conference, and it stated the number of Elders they had in the state but I forget the number, but any way there was quite a number of them. I also learned that there was a paper called the “Saints Herald” which was the official organ or paper of the re-organization, and that Joseph Smith the son of Joseph Smith the martyr, was the editor of that paper, and that he was the President of the church. It went on and stated a great deal about the re-organization and gave a great deal of valuable information other than what I have stated, for what I have said is simply an outline of the main facts set forth in that article. Well after I got through reading it, – that is reading that article, – I called my wife’s attention to it, and I sat down in a chair and read it over to her, and when I got through I said to her “I am going to send for that paper” referring to the Saints Herald, and I said “Perhaps this is nothing but a paper blow like a good many other things I have seen in newspapers. I said that for I had no idea that I would ever hear from it. Well I sat right down and wrote a card to Joseph Smith and directed it to Lamoni, Iowa, where the article I refer to stated the headquarters of the organization was, and state in the card that if it was a fact that he was alive and publishing a paper called the Saints Herald, I would be glad to have him send me a copy of the paper by return mail for examination, and signed my name to it, and below that I wrote the post scrip, and said “I knew your father in his life time, and when I knew him I knew him to be not a polygamist.” I can’t say those are the identical words I used but it was in that language substantially. Well then I put it in the post office and as I was busy in my professions I did not pay much attention to it, for in fact I would not have been surprised if I had never heard from it again, so at the time I may say I forgot all about it, but when Saturday came sure enough the paper came, and I was surprised to learn that there was a people called the “Latter Day Saints” still in existence, that is I learned it officially so to speak from this publication the Saints Herald, and that they had not all gone off with Brigham Young to what is now know or called Utah. All this information and knowledge was a matter of great surprise to me, and what surprised me more than any thing else, and is a wonder to me even to this day, is that in traveling over that southern peninsula of Michigan as much as I have, visiting so many towns, houses and school houses, practicing my my profession and preaching the gospel as I visited in that state and especially in that part of the state, that I never ran across a Latter Day Saint or heard of one until I saw it in that newspaper on that occasion. That is something that is entirely incomprehensible to me, and something that is absolutely beyond my under standing, for it is a fact that up to the time I caught that article I never heard of a Latter Day Saint but what was connected with that apostasised church in Utah except James Jesse Strang and some of his connections. That was a matter of such astonishment and utter surprise to me, that at first I could hardly believe my senses when I learned that there was so many of them there in my own state, and in my section of the state all around me, and I had never heard of them that I did not know what to make out of it. I found that up in the north part of Iowa and int he south part of Iowa and around Lamoni for I had traveled through that country on both sides of the states and had heard nothing about it. I have been up here in Missouri at Maryville and have preached there to the people, and yet although I was so close to them I had heard nothing of them. I had been up here in the state of Kansas and preached to the people there, and had heard nothing of them in all my travels, and I learned afterwards that I had been right around where there were and had really mixed up with them, and that is a matter of surprise to me to this day how I never ran across any of them. Now gentlemen what I have detailed here is just how I came to learn of that organization. Well as I state before that paper came in response to my inquiry, and I took it and read it, and then I wrote a note to Joseph Smith to learn when the conference would be in Michigan, and in reply he sent me the date and were it would 539 be held, but he did not tell me in his reply who to call on. I then in the paper learned the name of Bishop Blakeslee, and that he was a president of my own state, and then I dropped him a card informing him that I would, – or that I was expecting to attend their conference at Coldwater, and there I wanted to make my acquaintance with them, and I would be pleased for him to tell me whom I should call on, and he sent me four names he sent me the name of W.H. Kelly, – the name of W. Lockerby, – and the name of Edwin or Edward Whalley, – I don’t know which the name is but it is E. Whalley anyhow, and the name of another man called Louck, – I don’t remember his given name either. He sent me these four names I have given you, and I see from the manner of his address he was a business man, and I took it he wrote these names in the order which he would be pleased for me to call, and as the name that came first was W. Kelley, I sat down and wrote him a card and told him I was going to the conference to get acquainted with them. –

471: Well we don’t care about all that history?
Well I wanted to tell how I came to be acquainted with them, – that was all.

472: It is a very interesting story and I would be glad to hear it?
Well to cut the matter short that is the way I learned there was a reorganization and that all the Latter Day Saints had not gone to Utah with Brigham Young, – I got acquainted with them for I attended the conference, and then I commenced to make myself acquainted with their doctrine. I began my investigation of the Reorganized Church.

473: Well we don’t care, – you can make your statement if you so desire, – make it in your own way.
Well that is about all of the statement I have to make, for that is the way I became acquainted with the Reorganized Church.

474: Now at the time you were here in Jackson County, and went across the river; what, if any thing, was done by the members of the church in the way of disposing of their property here, if you know, before they left? Now I am asking you for your personal knowledge if you know anything about it?
Well when they left here they had to leave without disposing of their property as far as I know. That is the way they left so far as my knowledge extends, for they did not have time to make any disposition of it.

475: What opportunities so far as you know was there for them to dispose of their property?
I don’t know of any, – that is I do not know of any here in Jackson County, and so it was in Caldwell County with this exception that they had three months to get away in from Caldwell County, but no time to speak of was given them to get out of this County. That was all the opportunity that I know of their having to dispose of their property.

476: To what do you refer as ; “all the opportunity they had to get away in”?
The three months that was given them to get out of Caldwell County in. Some of them did manage to dispose of their property in that time by doing so at a great sacrifice, and others could not dispose of it during that time.

477: You were asked yesterday on cross-examination Doctor, something with reference to the name of the Church?
Yes sir.

478: Now I will get you to look at Exhibit E, Se. 43, Par. 4 & 5 on page 173, being portions of a revelation given in June 1829, and I will ask you to read from the word “take” in the tenth line from the bottom of the page and paragrapg forth, down to the middle of paragrapg five
Shall I read it out aloud?

479: Yes sir?
“Take upon you the name of Christ and speak the truth in soberness and as many as repent and are baptised in my name which is Jesus Christ, and endure to the end, the same shall be saved. behold Jesus Christ is the name which is gi – ven of the Father, and there is none other name given whereby man can be saved; wherefore all men must take upon them the name which is given of the Father for in that name shall they be called at the last day; wherefore if they know not the nanw by which they are called, they cannot have place in the kingdom of my Father. And now behold there are others who are called to declare my gospel, both unto Gentile and unto Jew; Yea, even twelve; and the twelve shall be my deciples and they shall take upon them my name and the twelve are they who shall desire to take upon them my name, with full purpose of heart; they are called to go into all the world to preach my gospel unto every creature, and they are they who are ordained of me to baptise in my name according to that which is written; and you must have th – at which is written before you, wherefore, you must perform it according to the words which are written”.

480: I will get you to look at Exhibit E, Doctor Rathbun, section two page seventy nine paragraph seven and read it to the reporter commencing with the word “all”?
“All those who humble them – selves before God and desire to be baptised, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly man – ifest by their works that they have received of the spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins shall be received by baptism into this church”.

481: Now I will ask you if you were acquainted with a party here in Independence by the name of Samuel Wood or Woods?
connected with the church do you mean?

482: I don’t know whether he was connected with the church or not. perhaps he was connected with it?
I don’t have, – I do not get him distinctly in my mind now.

483: You do not remember of such a party here at Independence at the time you lived here? Is that what you say?
I don’t recall distinctly any such person.

484: You were asked yesterday about the plat of ground known as the “temple plot” as you called it, or “temple lot”, – you called it “plot” or “plat”, while others called it “lot”; and in your cross examination you stated that the “plat” or “plot” primarily understood it was fifty and some odd acres or seventy some acres?
Yes sir or there abouts.

485: Fifty or seventy odd acres or thereabouts was the amount of it as you under stood it?
Yes sir.

486: I will ask you to state now Doctor Rathbun, what if any thing was done by the church before it left this county of Jackson towards setting any particular part of that piece of ground off, and dedicating it for church purposes, – temple purposes or whatever it was. Just state the facts about that if you know anything?
Well it was my understanding of it, – it was my understanding of it was that at time, that that was, – there was not a very large portion of it, but rather a small portion of it, –

487: Just state what you know about it Doctor? By Mr. E.I. Kelley, –
 

488: You can state the manner in which it was held by the society at that time?
There was a small portion of it that was set ap- art and consecrated for the purpose of building a temple on sometime in the future, and that portion of it was the portion that they occupied for religious worship from time to time. I would state however, that I did not see it consecrated, nor did I see it set apart. At the time it was set apart I was not present, but I saw it occupied and was present at the time of the oc- cupation thereof for religious worship a great many times, as the lot that was set apart and consecrated for’ the purpose thereon was used for religious worship, and I was present at religious worship a great many times.

489: I wil ask you Doctor if you Doctor if you heard any public declarations from the stand or platform of the fact that that lot had benn de- dicated and consecrated for the purpose of building a temple thereon at some future time, or in substance that?
May I state it?

490: Yes sir, – just go on and answer the questions?
I have heard an – nounced I can not say how many times, but more times than one, – I would not say how many times, but several times anyway, – I would not say how many times, but more times than one anyway as I before stated, and I have heard the announcements made from the stand when speaking there, that this lot was sacredly consecrated and d dedicated by God for the building of HIS. temple there. That I have heard stated several times.

491: Can you mention the name of any one who you heard make that statement?
I have heard Oliver Cowdery make that statement, and I have also heard Mr. Phelps on several occasions make the same statement. I have also heard others in general conversa- toi make the same statement, but not publicly like these other men I have mentioned. It was a matter of common notorie- ty that this piece of ground was set apart and solemnly dedi- cated fot the purpose of building of a temple some time in the future, and that temple was to be used for the purpose of worshipping Almighty God.

492: At the time of those declarations were made do you know whether or not Edward Partridge was -present?
When Oliver Cowdery and Mr. Phelps made these declarations he was present.

493: What did Edward Partridge say, if anything, with reference to that subject?
Well your speaking in reference to that reminds me of a fact that Mr. Partridge himself stated publically the same thing, that it was consecrated, dedicated and set apart for the building of a temple for the worship of God, for I hear him state that publicly also.

494: You have Edward Partridge, you have heard Edward Partridge also state that publicly?
Yes sir.

495: Where were the declarations of Partridge made?
Right there.

496: Do you mean on the ground where the meetings were held?
Yes sir, – on the grounds where the meetings were held, for that would be the time when they would speak specially about it. They seemed to speak of it being a sacred spot.

497: I think that is all we have to examine the witness on?
 

498: Where these occurances of which you have just spoken took place, it was in amongst the trees was it not, – wasn’t it right there in the woods?
Yes sir it was woods. It was all woods around there at that time.

499: There was large trees standing around?
There was some pretty good sized trees there.

500: And was not the stand from which the speaking was done set up against a tree or some trees?
I don’t remember about the stand being set against some trees. There was a stand made there, but I think it was rather to one side of a tree. The end of it may have been secured to a tree through, I wouldn’t say that was the case, but the other end was on posts that were set up there.

501: Was or was not shelter from the sun obtained by the trees?
Yes sir there was sufficient shelter for the meetings. It was in a shady place.

502: These meetings that I understand you to have spoken were held in the warm weather?
Yes sir.

503: They were not held there at the time in the winter?
No sir.

504: Were they held there on more than one spring or more than one summer?
They were held there in the summer and fall, – it was the latter part of the summer of 1832, and I think the fore part of – just the fore part of or early in 1833, and that was all.

505: Are you able to state whether there was any trees at that time where the present temple of the Reorganized Church is built? The present church of the reorganization is what I refer to?
Well I do not call it a temple, – I call it a meeting house.

506: Well a rose, you know, is just as sweet when called by any other name?
How do you ask me that question?

507: I ask you whether or not there was trees at that point?
Where our place of worship is now? Where that house stands?

508: Yes sir?
Yes sir, I think there was trees there. Now I would not say postively, but that is my mind about it.

509: You stated there was trees over quite a large proportion of that fifty or seventy-five acres of which you speak as composing the temple plot?
Yes sir. In traveling over it at that time I go not think that there was any part of it that could be called absolute prairie. There was places on it where there was brush on it, but I don’t think any of it could be called prairie or places where you could go out and mow prairie grass.

510: Did any body ever show you the bounds of it?
Of the temple plot.

511: Yes sir.
No sir, – not as far as I know. I never saw the lines of this side of it, but the boundary line all around it I can’t say anything about that, for I never went around it to see the boundary line of it, but so far as I seen it, or observed over the plat why I have no recollection of any absolute lines.

512: I believe you states yesterday that there was no road running by it on the north of it when you were there?
On the north, – ?

513: Any road running in a westerly direction and on the north side?
I don’t know that I stated that there was no road running north. I have no recollection of making that statement. I do not recollect now that there was, but if my memory serves me right not there was a road that run down, – well I don’t know just where it was, but it was on the north side, – I can’t say just as to how that was for it is so hard for me to get the longitude fixed in my mind and keep it there. If I could get the longitude and latitude fixed in my mind I could tell you more about it, – but I think it was rather on the north side there that the road run.

514: Well what sort of a road was it if any?
It was a mule road that was cut out there, and not for a wagon road I think I don’t know that it went to the extremity of that plot, – I don’t know that it did, but it run down there to it and along it some way or other, – I can’t remember how that was.

515: Did it run into it or not?
In what way do you mean?

516: Did the road you refer to run into the grounds?
I knew, – I remember we could drive in on to the plot, for they drove in in on to the place to the place where they held the meetings.

517: From what direction did this road upon which they drove in come or go to the temple plot?
It came from the village.

518: It was a road from the village?
Yes sir.

519: Do you know whether there was more than one wagon road leading from any direction into these grounds or onto that lot?
I think that the road that run out from the village, – The main road that run out that way, – there was a road that turned off from that and went in on the grounds. My memory is that there was a road that turned off from the main road that lead out from the village and that went to the temple plot or to the grounds where the meetings were held.

520: Turned off, to the north or to the south? the road going west you know is the road that I referred to, and I wanted to know what is your recollection as to whether that road turned off to the north or to the south from that road?
There was a road running west, –

521: Yes sir, and now I want to know if the road that you say turned off from that road and led to the temple lot, – whether that road turned off to the north or to the south, – whether that road turned off to the north or to the south, – to the left hand or to the right?
I think it turned off to the left if my memory serves me right it turned off to the left, but this was a good while ago and I could not state absolutely how that was, but that is my recollection now that it turned to the left.

522: Well how long was that road that turned off this main road?
I could not say just how long it was. It did not go any great ways until it got down to the lot.

523: Well was it five-hundred yards?
No sir, I don’t think it was.

524: Was it three-hundred yards?
Well it might have been. I would not say postively in regard to that.

525: It might have been three-hundred yards?
Yes sir. It might have been and again it might not have been.

526: Well what would you place as the lowest limit of the distance?
Well I would say three-hundred yards or there about, – more or less.

527: Now at that time you say there was some of this lot set apart for the church?
Yes sir.

528: Do you know how much was set apart?
Well I have it in my mind that there was about three acres. Three acres, or such a matter. I don’t think there was more than that, for I think they called it three acres or about that amount.

529: Was the boundaries of it defined in any way?
Well it was not so very well defined so far as corner posts or any thing like that is concerned, but they had it marked out so they knew where it was, but I do not know that there was any corner posts established. I could not say that there was any corner posts or stones established or any established lines, but there was about three acres that I know they said were set apart, or in the neighborhood of that amount.

530: Did they own the whole of it? or claim the whole of it as the plot?
Yes sir.

531: Then how was three acres set apart in contra-distinction from the rest of the plot?
Well that was set apart for the temple lot, and the rest of it was for the purpose of settling saints on it, for the homes of saints ultimately, and they concluded to buy more lands than that. Their idea was to buy more lands than that and ultimately settle homeless saints upon it. That was what the idea of the church authorities was at that time.

532: Well was the church at that time buying property to sell to its members?
Well during this time they were obtaining monies more or less, – they did not obtain much, but they obtained some and with it bought some lands.

533: The church authorities bought some lands you say?
Yes sir.

534: With money obtained from members of the church?
Yes sir. I do not know anything about how much land they bought in that way, but I know they were buying some land.

535: The church was doing that?
Yes sir, Bishop Partridge was for the church.

536: Was he the church?
He was the one that was handling the money for the church as the bishop of the church, or agent of the church, and under our form of church government he had the handling of the church money.

537: What authority, if you know, did he have to do that?
He was appointed by the president of the church to do that.

538: You say he was appointed by the president of the church?
Yes sir.

539: To do what?
As the bishop of the church, and he was directed among other things to buy lands for homeless saints.

540: How do you know that to be a fact?
Well all I know about that was, – I did not see any articles agreements or anything of that kind, but I heard them talk about it, and I talked about it with Bishop Partridge myself and I know that my father gave him some money on it.

541: On what?
To buy land with.

542: To buy land?
Yes sir.

543: To buy what land?
Any land that the Bishop would choose to buy.

544: Where?
Anywhere.

545: Did he buy land else where in this county?
I couldn’t say how much he bought. I suppose he bought land elsewhere besides that.

546: Can you tell whether or not he bought any land for himself, as a prive individual?
Well it rather strikes me that he entered that land in his own name, -I wouldn’t say potively but that is the idea I have of it, that he entered that land in his own name.

547: What land do you refer to?
The temple plot, -I think that was the way it was, but then it was understood by everybody that it was the church property.

548: Do you know enough of his affairs to be able to state that he bought any land for himself as an individual?
I do not think he did otherwise,-

549: You don’t think he did otherwise, – I don’t understand that?
Well other wise than I have stated, -that he was buying it for the church.

550: He bought land for the church?
Yes sir. It makes no difference to me how he bought it or entered it or deeded it, -if he deeded it incorrectly that makes no difference to me.

551: Well that is something I was coming ti, -if he bought the land for the church how could he make a dded to the land to the parties that put their money into it?
Well I say that is something that I have nothing to do with, and anything I would say on that question would be merely my opinion. I know that he bought lands for the church, and money was placed into his hands by different members of the church with that object in view.

552: How do you know that?
I don’t know that he bought any for himself at all.

553: How do you know that money was paid into his hands for the church?
Well so far as seeing it is concerned I do not now, only so far as my father is concerned, and I know he paid him money for that purpose,-

554: Do you know he did not buy any land for himself?
No sir, I wouldn’t say that he did not buy any land for himself.

555: Was he an honest man?
Well we always took him to be, and I believe he was.

556: Well, if he was an honest man, and bought land for the church, would he buy that land in his own name?
What is the question?

557: If he was an honest man and buying lands for the church, would he buy that land in his own name? Would he buy land in his own name with the money of the church?
Well he would not unless there was some consideration or understanding about it with those who gave him authority, but he might do it in pursuance of an understanding he had with the authorities that gave him the appointment to purchase these lands.

558: Well can you give nay reason as to why he should be taking the title to land that he bought for the church in his own name in that way?
Well now none other than that just as that time when he was buying the land it was not ready, -there was no ready method of getting knowledge back and forth between points far removed as it is now, -from Kirtland Ohio, where the President was, and I have known them to do somethings in haste when they had to wait for further information, and under these circumstances he might have bought land in his own name, waiting for the time being for information from the President of the church, who at that time was living at Kirtland Ohio, – then he would dispose of it and make a tille to whereever he directed.

559: You say these were the reasons?
No sir, I do not say that, I say that possibly here was some cause like that that made him take the title in his own name, and the land may have been entered in his name for the reason that at that time under the law a church could not enter it or take title. I am of the opinion that there was a good and valid reason for Bishop Partridge acting as he did in that matter, but I don’t know what it was.

560: You say you saw your father giving money to Partridge?
Yes sir.

561: How much did he give him?
I could not say now how mush he did give him, for I don’t remember the amount.

562: Well was it as much as a dollar?
Yes sir.

563: Was it more than that?
Yes sir. At one time he must have given him as much as twenty dollars or such a matter, and at another time he gave him perhaps as much more. He gave him ore or less than twenty dollars on two different occasions.

564: What time was that, – what date?
That was in 1832.

565: In 1832 you saw your father give Bishop Partridge money?
Yes sir.

566: Do you know what time in the year it was in 1832 that he gave him this money?
What time in the year was it?

567: Yes sir?
Well it was in the latter part of the year.

568: Do you know what he told him to do with it?
No sir.

569: Do you not remember any thing about what your father told him to do with the money when he gave it to him?
No sir, I don’t remember any thing further about it than I have stated.

570: How old were you then?
In 1832?

571: Yes sir?
I was eleven years of age.

572: Don’t you remember anything about the directions your father gave to Partridge about the money?
Well he gave it to him for the purpose of buying land.

573: Well can you state here what your father told Partridge?
Well he told him that was for the use of buying land for the homeless Saints.

574: You remember that?
Yes sir, that much of it I do remember.

575: And you are sure you remember that much of it?
Yes sir.

576: Do you know what he did with that money?
No sir.

577: I will hand you Exhibit “J” entitled “Book of Doctrine and Covenents” of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, carefully selected from the revelations of God, and given in the order of these dates Lamoni Iowa, printed by the Board of Publication of the Re-organized Church of Latter Day Saints 1880; and ask you to read on page two hundred and seven, commencing, at section one-hundred and two, paragraph seven and read to paragraph ten?
Where shall I read?

578: Commencing at paragraph seven and reading over on the next page to paragraph ten, inclusive?
(the paragraph referred to is on page two-hundred and eighty seven of Exhibit “J”). And let all my people who dwell in the regions round about, be very faithful and prayerful. humble before me, and reveal not the things which I have revealed unto them, until it is wisdom in me that they should be revealed. Talk not judgement, neither boast of faith not of mighty works, but careful gather together, as much in one region as can be consistently with the feelings of the people; and behold I will give unto you favor and grace in their eyes that you may rest in peace and safety, while you are saying unto the people, execute government and judgement and justice for us according to law and redress of our wrongs. Now behold I say unto you my friends in this way you may find favor in the eyes of my people, until the army of Israel becomes very great; and I will soften the hearts of the people, as I did the heart of Pharaoh, from time to time, until my servant Burak Ale, and Baneemy, whom I have appointed shall have time to gather up the strength of my house and to have sent wise men to fulfill that which I have commanded concerning the purchasing of all the lands in Jackson County, that can be purchased, and in adjoining counties round about; for it is my will that these lands should be purchases and after they are purchased that my saints should possess them according to the laws of consecration which I have given; and after these lands are purchased I will hold the armies of Israel guiltless in taking possession of their own lands, which they have previously purchases with their money, and of throwing down the towers of mine enemies that may be upon them, and scattering their watchman, and avenging me of mine enemies, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. By firstly let my army become very great, and let it be very sanctified before me that it may become fair as the sun and clear as the moon, and that her banners may be terrible unto all nations; that the kingdoms of this world may be constrained to acknowledge that the Kingdom of Zion is in every deed the Kingdom of our God and his Christ; therefore, let us become subject unto her laws. Verily I say unto you it is expedient in me that the first Elders of my church should receive their endowment from on high, in my house, which I have commanded to be built unto my name in the land of Kirtland; and let these commandments which I have given concerning Zion and her law be executed and fulfilled after her redemption. There has been a day of calling, but the time has come for a day of choosing; and let those be chosen that are worthy, and it shall be manifest unto my servants by the voice of the Spirit, those that are chosen, and they shall be sanctified; and inasmuch as they follow the council which they received, they shall have power after many days to accomplish all things pertaining to Zion”.

579: Now will you turn back to page two-hundred and eighty-five of the same book?
Yes sir, that is the beginning of the section or revelation.

580: The beginning of the section you have just read is on page two hundred and eighty five of the same book?
Yes sir, that is the beginning.

581: Now will you read the date of that revelation?
“Revelation given on Fishing River Missouri, June the 22nd, 1834”. That is all you want me to read?

583: Yes sir. Is it not a fact, or do you state it as a fact here in your testimony that portions of the Mormon belief, using that phrase, I should say portion of the Mormon people who were here in 1831, 1832, and 1833 were not familiar with all the doctrine of the church, and that a portion or the Mormon Belief was kept from the public generally?
I don’t know that any of their modes of operation or purposes in that regard were kept concealed. I do not know that that was kept concealed.

583: Well I ask you if any of their purposes were kept concealed, – t that is what I meant to ask you?
I do not know that they were.

584: Do you know whether any of their revelations were kept concealed, – from the public at that time or any other time?
I do not know that they were. I don’t believe they were concealed, or they were generally published in the paper that was published here, as fast as they were received.

585: Do you know whether any other land was obtained by the church, or by any of its members in this county, at or about that time
There was individual members of the church bought land for themselves here in this country at that time.

586: At that time?
Yes sir.

587: And in other counties also in the neighborhood here?
Well as I understood it, it was in this county, – Jackson County.

588: Did they not do the same in Clay and Caldwell Counties?
Yes sir but that was later on. They bought up piles of land in Caldwell county, but they had to leave it afterwards.

589: They bought land in Caldwell County after this revelation you have just read a portion of, was given in 1834?
Yes sir. (590 missing)

591: And in Clay and Daviess counties also?
I do not know anything about how much land they bought in Clay and Daviess Counties, but I know they bought up and large quanity of land in Caldwell County, but besides that County and this I don’t know know how much they bought.

592: Zion’s Camp, – in 1830 or ’34 or about those dates?
I do not.