39 – Joseph C. Kingsbury

1: Where do you live Mr Kingsbury?
Here.

2: Well state where you live?
Here in Salt Lake City.

3: Where did you reside before coming here to Salt Lake City?
At Nauvoo.

4: In what state was that?
Illinois.

5: Before moving here you resided at Nauvoo in the state of Illinois?
Yes sir.

6: How long did you live at Nauvoo in the state of Illinois?
Well I lived, – let me see, – I came up to Nauvoo I think it was in the year ’40. Yes sir I think it was the year ’40 that I came to Nauvoo.

7: When did you live there?
I left there in 1846.

8: What time in the year?
February.

9: State to the reporter what church you were a member of, if any, while living at Nauvoo, Illinois?
What church was I a member of?

10: Yes sir?
I belonged to the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. That was the name of the church I belonged to.

11: Did you hold any office in that church?
Yes sir.

12: Well state what the office was you held in that church?
I held the office of an high priest.

13: During what time did you hold the office of an high priest?
I was ordained in Kirtland during the year eighteen-hundred, – well I can’t tell you exactly the year I was ordained that I know of, but it was while the church was there at Kirtland, – I can’t tell you the year exactly now, – not till I look at my journal, but it was pretty early, maybe in 1833 or ’34 that I was ordained.

14: It was in 1833 or 1834 that you were ordained?
Yes sir.

15: You were irdained then as an high priest?
Yes sir

16: How long did you hold that office in the church?
I hold it at the present time.

17: Have you held it continuously ever since that time?
Why yes, – of course I have. Yes sir, I have continued right on with the church in that office from that time to this. I held the office of high priest in the second ward while I was there for a while.

18: I will ask you to state Mr Kingsbury what you know in regard to the teaching or practice of the doctrine of plural marriage, sometimes called “polygamy” or commonly called “polygamy”, in the church, at Nauvoo, Illinois, before the death of Joseph Smith in 1844?
Well Joseph Smith taught me the principle of polygamy. He gave me to understand it with his own mouth that he had married wives more than one. Now in conversation with him, he told me that.

19: State what you know in regard to a revelation, if anything concerning that doctrine of plural marriage?
The revelation, – Bishop Whitney got the revelation when we were married and presented it to me and wanted me to copy it, and so I went into a room by myself, – a divided place, – a place that was divided, – I went off in there by myself, and copied it, – that is I copied the revelation on plural marriage that he handed me, and just as I got through the copying of it, Hyrum Smith came in and wanted the revelation, – the original revelation, was what he wanted. He came in to see how I got along with it, – That is Bishop Whitney did, and then he went out and told Hyrum Smith that he would hand him the revelation in a few minutes, for I was not quite through the copying of it. Well when I got through making the copy, I took the one I had made myself and read it and he took the original and read it at the same time to see if I had made any mistakes, and that it was correct, and when he found that it was all correct he took the one that the one that I had made and went out to the door and handed it to Hyrum Smith who was outside of the door ready to take it.

20: State to the reporter as nearly as you can, what time that was?
Well it was in the month of July. It was not far from the middle of July, or along there some where, – I can’t tell you exactly the date.

21: Of what year?
What year?

22: Yes sir?
Well let me see, – what year was it? Well it was the year it was given, for it was not more than one or two days after it was given that I copied it.

23: Well if you can state what the year was, I would like you to do so?
I can’t remember the date exactly further than it was the year it was given, and just a few days after it was given, – Was not it in 1842, I can’t exactly now remember, but it was along there some where I think. Yes I guess it was 1842.

24: State to the reporter what difference, there was, if any, in the teachings of the revelation you copied, and the teachings of Joseph Smith to you personally on that principle of plural marriage?
There was no difference, so far as I notice it.

25: State what difference, if any, there is between the revelation a copy of which you made as you have stated, and the revelation as it was published in the book of doctrine and covenants of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints at the present time, here in Utah?
It was the same, – it is the same.

26: Can you state what year it was that you had this conversation with Joseph Smith on this question of plural marriage?
The same year.

27: What year was that?
The year of 1842 I think.

28: It was in 1842?
I suppose that it was in 1842 that it was given, – I think it was that year.

29: I will ask you to look at that book to refresh your memory, and then state to the reporter about what year that was? That is what year it was that you made that copy of the revelation you have stated you made?
I copied it the same year it was given. I did not notice it particularly as to the date and I can’t say, and I can’t see this very well. At all events it was about the middle of July that I made the copy, – July of the same year it was given, – and possibly the same day it was given, – I can’t say as to that, but I don’t think it was more than a day or two after it was given, – at any rate I made the copy of it right away shortly after it was given. (witness refers to the book handed him) I think it was in 1843, – any way it was the same year it was given that I copied it, and it was not more than two or three days after it was given that I copied it.

30: Well can you state more definitely about when it was given? on the ground that it is incompetent, irrelevant and immeterial, and leading.
Well as I said before it was not written more than a day – or two before I copied it. I know that. Maybe it was the same day it was given that I copied it, but I cannot state precisely as to the date.

31: Have you an knowledge as to when this revelation was first given?
When the revelation was first given? What do you mean when the revelation was first given?

32: Well I mean what I say, – can you tell about the time that revelation was first given?
Well no, I cannot tell you about that I know I heard about it, – that is I had heard about the revelation on plural marriage before I coped it.

33: And you cannot state the year with accuracy?
No sir.

34: Well, that is all I have to ask the witness at the at the present time? Cross examination by P.P. Kelley, –
 

35: Mr Kingsbury you became a member of the church in ’33 or ’34 you stated?
No sir, it was in January 1832.

36: In January 1832 you became a member of the church?
Yes sir that was the time.

37: That was a Kirtland, Ohio I believe yous tated?
Yes sir.

38: Do you remember the date you became a member of the church?
It was the fifteenth of January 1832

39: Who baptized you?
A man by the name of Riggs.

40: Did you know Bishop Whitney?
Yes sir, I knew him before Mormonism came around.

41: Did you know Bishop Partridge?
Yes sir, I knew him before Mormonism came around.

42: You know them both then?
Yes sir.

43: This man Partridge that you knew was named Edward Partridge was was it not?
Yes sir.

44: Who was the Bishop of the church at the time you became a member of it?
Bishop Partridge was the bishop of the church at that time, and Bishop Whitney was another bishop in the church before I became a member.

45: What was the first office you held in the church?
The first office I held was an Elder.

46: That was the first office you held?
Yes sir.

47: When were you ordained an Elder?
I was ordained an Elder on July 18th 1823. No I think it was in July in ’22, – I think it was that year. I mean to say it was July 22nd I was ordained an elder.

48: You were a member of the church before any of the church went to Jackson County, Missouri?
No-sir

49: You were not?
No sir, for some of them were there before I was a member of the church.

50: You think some of them were in Jackson County before you were a member of the church?
Yes sir, I think Bishop Partridge was there before I joined the church. I would not be absolutely positive of that, but I think he was there.

51: Do you know anything about Bishop Partridge purchasing land in Missouri for the benefit of the church?
No sir, I don’t know anything about it, only from hearsay, and that it all I do know about it, only from hearsay, and that it all I do know about it.

52: All that you know about it is from hearsay?
Yes sir, that is all that I know about it.

53: Do you know anything about money being contributed for that purpose by members of the church?
I know that this man, Bishop Whitney, told me that he sent money up there to buy lands for the church. Now that is all that I know about what he told me, and he told me that after I went with the church. After I joined the church I went with him, and lived there a while, and that is what he told me about it.

54: Who did he say he sent it to?
He sent it up to buy land, but I don’t know who he sent it ton, – I suppose though it was Bishop Partridge.

55: Who was the proper person up there to send it to?
Well the proper person to send it to, – the proper person I would suppose would be the Bishop and his Counsellors. They are the proper persons I suppose.

56: Well who was the Bishop and who was the counsellors
Well Partridge was the Bishop, – that is my supposition you know, for I suppose it would be sent there to him, but I don’t know about that only I think that was the way it was done, for the bishop is the man that looks after matters of that kind.

57: It was sent to Bishop Partridge?
Yes sir, if it was sent at all, but I don’t know that he got it.

58: Well did you go to Missouri at all?
yes sir, – but I did not go to Jackson County.

59: When did you go to Missouri?
I went up to Missouri in 1838, but as I said I didn’t go to Jackson County, – I went up to Far West.

60: How long did you live there?
I did not live there more than two or three months, for that same year, or that spring we had to leave.

61: Were you there when the revelation on tithing or on tithing and surplus property was given in 1838?
I was there in 1838, – I got up there in ’38, but I don’t know what month it was given, – Let me see when I got there, – yes it was in ’38 in October I think, but I don’t know when that revelation was given.

62: Were you there at the conference held in 1838?
On the 6th of April?

63: Yes sir?
No sir.

64: You were not there at Far West then on the 6th of April 1838 when the Conference was held there?
No sir, I was not in Far West then. I did not get there until October after that.

65: Well at the conference where the revelations were presented to the church, that was held in October of that year, or some where along there, – were you there at that conference?
No sir, – for that was before I got there that was held.

66: Were you there at any conference that was held in 1838?
No sir I was not at any conference in 1838.

67: Or early in 1839?
No sir not in ’39 either for I left there in January 1839. I was obliged to go.

68: Will you answer the question I asked you?
What is the question?

69: I asked you if you were there at a conference that was held in 1839?
No sir, – no sir. I told you that I was not for I left there in January, and I had not time to attend one if there was one there.

70: Were you there at one in 1837?
No sir.

71: What was your anser to that question?
I said I was not.

72: You went from Far West to Nauvoo as I understand you, – did you not?
I don’t know that I stated that, but that is the fact.

73: You went from Far West to Nauvoo then?
Yes sir.

74: Directly?
No sir. I stopped on the road there.

75: Where at?
Well twenty five miles from Quincy I stopped, and I stayed there probably eight or nine months, and then I went on to Nauvoo.

76: And finally got to Nauvoo in 1840 or 1841, – which was it?
Well it was before that probably. I got thee in the winter or fall of 1839 I guess it was, for I stopped at Quincy you know for a while before I went there. I went up to Far West I think in ’40. Anyway I got there late in ’39 at Nauvoo or in the beginning of ’40, – but I could not say whether I got there in ’39 or not for sure.

77: You don’t mean you were at Far West in 1840?
No sir.

78: Well that is what you said?
Well that is wrong for I got to Far West in October 1838 and then I was obliged to leave there in 1839 the time that the most of the rest left there, and I went on down to about twenty or twenty five miles from Quincy where I stopp r for eight or nine months, and then I went on to Quincy and stopped there for a little while and then I went on to Nauvoo, and got there probably in the latter part of ’39 or the early part of ’40, – I don’t know which.

79: Then it was a mistake when you said you went to Far West in ’40?
Yes sir, – I don’t think I said that. If I did it was in answer to one of your questions, and I thought it was Nauvoo you were talking about.

80: Well don’t your answer show that you went up to Far West in 1840?
Well if it does it does not show the truth, for I was not there in 1840.

81: Please read the answer to the witness, and see what he says about it (the Examiner hereupon reads to the witness his answer to question number 76) What do you say to that?
I mean to say Nauvoo, and not Far West for I was not as Far West in 1840 at all. I meant to say Nauvoo, – it was just a slip.

82: Well now what year did you get to Nauvoo in, – ’40 or 1841?
It was in 1840.

83: You are positive as to that?
Well I am tolerably positive I say it was in 1840.

84: Was it in the winter?
In the fall or winter. You might call it winter weather anyhow, because it was pretty cold when we got there”

85: What was your business then, – what were you doing?
I was travelling then.

86: You were travelling then?
Yes sir.

87: Well what did you do after you got to Nauvoo?
What did I do?

88: Yes sir? That is the question I asked you?
Well I was employed in going up and down the river to help lighten boats.

89: For how long did you continue at that?
Well for a year or two. I was there at that for a year certainly.

90: Well according to your best recollection which was it, – a year or two years?
I guess off and on it was a couple of years that I helped to lighten boats. I think about a couple of years I was at it off and on in the boating season.

91: Who were you working for?
At that time I was working for, – let me see who it was, – I was working for the steam boat folks, and as they came in I would work for them helping lighten them, and I used to go over to Montrose and help lighten boats there also. I used to take any job that came up, and that I could get, and I was employed in that way for a year or two, – perhaps only a year and a half, but I can’t remember the names of the captains of the boats or the men I worked for.

92: You were working for the steam boat company?
Yes sir, and at odd jobs that turned up.

93: Well what company was it?
I don’t know.

94: Do you know the man’s name?
No sir, for it was for different people, for first one boat would come along and want to be lightened up, and I would help do it and then another boat would come along and I would help do it, and so it was first one after another and so I was not working steadily all the time for one man or one boat, but took them as they came. I did not keep any record of who they were, but I knew their names at the time of course, but have forgotten them now.

95: You were just a day laborer then?
Yes sir.

96: You attended church there in Nauvoo every Sunday, or nearly every Sunday did you not?
Well I used to attend church there most of the time. I was pretty regular in my attendance of church.

97: Did you do any preaching then?
No sir, I did not do much preaching then.

98: Did you exercise the duties of an high priest then?
Yes sir.

99: You did?
Yes sir, I did when it was required.

100: Were you a member of the high council?
I was in Kirtland.

101: When was that?
In 1800, – in 1838 when I left there.

102: When you left there, – where?
Kirtland.

103: And you left Kirtland in 1838?
Yes sir I think it was in 1838 that I left there, – that is it was in ’38 I think that I left Kirtland.

104: Well I would like to have you fix the date definitely that you left there?
Well I think that was the time, – I think there is no doubt of that.

105: And you were a member of the high council which at Kirtland?
Yes sir.

106: Why were you not a member of the high council there
Do you mean at Nauvoo?

107: Yes sir?
I was not a member of the high council at Nauvoo, but I was at Kirtland.

108: Why were you not a member of the high council at Nauvoo, – that is the question?
Why, what?

109: Why were you not a member of the high council at Nauvoo, Illinois while there?
Why because there was other appointed instead of me.

110: You were an high priest?
Yes sir, I was an high priest.

111: And you were a member of the high council in Kirtland by virtue of your being an high priest?
Yes sir.

112: But you were now, – not a member of the high counil in Kirtland?
No sir.

113: I mean in Nauvoo?
I mean in Nauvoo too, – I wasn’t a member of the high council there, for they had appointed others in my place.

114: You did not perform any of the duties of an high priest in Nauvoo?
Not particularly. I did when I was called on, but not particularly. I was not.. –

115: What were your duties in Nauvoo as an high priest?
I was not set apart for any particular place, only I was sent out occasionally to visit once in a while a settlement out side, but that was not done very often either, because I was a common laboring man.

116: Did you perform any marriage ceremonies?
Where?

117: Anywhere?
Not in Nauvoo I did not there. I did not do anything of that kind in Nauvoo at all.

118: Well did you do any of it about Nauvoo?
No sir.

119: During the time that you had your residence there?
No sir.

120: Did you in Kirtland?
No sir.

121: Is it your best recollection that you did not?
I said I did not.

122: Well now what else did you do there in Nauvoo besides your work on boats?
I was in Josephs store there in Nauvoo for a year or two.

123: Did you ever preach any sermons?
Oh yes sir.

124: How many?
I don’t know how many.

125: How much of your time from 1832 up to 1844 was spend in the ministry?
From when?

126: From ’32 to 1844?
Well I traveled east two or three times in the eastern states, and was gone a year or two on that mission.

127: When was that?
Well I went from Kirtland once and was gone for a while, and after I came to Nauvoo I went from there once also and was gone for a while.

128: Well when was that?
Well the time I went from Kirtland I couldn’t tell you exactly the year, but I think it must have been in the year of ’33, – ’33 or ’34, – maybe it was in ’34. I can’t tell you unless I get my minutes, but if I had them I think I could tell you just the time it was.

129: Well what time did you go from Nauvoo on that mission?
I went, – I thin I went in the year, – let me see, – I think I went in ’34, – no I mean 1844, – I thin that was the year I went from Nauvoo.

130: In 1844?
Yes sir.

131: What time was it in the year you started?
I went in the spring.

132: In the spring?
Yes sir.

133: In what month?
Well I don’t remember what month it was.

134: March or April?
Some where along there I guess. I can’t say the month positively, but it was somewhere along there I guess.

135: How long were you gone?
I was gone about a year

136: You were gone about a year?
Yes sir.

137: Where did you go to on that mission?
I went to the eastern states.

138: To the eastern states?
Yes sir.

139: You taught the doctrine of polygamy in the eastern states while on that mission?
No sir.

140: You did not?
No sir.

141: Well what did you teach?
I taught only, – I only talked the first principles of the gospel, – I did not talk polygamy at all.

142: You did not teach polygamy at all?
No sir.

143: Why did you not do it?
I was not instructed to teach anything but the first principles of the gospel

144: Then if you did not teach that, what did you teach on the marriage question?
What did I teach on the marriage question?

145: Yes sir? If you taught anything, what was it?
I don’t know as I taught anything in particular on the marriage question?

146: You recollection is indefinite on that matter?
I taught what was the law of the church if I taught anything, – I don’t remember what I did talk on that.

147: Did you teach any body that they could have more than one wife?
Nor sir.

148: You did not?
No sir.

149: Was there any law in the church at the time that provided that a man could have more wives than one?
Well now, –

150: Well now just answer the question, – was there any law in the church at that time that provided that a man could have more wives than one?
No more than that revelation.

151: What revelation?
The polygamy revelation as it is called.

152: Was that a law of the church at that time?
That was a doctrine of the church.

153: Had it ever been presynted to the church at that time?
Why the doctrine and covenants had been presented to the church, and that was in it.

154: Was it in it in 1844?
I never saw it then.

155: Was it in it in 1852?
1852, – I can’t tell you for I don’t remember.

156: Was it in the 1845 edition of the book of covenants?
I guess it was in the 1852 edition.

157: You guess it was in the edition of 1852?
Yes sir I think it was in the edition, but I don’t know anything about that.

158: You don’t know about that?
Nos sir, not positive. I have my ideas of course, but I have no positive knowledge.

159: You were an elder in the church?
Yes sir?

160: At that time?
I was.

161: And you said it was a doctrine of the church at that time?
Yes sir. It was a doctrine as it was presented in the doctrine and covenants.

162: As it was presented in the book of doctrine and covenants?
Yes sir.

163: When it was presented or embodied in the book of Doctrine and covenants, and presented to the church it became the law of the church?
Yes sir, I suppose it did.

164: And not until then?
I suppose not.

165: Well did it become a law of the church until it was presented to the church and accepted by the church? Now answer that question, yes or no?
Well I don’t know anything about it.

166: Do you pretend to say now after being an elder in the church from 1832, up to the present time, that you don’t know that?
I know it was a doctrine of the church when it was published and made public.

167: Don’t you knw it was not published to the church until after 1852?
Well yes sir.

168: What is that?
That is right, – It was not published until then.

169: Have you not stated that it was not, – that it was published before that?
No sir, – it was not published abroad to all the world through until 1852.

170: Well was it published at all in any shape?
Yes sir it was published to the church.

171: In what manner was it published to the church?
Verbally.

172: Where?
It was published to me verbally.

173: You were the church were you, – is that what you wish to be understood as saying?
It was spoken to me verbally by Joseph Smith himself, and if he was the church that was sufficient.

174: He told you that himself?
Yes sir.

175: What did he tell you?
He told me that it was the doctrine of the church that the Lord had revealed to him.

176: He revealed it to you first did he, and then two or three days after that you copied it, – is that the way it was?
Yes sir I expect it must have been along there some wheres, but I can’t tell the time that he told me that, or how long it was after that that I copied the revelation but it wasn’t long.

177: Well are you willing to go on record here as swearing that it was revealed to Joseph Smith, and within two or three days of the time it was revealed to him, you copied it?
I can’t tell you exactly the number of days.

178: Well did you copy it within ten days after it was revealed to him?
Yes sir, I presume it was within ten days after it was revealed to him that I copied it.

179: Well do you know whether or not it was within ten days after it was revealed to him, that you copied it?
No sir, it might have been more.

180: It might have been more than ten days?
Yes sir, and it might have been less.

181: Are you willing to swear that you copied it within twenty days after it was revealed to him?
Yes sir.

182: That is was revealed to him within twenty days prior to the time that you copied it?
 

183: Are you willing to sear to that?
Yes sir. The idea of it is just this, –

184: Well just answer my question, – do you swear that it was delivered to him within twenty days prior to the time that you made the copy of it?
Yes sir, I swear to that right straight up and down.

185: Now tell me how you know when it was revealed to him?
How do I know it?

186: Yes sir?
By what he told me.

187: He told you it was revealed to him?
Yes sir, that is what the said.

188: Well tell us how you know it was revealed to Joseph Smith?
How do I know it?

189: Yes sir?
Well of course I could not know anything more about that further than what he told me.

190: Did he tell you that he had just got it two or three days before you copied it?
No sir.

191: He did not tell you that?
No sir, he did not tell me anything about that at all.

192: Then how do you know that the revelation was delivered to you to be copied, and you made the copy of it within twenty days of the time that the tevelation had been received?
I can’t tell you.

193: That is one of the things, – alleged facts, that when they, come to be sifted down amount to just nothing, – it is like these other facts or alleged facts that you have been swearing to here, and when they come to be investigated, it turns out that they amount to just nothing at all?
It is hard for me to testify and say I know so and so when I don’t. You ask me to say that a certain thing occured between or within so many days, and I can’t tell you just how many days it was or anything about that; but I do know that the revelation was a doctrine of the church.

194: In answer to my question you said you would swear that it was within twenty days of the time that it was revealed to Joseph Smith that you copied it?
Yes sir.

195: Now sir I want you to tell how you know it was within twenty days of the time you copied that Joseph Smith received it, – just tell how you know that if you can?
How do I know it was within twenty days?

196: Yes sir?
Well the idea of it is this, –

197: Well never mind what the idea of it is, but just answer my question?
What is the question?

198: How do you know that it was within twenty days prior to the time that you copied that revelation as you say you copied it, that it had been received by Joseph Smith?
 

199: Just answer the question? We will wait for an answer?
All I know is by what he told me.

200: All you know is from what he told you?
Yes sir.

201: From what who told you?
Joseph Smith.

202: Well what did he tell you? Did he tell you that he had just received it within twenty days?
He did not say within twenty days. He did not say anything about twenty days.

203: Did he say he had received it within any particular time?
He told me.

204: Did he tell you that he had received it within twenty days?
No sir.

205: He did not tell you that?
No sir, he did not tell me when he had received it. He did not tell me that day nor the hour that he had received it.

206: Nor the month?
No sir.

207: Nor the year?
No sir. He did not tell me anything about when he had received it.

208: Then how do you know when he got it?
Well I don’t know when he got it, but I supposed that was when he got it.

209: You supposed that was when he got it, within twenty days of the time you copied it?
Yes sir.

210: Upon what, what did you say you copied it within twenty days of the time the revelation was revealed to him?
I did that from circumstances.

211: You are testifying here to your conclusions then?
No sir.

212: Buy you say that you decided that you had copied the revelation within twenty days after it was revealed to him, you decided or came to the conclusion that it was within that time from circumstances?
Yes sir.

213: How do you know when it was revealed to him?
By circumstances.

214: By circumstances?
Yes sir.

215: Just name your circumstances, what are the circumstances that so irresistibly lead you to that conclusion?
Because Bishop Whitney got it soon after it was revelated to him.

216: How do you know that?
How do I know it?

217: Yes sir, how do you know that Bishop Whitney got it soon after it was revealed to him?
I don’t know it only as I said by circumstances.

218: Well now what are the circumstances?
The circumstances are that as soon as that revelation from Joseph Smith according to his testimony to me, and he wanted a copy of it made, and he handed it to me to make the copy of it, which I did.

219: Now what a moment, how do you know he got it from Joseph Smith?
I don’t know anything about it only just from what he told me himself.

220: Well now do you know of your own knowledge that he got it from Joseph Smith?
I don’t know anything about it only what Bishop Whitney told me.

221: You don’t know of your own knowledge at all or not, whether he got it from Joseph Smith?
No sir, only from his testimony to me.

222: All you know about that is what Bishop Whitney told you?
Yes sir.

223: You don’t know of your own knowledge whether it was revealed to Joseph Smith, one month or ten years before that time?
No sir. Not to my knowledge I don’t. I don’t know any more than his testimony to me.

224: Whose testimony to you?
Joseph Smith’s, and he told me that was the revelation he had received.

225: What was the revelation he told you he had received
He said that was the revelation he had received.

226: Did Joseph Smith take the original and give it to you?
No sir, and I did not say he did.

227: Who did give it to you?
I said Bishop Whitney was the one gave it to me.

228: Well was that correct, – did he give it to you?
Bishop Whitney did.

229: Did Joseph Smith ever take the original and present it to you, and say “this is the original revelation”?
No sir.

230: Then how do you know that you had the original revelation if he did not present it to you, and say it was the original revelation?
Only by the writing, – I knew it was Clayton’s writing for I was familiar with his writing, and I knew it was his writing.

231: Did Joseph Smith ever put any revelation in your hands, and say this is the revelation?
No sir he didn’t put the revelation in my hands in that way, but he said verbally that he had received the revelation, and that that was the one.

232: Did he ever tell you personally that the revelation that Whitney had presented to you was the revelation that he had received?
No sir, not that particular revelation, but he told me that he had received the revelation.

233: Then what makes you say he told you the revelation you copied was the revelation he had received?
He did not tell me that, and I don’t think he said he did. I am sure, though, that that was the revaluation for it was in Clayton’s hand writing and he did all of Joseph’s writing at that time. 234 (This number is missing) 235 (This number is missing)

236: Now you say that Joseph Smith told you about the revelation?
Yes sir.

237: When did he tell you this?
What?

238: That this was the revelation, or that he had a revelation to that effect?
The verbal one?

239: Yes sir?
I can’t tell you the date.

240: When did he tell you about this revelation on polygamy?
I can’t give you the date sir. He told me, but I can’t tell you exactly the date.

241: Well give me the month for I will let you have thirty days to wander around in?
Well I say I can’t tell you exactly the date.

242: Can you come within ______ of the date?
I don’t know that I can.

243: Well, can you come within sixty day of the date?
Well I don’t know that I can, – I might.

244: Well take two months time – and see if you can come within sixty day of the time. I am not particular about a day or tow. It is no killing matter?
If I had time to get up my history of these things I could tell you more about it, – I could give you more particular dates, but I haven’t got it.

245: Have you a journal in which you noted down the facts as you went along?
No, not for every day.

246: A journal that was written up within ten days of the time, – Have you such a journal as that?
It is generally a journal from one day to another of particular facts and circumstances that I thought were of importance. That is what I have.

247: Have you a journal that was written prior to 1844, the date of Joseph Smith’s death?
Yes sir I have a journal if I could find it.

248: Where is that journal?
I don’t know. I don’t believe I know just where it is.

249: What is the use of your saying if you had a journal you could answer these questions, when the fact appears to be you don’t know whether you have a journal or not?
Well I have not looked over my papers for a long while, for the fact is I have been knocking about so much, that I haven’t had the time to see if I still have it. I expect I have it lying around some where, but at this time I don’t know just where it is.

250: Will you try and find that journal and bring it up here to court where your testimony is being taken?
I will try.

251: Will you make diligent search, for it and if you find it will you bring it up here?
Yes sir, if I can find it I will.

252: I refer to a journal that was written by you for the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.

253: You have it?
I don’t know. I think I have some where. I know I did have such a journal as that.
Before the death of Joseph Smith?

255: Yes sir?
Yes sir.

256: Well now I believe you refused to take an oath here to day, did you not?
Yes sir.

257: You did?
Yes sir.

258: You affirmed?
Yes sir.

259: When has that change came about?
What change?

260: That you decided to affirm instead of swearing in the usual form?
That I affirmed?

261: Yes sir.
 

262: You have been taking oaths before this time have you not? Have you not taken oaths before this time?
Well I have years before.

263: Have you any consientious scruples against taking an oath?
I generally affirm.

264: You do what?
When I testify in anything I generally “confirm”.

265: Well did you make an affirmation?
 

266: When you take whatever you took here to day from the Commissioner, did you understand you were confirming, or affirming to your statements?
Well there is a little difference I suppose, but I understood that I was affirming, – I supposed that was what I was doing.

267: When you gave your evidence, have you been affirming during the last seven or eight years, all the time?
No sir, for I haven’t had any occasion to do so.

268: When was the last time you affirmed, or were sworn prior to this time?
I can’t tell you.

269: You can’t say how long it has been?
No sir. I don’t remember when it was.

270: Was it as far back as 1886?
I can’t say.

271: Did you make any affidavits in 1886?
I can’t say.

272: I will ask you if you did not here in Salt Lake City in ’86, take an oath before a Notary Public.
Yes sir.

273: In 1886 you took an oath before a Notary Public?
Yes sir.

274: Then why do you refuse to take an oath to day?
I think I affirmed then. Well I don’t know what it was.

275: You don’t know what it was?
No sir.

276: Well now what time in the day was it that you commenced to copy this revelation?
The polygamy revelation?

277: Yes sir, this revelation that you say you copied, – what time in the day was it that you commenced to copy this revelation that you say you copied?
I can’t remember what time in the day it was.

278: Well was it before noon or after noon?
I cannot tell you sir.

279: You can’t tell anything about what time in the day it was you commenced to copy the revelation you say you copied?
No sir.

280: I should think that such an important event as the copying of a revelation as that would have made an impression on your mind that would enable you to remember something about it with reference to the time you copied it?
Well it is in my mind that I copied it, but I can’t remember the time of day that I did it.

281: What was your business at that time?
I was living along with Bishop Whitney at that time.

282: Well I asked you what was your business?
I told you.

283: Well did you not have any business at that time except to live along with somebody else?
Well my business was that I was employed by him in performing labors in and around his premises.

284: Were you the secretary of the Bishop?
No sir.

285: Were you a day laborer for the Bishop?
I was assisting him in making improvements of one kind and another around his premises.

286: You were a day laborer then?
I was boarding with him, and assisting him.

287: Just hired by the day were you not?
Not particularly hired by the day, but I was assisting him, at whatever he wanted me to do. I helped him in any way I could whatever he wanted me to do.

288: Did you hold the office of secretary or private secretary, or any office of any kind in that way to the bishop?
No sir. Not particularly.

289: Well di you not hold it particularly or not particularly?
No sir.

290: Did you have any particular work to do in the Bishops office?
He did not have any office at that time.

291: Did you have any particular business to transact in Joseph Smith’s office?
No sir.

292: You did not?
No sir, -not in his office. In Joseph Smith’s store I did, for I was with him there at that time, or about that time.

293: Well will you answer my question, -did you have any particular business to transact in Joseph Smith’s office about that time?
I have told you I did not

294: He kept a private office did he not?
Yes sir.

295: And he also kept a private secretary?
I expect he did.

296: Don’t you know he did?
I think he did.

297: Well, were you his private secretary/
No sir.

298: Who was his private secretary?
Clayton was his private secretary.

299: When?
At the time that revelation was given.

300: When was Clayton his private secretary?
Both before that revelation was given and after, it, up to the time of his death.

301: Until Joseph Smith’s death?
Yes sir.

302: How do you know Clayton was his private secretary?
Well I know he was considered his secretary.

303: Well are you willing to swear that Clayton was the private secretary of Joseph Smith?
Well I can’t say that he was his private secretary, but I know that he went with him continually, and everybody supposed he was his private secretary. He did Joseph’s private writing.

304: Well, answer the question, -DO you know that Clayton was Joseph Smith’s private secretary?
I don’t know it, but he was considered to be so.

305: Well now if you don’t know that is enough?
No sir, I don’t know it of my own knowledge.

306: Did you know a man by the name of Whitehead there at Nauvoo?
Yes sir, I knew him well.

307: What was his business there?
He was in the tithing-office under Clayton.

308: Under Clayton?
Yes sir.

309: What was Clayton doing in the tithing office?
He was the chief clerk, and Whitehead was there under him. That is Whitehead was there under Clayton and Clayton was there under Bishop Whitney’s direction. That was in Nauvoo and I had the handling of the goods under Bishop Whitney’s direction so I came to know them well.

310: What goods do you refer to?
Goods that were brought in under tithing.

311: Did you not testify a while ago that you were assisting Bishop Whitney in making improvements around his house?
Yes sir, but this that I am talking to you about now, transpired after Joseph Smith’s death.

312: Well I am not talking about that. I am asking you now about what transpired before Joseph Smith’s death?
Well I was there in the tithing office after Joseph’s death, -I don’t know half the time what you are driving at, and so I can’t answer you right perhaps. If I knew what you were driving at I might do better perhaps.

313: Well we will try and get our bearings and go on? Now what were you doing there prior to Joseph Smith’s death?
Working in the store.

314: What kind of work were you engaged in in the store?
Selling goods and doing whatever there was for me to do.

315: You were working there as a clerk?
Yes sir.

316: How much of them were you engaged in that capacity?
Well perhaps for a year during the time that Bishop Whitney had charge of the goods.

317: Well now what time was it that you were in the store?
I can’t say exactly, but I think perhaps that it was in the year 1841 I think it must have been in 1841 or 1842, – some where along there.

318: You think you were in the store in 1841 or 1842?
Yes sir, – about there some time, – I can’t say positively as to the time, but I think it must have been about that time.

319: Were you employed that way in 1843?
In 1843?

320: Yes sir?
If it was in 1843 I was there it must have been in the fore part of the year, but whether it was in 1843 or not that I was there, I could not say.

321: You were there when Joseph Smith died?
No sir, I was away when Joseph Smith died. I started away a year or six months before he died, or something like that.

322: About how long did you say?
Abut six months or something like that before he died I started away. That is my best recollection of the length of time but I wouldn’t say positively it was that length of time.

323: Six months or a year before he died you say?
Yes sir, something like that.

324: That was when you started on that mission?
Yes sir.

325: You started on the mission in 1844?
That was the time I came back, – in 1844.

326: When did you come back?
Well soon after his death. He died I think, – well I think it was in July that I came back.

327: You think you got back in July 1844 then from your mission?
Yes sir.

328: And you had been gone a year about?
Some where in that neighbourhood.

329: Then you must have started about July 1843?
Yes sir, – it must have been in the latter part of 1843 some time I started. If I started in 1843 it must have been in the latter part of the year”.

330: What do you mean by “the latter part of the year”?
Well I mean it must have been in the fall of the year.

331: Now was it not in the spring of 1843 that you started?
No sir.

332: Did you not testify a while ago that you started early in the fall?
No sir.

333: Early in the spring I should say?
No sir. I don’t think I did.

334: You don’t think you did?
I don’t know.

335: I asked you if it was in March or April you started and you said it was?
Well when I come to think of it I guess it was.

336: Well was it in March or April 1843 that you started east on that mission?
Well sir I can’t remember, – it was I think in 1843 I started, and I got back in 1842.

337: Well now what is your best recollection of the time in 1843 that you started?
In 1843?

338: Yes sir?
Let me see. I got back after his death and that was in 1844 was it not?

339: Yes sir, that is correct?
Well I will tell you, – I think it must have been some time in August.

340: In August 1843 that you left?
Yes sir.

341: That is your best revised recollection now as to the time you started?
Yes sir.

342: And you got back in July 1844?
Yes sir.

343: Well now do you recollect these dates?
I think so.

344: And the rest of the year 1843 you were working in the store up to the time you started on that mission?
No sir I was not in the store at the time I started on that mission. I was along with Bishop Whitney, and he was building a house.

345: How long did you stay with Bishop Whitney?
After that?

346: Before you went on that mission?
I was there until I went away.

347: Well for how long before that were you with him, how many years?
I was off and on with him all the time, more or less. I can’t tell you how many years.

348: Well now Mr Witness, did you stay with Bishop Whitney all the time during the year 1843 up to the time that you went away?
Yes sir.

349: You did?
Yes sir.

350: And in 1842 was it the same way?
Yes sir, I was with him in 1842.

351: All the time?
Yes sir, I was right around there. I lived with him in his house part of the time, and a part of the time I lived right by the side of him, because I had a family and about that time I lost my wife, and then went to live with him.

352: Well what work you did in 1842 and 1843 you did for Bishop Whitney?
Yes sir.

353: And in 1841 was it the same thing?
I guess in 1841 I was assisting him in the store.

354: And in 1840 the time I believe you stated you got there, up through 1841?
No sir, not in 1840, for I was not in the store until some time in 1841. As I said I was working around here and there wherever I could get a job.

355: Well you got there in 1840?
At Nauvoo?

356: Yes sir?
Yes sir, I think so.

357: And in 1841 you were in the store with Bishop Whitney?
Yes sir, I was a part of the time.

358: and in 1842 and 1843 up to the time you left to go on the mission you were with him, – that is you were with Bishop Whitney in the store?
Yes sir.

359: You worked there in the store all the time?
Yes sir.

360: Well now you have accounted for your doings, – what you were working at all the time you were in Nauvoo from the time you came there to the death of Joseph Smith in 1844?
Yes sir.

361: Well now will you tell us where the two years that you said you worked on the river comes in?
I did not say it was two years I said it was a year, or a year and a half.

362: Well tell us where the year and a half comes in?
Well it was soon after I got up, – Well I got out of Far West in the early part of ’39, and I think in January, and I got to Nauvoo late in the fall or in the winter of ’39, and it was right away after that I commenced to work on the river. It was in ’39 that I commenced to work on the river.

363: Well you have been saying all the time it was in ’40.
Well I know very well I was on the river a part of the time in ’40. It was in the fall of ’39, – late in the fall, – and in ’40 I think I was most of the time on the river, and in 1841 I was I think most of the time with Bishop Whitney.

364: And in 1842 the most of the time with Bishop Whitney.
Yes sir.

365: And now you have it as you want it?
Yes sir.

366: That is right?
Yes sir. I think so.

367: Well now I would like for you to explain the year that you worked for Joseph Smith?
I did not work for him.

368: You did not work for Joseph Smith?
No sir.

369: Did you not state that you did?
Bishop Whitney was attending to the work for him, and I worked for Bishop Whitney. I worked there in Joseph Smiths store, but I was under Bishop Whitney who had charge of Joseph Smith.

370: Answer the question, – did you not say you were working a part of the time for Joseph Smith?
No sir. It was in Joseph Smith’s store I worked, but it was under Bishop Whitney, for he was the man I got my – orders from. I never worked for Jodeph Smith. I never worked for him at all.

371: You never worked for Joseph Smith at all?
No sir, but it was in Joseph Smith’s store. I worked a part of the time. That is the way it was, – it was in Joseph Smith’s store, but I was working under Bishop Whitney.

372: Did he own the store?
Who?

373: Joseph Smith?
He owned the store but he had given Bishop Whitney the charge of it, and Bishop Whitney got me to work in the store. He got me to assist him in the store.

374: Did you ever work for Joseph Smith in his private office?
No sir.

375: You never worked in Joseph Smith’s private office?
No sir, only at his house.

376: Who was his private secretary?
His private secretary?

377: Yes sir?
Well in the fust place it was Williard Richards, – at any rate that was the understanding?

378: Well if you know tell me who was the private secretary of Joseph Smith from 1840 to 1844, – that is you may state who it was, if you know of your own knowledge?
Well I know it is said in his history in the history of his life that Williard Richards was for a part of the time I know, and I see him there.

379: Do you know anything of your own knowledge as to who his private secretary was during that time, – now that is do you know of your own knowledge?
Well I say that I saw him there, – that is I saw Williard Richards there, and he was understood to be his secretary, and I saw Clayton there too. I saw them in his private office.

380: Are you preparyd to swear that Willard Richards was his private secretary of your own knowledge?
That is all that I can tell you about it that I have told you.

381: Can you swear that Clayton was his private secretary?
I told you what I had to say about that.

382: Well are you prepared to swear that he was his private secretary?
I told you what I had to say, – I saw him there, and I understood that he was a part of the time.

383: You saw him there with him a part of the time, – is that what you say?
Yes sir.

384: You also saw Brigham Young there a part of the time
I don’t know whether I ever did or not. I can’t say as to that. I may have

385: And Heber C. Kimball?
I do not know

386: And number of other people also?
Where.

387: There with Joseph Smith in his private office?
I probably did. I don’t remember of ever seeing Brigham Young or Heber C. Kimball in his place.

388: You have seen Whitehead there?
I don’t remember seeing him. I don’t think I ever did see him there in Joseph Smith’s day. No sir I know I never did in Joseph Smith’s day.

389: Do you swear that Whitehead was not the private secretary of Joseph Smith from ’39 or ’40 up to 1844?
I swear that I never saw him there, or knew him to be his private secretary.

390: Well ill you swear that he was not?
I don’t know anything about it.

391: Well do you swear that he was not?
I swear that I don’t know anything about it at all, for I never knew Whitehead at all until after Joseph Smiths death

392: Was he not there in the private office of Joseph Smith from 1839 to 1844 at the time of Joseph Smith’s death?
I don’t swear that he was not.

393: Well do you swear that he was?
Now to my knowledge.

394: Answer the questions please, – you might as well answer it for I will stay with you until you do?
What is the question?

395: Do you swear that Whitehead was not there in Joseph Smith’s private office from 1839 or 1840 down to 1844
Not to my knowledge I say. I don’t know anything about it.

396: Well do you know of your own knowledge who was Joseph Smith’s private secretary, – Just answer that question?
I have answered that.

397: Do you know of your own knowledge who was Joseph Smith’s private secretary from 1841 to 1844? Now that is a question you can answer “yes”, or “no”, and I want you to answer it that way?
I can’t say that I know any more than I know he was with him, and that is all that I know about it any more than I know that Willard Richards was with him, and he was reported to be his private secretary, and Clayton was there too, and he was also – reported to be his private secretary.

398: All you know about hat is what some body else told you?
Yes sir.

399: Well then I move to exclude the answer as heresay. Now who was it reported Richards as being the private secretary ro Joseph Smith? Did Joseph Smith represent that he was the private secretary?
I can’t say, but I suppose it must have come from him in the first place.

400: Well do you know it came from him?
No sir, I don’t know anything about that.

401: I want you to understand Mr Witness I am not asking you about anything you read in a history. I am simply asking you for your own personal knowledge and nothing else, and if you do not know of your own knowledge I want you to say so, nor do I want you to say anything about what somebody else told you, unless I ask you about what Joseph Smith said to you?
Yes sir.

402: Did Joseph Smith ever tell you that Willard Richards was his private secretary?
No sir.

403: Or that Clayton was?
No sir.

404: Now you copied that revelation you say?
Yes sir.

405: and you copied the whole of it?
Yes sir.

406: Well how long did it take you?
I can’t say.

407: Well according to the best of your recollection how long did it take you?
To copy it?

408: Yes sir, that is the question I asked you?
Well I could not tell you exactly how long it was.

409: Did it take you an hour to copy it?
How many hours or how many minutes or how many seconds I can’t tell you. I cannot tell you how long it took me, but I know I copied it just as fast as I could write it down, and I could write pretty well then.

410: How many, sheets or paper did you have?
I could not say.

411: Did you have more than one?
I could not say.

412: Are you willing to swear that you cannot say whether you had only one sheet of paper?
I can’t say.

413: Well what is you best recollection about it?
Did you ask me if I would swear there was only one sheet of paper?

414: Yes sir?
Yes sir, there was more than one sheet.

415: Well how much was there?
There was as much as two large sheets,-if not more.

416: Two large sheets of what kind of paper?
Well it was the common paper used in those days.

417: How large were the sheets?
I can’t say, but I suppose the usual size of paper used in those days.

418: Well what kind of paper was it?
I tell you I don’t know, but I suppose it was common fools cap.

419: Common fools cap?
Yes sir, I suppose so.

420: Well there was two sheets of it?
of the paper?

421: Yes sir?
There must have been,-for I know there was over one sheet.

422: Do you mean two full sheets written on all sides, or do you mean just two pages?
I wrote it on whatever paper it took, but I can’t tell you how much paper it did take. I can’t remember these things, and i don’t believe any body else could.

423: Well you say there was more than on sheet of paper.
Yes sir there must have been.

424: How long were you at it?
I suppose not more than an hour, perhaps it took me an hour, and perhaps not over half an hour. I can’t remember how long it took me.

425: Have you ever seen the copy since?
Yes sir.

426: Where?
Where?

427: Yes sir?
I saw it in Nauvoo?

428: When
Soon after I wrote it.

429: That is where you saw it?
Yes sir.

430: And it was soon after you wrote-it?
Yes sir.

431: Now don’t you know that the copy that you wrote at that time was not a full half sheet of paper?
A full half sheet of paper?

432: Yes sir,-That it did not cover a full sheet of fools cap paper?
No sir.

433: Don’t you know that you did not write quite a page of fools cap paper?
 

434: Answer that question?
What is the question?

435: Don’t you know that you did not write quite a page of fools cap paper? Aint that true?
I know I wrote just what it took to write it whatever that was. I know there was more than that, but how much there was of it I can’t just say.

436: Well don’t you know it did not take any more than that?
Than what?

437: Than a half sheet of fools cap paper?
I knot (know) that whatever it took to write it on I used to write it on.

438: Well did you write it on more than one page of fools cap paper?
I say I took just what ti took to write it on, -whether it was one page or whatever it was.

439: And you don’t know how much paper it did take to copy it on?
No sir.

440: Nor do you know how long it took you to write it?
No sir, I can’t remember for this all happened so long ago you know.

441: Well did you write an hour?
I don’t know.

442: Did you write for more than an hour?
I don’t know that it was more than an hour.

443: I did not ask you if you wrote more than an hour, I asked you if you wrote an hour?
Possibly I might

444: Well your best judgment is that you did not write an hour is it not?
My best judgement is that it was an hour more or less.

445: Well now what is your best judgement as to the time that you copied that revelation, or alleged revelation as you claim?
The time? What time?

446: The time or month of the year?
Well it was the time that was in July.

447: What time in July?
Well some where along about the middle of July.

448: That was just after you came back from your mission
No sir.

449: It was not?
No sir.

450: Did you not say it was?
No sir, for it was just before I went on my mission.

451: Did you not testify a while ago that you went on your mission in August 1843, and came back in July 1844?
Yes sir, but I wrote that before I went on my mission.

452: You did?
Yes sir.

453: And that you swear positively?
Yes sir, you see that was in 1843.

454: And you are sure about that?
Yes sir, I copied the revelation before I started on that mission.

455: And that was in 1843?
Yes sir.

456: Well that was the law of the church was it not when you started on your mission?
Yes sir. The law of the church did you say?

457: Yes sir?
It was now a law given to me to preach to the church.

458: It was not?
No sir.

459: You were not authorized to preach that on your mission as the law of the church?
No sir.

460: Who was it given to of your own personal knowledge?
Who was what given to?

461: Who was the revelation given to, -Now i mean of your own personal knowledge, -you may state who it was given to, if you know, or your personal knowledge?
Given to?

462: Yes sir, -of your own personal knowledge?
I suppose it was given to Joseph Smith.

463: Do you know it was given to him of your own personal knowledge?
No sir.

464: You don’t know that it was given to Joseph Smith of your own personal knowledge?
No sir, I don’t know it.

465: well that is what I asked you for?
Well I don’t know.

466: Now you copied it at the time you were working in the store for Bishop Whitney?
No sir, you get away off.

467: Were you not working for Bishop Whitney in 1843?
Yes sir, but at the time I wrote that there was no business in the store that required my attention at the time that I made the copy of that revelation.

468: What day of the week was it?
I could not tell you.

469: Do you not know what day of the week ti was?
I can’t say what day it was.

470: Was it Sunday?
I could not say.

471: Was it Monday?
I could not say what day of the week it was.

472: Can you tell about what time of the day it was?
No sir.

473: You cannot tell me whether it was the forenoon or afternoon?
It was some wheres along towards the middle of the day, but I cannot say whether it was in the forenoon or the afternoon. -That is something that I cannot remember at this time.

474: Well now you said that after you made this copy you saw it again?
Yes sir.

475: How long was it after the time you made the copy, that you saw it again?
After when.

476: After that day that you made it?
I did not see the copy after that day, but I saw the copy that same day again after I made it.

477: That is you saw the copy you made that same day, and after you made it?
Yes sir.

478: Did you ever see it after that day?
No sir.

479: Do you know what became of the copy after that?
Yes sir, I think I do. I know that Bishop Whitney had the copy, and he kept it I think.

480: Till when did he keep it?
I don’t know.

481: Well how do you know he had it, and kept it?
Because he said he had it, and I know he took it from me when the copy was made. He took it as soon as it was made.

482: How long did he keep it?
I don’t know, but he told me that he brought it here to the valley with him, in these mountains. Now that is his world to me. I don’t know that it is so but it is what he told me and that is all about I know about it.

483: You say Bishop Whitney told you that?
Yes sir.

484: When did he tell you that?
After we got here.

485: After you came here to Utah?
Yes sir.

486: Did he ever show it to you?
No sir, -not after we came here.

487: Did he ever show it to any body?
Well I suppose he did, but I don’t know that he did.

488: Well we want what you know, and not what you suppose. If you don’t know a thing, say you don’t, and let that end it. Now you do not know whether he ever showed it to any anybody after he got in or not?
No sir, only from what he said himself. He told me that he showed it to Brigham, – that is he told me so, but I don’t know it for I didn’t see him show it to Brigham Young.

489: You were here in 1852, were you not, – here in the City?
Yes sir.

490: And you were here at the General Conference of the church held in the Tabernacle in August 1852?
Yes sir.

491: And is it not a fact that at that conference, and at that time this revelation, or purported revelation, was presented to the people for adoption?
It was published to the world I think in 1852.

492: Was it not presented here at the Conference in the Tabernacle in 1852?
I don’t recollect.

493: Do I understand you to swear that you do not know whether it was or was not?
I say I don’t recollect about that.

494: Well do you say it was not?
I don’t know anything about it.

495: Do you say it was not read to the people here assembled at that Conference in the Tabernacle, in August, – on August 12th 1852?
No sir, I don’t say that.

496: Well what do you say?
I say as I said before I don’t remember.

497: Don’t you remember the time that Brigham Young presented it from the stand?
 

498: What do you say to that?
I say I don’t remember.

499: You attended that conference?
I do not remember.

500: Has any one told you not to remember anything except what you wanted to remember?
No sir.

501: No one has told you that?
No sir.

502: Who has talked to you about your testimony in this case?
I have been talking to you about it.

503: Have you talked to President Woodruf about your testimony?
Only last night, then I spoke to him, – that is all I have said to him.

504: Have you talked with Joseph F. Smith about what your testimony would be here?
No sir.

505: You have not?
No sir.

506: Now you can recollect things that occured back in Nauvoo, – what was said to you then in conversations, and that was away back in 1844 and 1843, – and yet you cannot remember in 1852 public meeting that was held here in your own city, nor the matter of the presentation of such an important matter as this plural wife revelation? Do you want to go on record as saying that?
I don’t remember it.

507: You do not remember anything about the presentation of that alleged revelation to the church then?
No sir.

508: You have read the sermon by Brigham Young?
I have read some of his sermons.

509: Published in the Journal of Discourses with reference to this revelation on polygamy?
I don’t remember.

510: That is another of the things that you don’t remember?
I say I don’t remember now whether I have read that or not.

511: Have you not read the sermon in which Brigham Young said he was the man that had the only copy of the polygamy revelation on earth?
No sir, I don’t remember that.

512: And that nobody else knew anything about it but him.
No sir.

513: Was Joseph Smith present when you copied that revelation?
No sir.

514: Who was present?
When I copied it?

515: Yes sir.
No one but Bishop Whitney, and he was not present all the time.

516: You were acquainted with the book of Doctrine and Covenants in the church prior to 1844, were you not?
Yes sir, I was acquainted with what was published.

517: Is this the book?
I have looked at that and read it.

518: You have also read the revelation in the 1835 edition of the book of Doctrine and Covenants in marriage?
Yes sir.

519: And you know what it was?
I did at that time.

520: And that is the doctrine that you taught as the law of the church when you were out preaching?
Yes sir. Well I will say that I did not preach anything at all on the question of marriage when I was out preaching.

521: Well if you had been called on to preach anything you would have taught that, wouldn’t you?
If I had been called on to say anything about it, I would of course teach it as it was given there, but I did not teach anything about it when I was preaching. Of course while I did not teach it, if I had been called on to do so by anybody I would teach it according to the laws of the land.

522: According to the laws of the land?
Yes sir.

523: Why would you do that?
Because I could not preach anything else then.

524: Well you had a church law on marriage did you not?
I was not authorized to teach anything on marriage.

525: Well if anybody had asked you anything about the question of marriage in your church, you would have told them what the law in your church was?
Yes sir.

526: And would you not have told them it was monogamy?
Yes sir, I believe I should.

527: That is what you would have told them?
Yes sir.

528: And would that not have been true?
I expect it would have been then.

529: Was there any other law of the church at that time on the question of marriage?
Well I don’t know that there was anything said particularly about the question of marriage at that time. I don’t remember that there was anything in particular said about marriage at that time. I don’t recollect that there was much said about it at that time.

530: There was not?
No sir, no more than there ever had been in speaking of marriage, –

531: What do you mean by that?
Well I mean that there was nothing more said about it then than there had been before, until just a year or so before Joseph’s death, and then it began to be talked about.

532: Then the law of marriage was the law laid down and declared upon by the church in the book of doctrine and Covenants, which at that time was the edition of 1835?
Yes sir.

533: And that contains a section on marriage, – at section on marriage that was adopted by the General church at Kirtland, Ohio?
Yes sir. It cites the circumstance there that a woman should have but one husband but it don’t say anything about that at all.

534: What is that?
It says that a woman should have but one husband, but it dors not say anything about what a man should have.

535: Do you mean to say that it says that a woman should have but one husband, and does not say anything about a man?
Well does it not, – look at it and see?

536: Well you are the witness?
I understand what it reads so, – that a woman should have but one husband.

537: Well you say that is what it is?
I think so, but whatever is in the book is right. I haven’t read it for a long time, and memory is not as good on that as it used to be, but I think that is what it says.

538: Do you recollect whether or not this was apart of the church law when you were out as a minister before 1844, – don’t you recollect that this was a part of the church law?
Well read it, and let me see?

539: I will read from Exhibit “E”, paragraph seven, section thirteen, being the revelation given in Februrary 1831, “And again I say thou shalt not kill; but he that killeth shall die. Thou shalt not steal, and he that stealeth and will not repent, shall be cast out. Thou shalt not lie; he that lieth and will not repent shall be cast out. Thou shalt love they wife with all they heart, and shall cleave unto her, and none else; and he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her, shall deny the faith and shall not have the Spirit, and if he repents not he shall be cast out. Thou shalt not commit adultery; and he that commiteth adultery and repents not shall be cast out; but he that commiteth adultery and repents with all his heart, and forsaketh it, and doeth it no more, thou shalt forgive; but if he doeth it again he shall not be forgiven, but shall be cast out. Thou shalt not speak evil of they neighbor, nor do him any harm. Thou knowest my laws concerning these things are given in my scriptures; he that sinneth and repenteth not, shall be cast out”. You recollect that?
Yes sir.

540: You recollect that as the law of the church?
Yes sir, that is right. That is there of course, and I recollect it.

541: Was that not a law of the church when you were a minister in the church prior to 1844?
Yes sir that was one of the articles of the church sir, – at least I suppose it was considered so in those days. What year was that?

542: This book was published in 1835?
What time was that revelation given?
That revelation was given in February 1831 did you say?

543: Yes sir, that was given in February 1831 and was it the law in the church at the time it was given?
Certainly.

544: It was the law of the church at that time you say?
Yes sir I suppose it was, but when that revelation was given it was not printed or published.

545: What is that you say?
It was not printed publicly then for all the church at the time it was given.

546: Do you suppose this was not publicly printed?
Yes sir.

547: What was it that was not printed?
The revelation was not printed at the time it was given to the church. It was printed since that time. You see the book of the law and commandments was not printed at the time it was given to the church, the revelations were not printed as fast as they were given to the church.

548: When were they first published?
I don’t remember that date, but all the commandments or revelations that were given were printed in the first book that was published after they were given, that is the commandments or revelations that were given up to that time.

549: This book here was printed in 1835?
Yes sir.

550: And was submitted to a general assembly of the church at Kirtland, Ohio, do you remember that?
Yes sir.

551: You remember that?
I remember something of that king.

552: This whole book was?
Was what?

553: Was submitted to the church?
Yes sir.

554: And in this book is the law of the church on marriage?
Yes sir.

555: Now can you tell me when any general assembly ever repealed that law, and adopted any other in its place?
I don’t remember.

556: Was it ever done, was that law ever repealed by any general assembly of the church and any other adopted in its stead?
I don’t remember of any. I don’t remember of anything of the kind.

557: Did they ever repeal it?
I don’t know.

558: Do you say they did repeal it in that manner?
No sir, I don’t say it was or was not.

559: Is that the law of the church here in Salt Lake City?
Well I presume we consider it one of the articles and laws of the church.

560: Do you consider it one of the articles and laws of the church that a man shall have but one wife here in Salt Lake City?
Yes sir.

561: You do?
Yes sir, we do now.

562: Well before the United States got after you, did you?
Well no, for we considered that by revelation or commandment we had the privilege of having more than one wife.

563: Was that a commandment or revelation changing this law here?
Well yes sir, not changing that law but adding to it, you might say.

564: Adding to it?
Yes sir.

565: Did the addition make a change in the law?
Yes sir.

565: It did?
Yes sir. You can see for yourself that it did.

567: Well you are the witness. Now is it not a fact that the additional revelation of 1852 made a change in the law of the church regulating marriage?
It gave a male member of the church the privilege of having more wives than one, if he was considered worthy.

568: Did the, -did it give the female members the privilege of having more members than one?
What is that,- I don’t understand that question?

459: Did it give the female members of the church the privilege of having more husbands than one?
No sir I don’t think it did. No sir I don’t think it does.

570: Don’t you know that the law here in Salt Lake City will permit a woman to be sealed to two different men
No sir.

571: It will not?
I don’t think it permits her to do that I don’t think she can have more than one husband.

572: Well can’t she be sealed to two different ones?
No sir, I don’t see how she can be. That is not my understanding of the law. If tht is the law I don’t know it, for I don’t see how she could be.

573: Don’t you know that as a matter of fact they did that?
Did what?

574: Seal a woman to two different men?
No sir.

575: You don’t?
No sir.

576: Well was it Sinai Jacobs sealed to two different men in Nauvoo according to the Brighamite doctrine?
No sir.

577: Do you mean to say that she was not, or you don’t know anything about it?
I don’t know anything about that at all. If that ever happened I don’t know anything about it. That never occurred to my knowledge, not that I know anything about.

578: I will read from section sixty fie, paragraph three on page one hundred and ninety two of exhibit “E”< as follows,- ” And again I say unto you that who so forbiddeth to marry, is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man; wherefore, it is lawful that he should have but one wife, and that they twain shall be one flesh and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation; and that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made”. Now do you recollect that as a part of the doctrine of the church prior to 1844?
Yes sir.

579: You recognize that as a part of the doctrine of the church prior to 1844?
Yes sir, that is all right sir.

580: Does that permit a man to have two wives?
It don’t say so does it?

581: I will read it to you again, and then you may answer it? “And again I say unto you that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man; wherefore it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation; and that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made”. What do you say to that?
It is lawful that he should or may have one wife, that is correct.

582: It would be lawful for him to have two wives?
Not now. Now it would not.

583: Would it be lawful for a man to have more than one wife from 1852 down until the time that Uncle Sam got after you gentlemen for having more than one wife?
We believed it was the privilege of a man that was considered to be an able and true man, -it was his privilege to have more than one, if he chose to avail himself of his privilege. There was no force used about it, -it was optional with hi but he could have another woman sealed to him for eternity if he saw fit to do so.

584: What about time as well as eternity?
And time, too.

585: Sealed to him for time and eternity?
Yes sir, time and eternity.

586: That is the law of the church?
No sir, that was the law of the church.

587: But it is not the law now?
No sir.

588: Uncle Sam got after you, and made you drop it as a law of the church?
No sir, I don’t know that that was the cause, but you can have it that way if you want it that way.

589: Is it not a law of the church now and here, that you can never enjoy the hereafter unless you have two, – have two wives?
No sir.

590: Was it not the doctrine of the church here in Salt Lake City, preached by Brigham Young, and Heber C. Kimball, and by all the Twelve Apostles of this church here in the Tabernacle in 1852, in the month of August and on the same day all of them?
I don’t know, –

591: Or nearly all of them?
What is it you want to know?

592: Did they not preach in the Tabernacle on a day in August 1852 that a man could not be exalted in the hereafter, unless he complied with the revelation on polygamy, and took more than one wife?
Not to my knowledge.

593: You never read that?
No sir.

594: You did not hear those sermons on that day?
No sir.

595: You don’t know anything about that?
I did not hear that.

596: If that is the doctrine of the church, you don’t know what the doctrine of the church is, do you?
If that is not the doctrine of the church, did you say?

597: If that is the doctrine of the church I said, that a man must have more than one wife, – two wives, – in order to be exalted in the hereafter, – if that is the doctrine of the church, you do not know anything about it do you?
Well the idea of it is this, I never heard that.

598: You never heard that?
No sir, I never heard them preach that in the Tabernacle.

599: Do you say that they did not preach it?
No sir. I don’t say they didn’t preach it. They may have done so, but if they did I didn’t hear it.

600: Do you say it was not a law of the church, and taught by the Presidency of the church from that time down, that a man in order to be exalted in the here-after, – in eternity, – must have two wives or more?
No sir for I heard it preached from the stand that a man could be exalted in eternity with one wife.

601: Answer my question, – have you not also heard it preached from the stand that a man could not be exalted unless he had more than one wife?
No sir.

602: Who preached that he could be exalted in the here-after with one wife, – just name your man?
Orson Pratt.

603: When was it he preached that?
Just before his death.

604: When, – when was it he preached that?
It was just before his death, – I don’t know when.

605: Where was it he preached that?
In the Tabernacle just before it was torn down.

606: What year was that?
I don’t know, – it wasn’t long before his death.

607: You don’t know what year it was?
No sir.

608: You say it was Orson Pratt preached what?
Yes sir.

609: Can you come within two years of the time you heard him preach in the Tabernacle that a man could be exalted in eternity with only one wife?
No sir.

610: Was it before 1852?
No sir. It was after that.

611: Did not Orson Pratt preach in August 1852 that a man could be exalted in the hereafter, unless he had more wives than one?
I don’t know.

612: Well did he?
I say perhaps he did? I don’t know whether he did or did not. I don’t say that he didn’t.
I don’t know anything about it I say.

614: You don’t remember anything about that?
No sir.
No sir.

616: Did you not attend that meeting?
No sir.

617: Have you not attended the General Conference of the church here?
Here in Salt Lake?

618: Yes sir?
Not always.

619: Were you here in Salt Lake City in August 1852?
No sir I do not believe that I was. I believe I was away up north sir.

620: Well were you, – I would like to – know for you answered me while ago that you were here in Salt Lake City at that time?
No sir I did not I do not think I think I answered you that I was not at the conference held here at that time, – that is in August 1852

621: Well did you not attend the conferences that were held here in Salt Lake City in August and September 1852?
I can’t remember I do not say that I was not here, for I think I was out of the country at that time, but if I was here at the time I don’t think I was at the conference held then. If I was I don’t remember it.

622: Don’t you remember that there was a special conference held at that time, and one hundred and nine elders sent out to preach?
I don’t remember. Perhaps there was.

623: Were you a married man when you joined the church in 1832?
No sir.

624: You were not married at that time?
No sir.

624: When were you married?
In 1836 or ’37

625: Who married you?
Joseph Smith.

626: You were married by Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.

627: Where were you married?
In Ohio at Kirtland.

628: What was the ceremony?
Just the ordinary ceremony that was used, – just the common ceremony under which they were married at that time.

629: The common ceremony?
Yes sir.

630: The ceremony authorized under the statutes of Ohio?
Yes sir, I presume so.

631: Was it not the ceremony adopted by the church?
No sir.

632: How do you know it was not?
I went and go a license.

633: You went and got a license?
Yes sir.

634: Where?
From the County Court.

635: Well don’t they get a license here?
Of course they do, but they could have it published there three weeks in the church meeting without a license at the I got married, but I did not do it that way, for I went and got a license.

636: You could be married without a license by having it published in the church for three weeks?
Yes sir

637: Could any body that was not a member of the church do that?
No sir.

638: They could not do that?
No sir, I don’t suppose they could.

639: Well did you a member of the church?
Yes sir.

640: What was her name?
Caroline Whitney.

641: Bishop Whitney’s daughter?
Yes sir.

642: And you were married according to the laws of Ohio?
Yes sir, I suppose so.

643: Well you say you were married according to the laws of the church?
I suppose so. I got a lawful wife and that was sufficient, and I was satisfied that I was married according to the laws of the church, and the laws of the land and that is enough.

644: Well were you not married according to the laws of the church, of which you were at that time a member, according to the manner in which the marriage ceremo- ny and the rules regulating marriage are set out in this book here (Exhibit E)?
He married me I suppose just as any other preacher would marry me”

645: He repeated to you a ceremony, – the ceremony ordered or fixed by the church, didn’t he?
I can’t tell you

646: Wasn’t it the ceremony provided by the church?
I say I can’t tell you whether it was the ceremony provided by the church or not.

647: You knew there was a ceremony provided by the chur- ch did you not?
I knew there was, but I cannot tell you whether I knew it at that time or not.

648: You recollect the ceremony in substance when I read it to you do you not?
I can’t tell you the cere- mony he used I tell you.

649: Well I will read to you the ceremony provided by the church to refresh your recollection?
I know how that reads.

650: You know how that reads?
Yes sir. In substance I know how it reads.

651: Well I will read it to you, – “Marriage should be celebrated with prayer and thanksgiving; and at the solemnization, the persons to be married, standing to- gether, the man on the right, and the woman on the left , shall be addressed by the person officiating as he shall be directed by the Holy Spirit; and if there be no legal objections, he shall say, calling each by their names; “you both mutally agree to be each others companions, husband and wife, observing the legal rights belonging to this condition; that is, keeping yourselves wholly for each other, and from all others during your lives”. And when they have answered “yes”, he shall pronounce them “husband and wife”, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by virtue of the laws of the country, and authoritu vested in him, “May God add his blessings to keep you to fulfill your covenants, from hence- forth and for ever. Amen”. – I will ask you if that in substance was not repeated to you by the minister who married you?
I can’t remember sir.

652: Can you remember it in substance? “you both mutually agree to be each others companion, husband and wife, observing the legal rights belonging to this condition, what is keeping yourselves wholly for each other, and from all others during your lives?
No sir, it is not exactly that way.

653: It was not exactly in that way?
No sir.

654: Wherein did he change it?
He married my wife to me.

655: Well he married you to your wife too, didn’t he?
Yes sir and after that he married me to her. He took one person at a time, and married us in that way. That says there “mutually agree”, – it was as it is in substance there.

656: Did he repeat it to you in this way, calling you each by name?
Yes sir, he called me by my name. 657 (Mistakenly listed as 557)

656: He said “do you take this woman to be yout lawful wedded wife, and keep yourself wholly for her, and none other, so long as life shall last”? Did he say in substance that?
No sir.

658: Well did he say that to your wife?
I don’t know what he said.

659: You don’t know what was said?
I can’t remember.

660: Well do you know then, that he did not say to you what I have stated, substantially?
I can’t remember what it was he said, but it was something like that.

661: Did he say the same testimony to her that he said you?
Well it was something similiar, – some thing the same, but I can’t say exactly what it was.

662: That is you want to say that you were not bound or married to one woman for all time, – when you were married in 1837 you were not married to one woman for all time, – that is what you want to say, – Is that what I understand you to say?
I was married at the time, of course.

663: For time?
Yes sir.

664: And you did not have the privelege of taking another woman so long as that one should live”?
I can’t say, – there was nothing said about that.

665: Well you did not have the privelege under the laws of the church, or under the laws of the land either to take another woman so long as that one lived, did you?
We never heard anything of the kind in those days at all.

666: You did not have any privelege under the laws of the church up to 1844 nor under the laws of the United States or the laws of the state of Ohio up to 1844, to take another did you?
No sir, no man had given me that privelege.

667: You did not have that privelege by law did you?
I had no such a privelege then. I did not consider that I had such a privelege at that time at all sir. I did not say that I considered I had such a privelege at that time at all.

668: How many times have you been married silce 1844?
Well sir I have had three wives.

669: All living at the same time?
No sir.

670: Were any two of them living at the same time?
Any two of them?

671: Yes sir?
Yes sir.

672: How many have you now?
One.

673: For how long has that condition of affairs continued?
I will not answer the question.

674: I will ask you how what minister of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, prior to 1844, in Nauvoo, or in any other place, you have heard preach the doctrine of polygamy from the pulpit?
I don’t remember hearing any doctrine of polygamy taught I mean preached, – in Nauvoo at all, -. That is preached from the pulpit.

675: Or in any other place prior to that time? Nauvoo or any other place, county or city? or state?
Why yes it has been preached here.

676: Before 1844 I said?
Oh no, no, no, – not here before that time for we were not here then. I had not heard it preached in 1844 on the stand at all.

677: Who did you hear preach it anywhere in 1844, – any where at all?
I heard it, – did you say in 1844?

678: Yes sir?
Bishop Whitney gave me to understand that was the law.

679: I asked you who you heard preach it anywhere in 1844?
In the pulpit.

680: Yes sir, or from the stand?
I never heard any one preach it from the stand prior to 1844. The only way that I heard of it at all up to what time was by conversation.

681: Did you ever hear any one preach it from the stand or in a private gathering up to that time?
No sir.

682: I refer to the time before the death of Joseph Smith?
No sir, I did not hear it preached from the pulpit before his death, but I heard it in private conversations you know as I stated, Bishop Whitney told me of it before Joseph died.

683: You say you did not hear it preached from the stand prior to the death of Joseph Smith in 1844? Now I will ask you if you heard it preached or taught to any considerable number of people privately before the death of Joseph Smith?
No sir.

684: Did you ever hear any body teach it to a number of persons either publicly or privately before the death of Joseph Smith?
Only what Joseph Smith taught me, and what Bishop Whitney taught me?

685: What did he teach you?
He said we had the privelege of having more than one wife.

686: Is that all that he said?
That was the understanding.

687: I am not asking you for the understanding, – I am asking you for what he said?
No sir, he said more, but I can’t tell you now all that he did say.

688: You do not remember anything more than he said?
No sir.

689: Can you tell anything else that he said?
He said it was the privelege of an able man to have more wives than one. I remember that he said that.

690: Will you swear to that?
I affirm that.

691: Joseph Smith told you that?
Yes sir.

692: You will not swear to that, but you will affirm it?
Yes sir.

693: To your mind there is a difference between swearing and affirmation?
Yes sir, I suppose there is.

694: Did you not swear to this 1886?
I did not swear, – when I took an oath I affirmed.

695: Do you consider there is a difference between an oath and an affirmation?
Yes sir.

696: What is the difference?
There is a little difference.

697: You consider then, that there is a little difference.
Yes sir.

698: An oath is more binding than an affirmation?
It is more binding than an affirmation. Well I don’t know that it is more binding it is considered to be more serious.

699: An oath is considered to be more serious than an affirmation?
Yes sir. I don’t now what you would call it, but I generally affirm.

700: You do that because your understanding is that a man cannot be convicted of perjury where he affirms and does not swear?
I don’t know anything about that.

701: And he can be when he is sworn?
I suppose that is true. I suppose it is true.

702: And that is the reason you do not take an oath but affirm instead of taking the oath?
Well I haven’t thought about that.

703: You consider there is more solemnity about an oath than an affirmation?
Well I consider so.

704: You consider an oath is more binding?
Well I consider it is more binding.

705: And for that reason you affirm?
I affirm because I would rather affirm sir.

706: Then will you affirm now sir that Joseph Smith did not state anything more to you than you have stated here on the witness stand?
No sir.

707: You won’t do that?
No sir.

708: did he say more?
Yes sir.

709: Well what more did he say to you?
I don’t know that I am obliged to tell you that sir.

710: Well, did he say anything more?
Yes sir.

711: Well what did he say?
I don’t know that I am obliged to say.

712: Well I think you will learn that you are and will be compelled to tell, for I think we have a right to know just what he said to you and all that he said to you?
I don’t think so.

713: I want to know just what he said to you?
I have told you about all that he said. I have stated in substance about all that he said to me.

714: You have told here substantially all that Jospeh Smith ever told you, or said to you, about the practice of polygamy, have you?
Yes sir, – he said that a man had that privelege if he was considered worthy.

715: Now did he tell you that you could have more wives than one, or that you could have women sealed to you?
He said we could have women sealed to us for time and eternity.

716: Did he ever use the word “wives”?
I can’t exactly say, but I presume it is likely he did.

717: Well are you willing to sear or affirm here that he did, or did not?
I say I presume he did.

718: I asked you if you were willing to swear or affirm here that he used the word “wives”?
It must have been “wives”. He said that a man could have more wives that one, and of course he must have used the word “wives”.

719: Well are you willing to swear that he used that language?
I am affirming.

720: You do not forget that you are affirming?
No sir.

721: Well are you willing to affirm that he used that language?
That is the understanding of it sir.

722: Is that what he said?
Yes sir, that is what he said.

723: Well what was it he said?
That a man could have more wives than one.

724: Did he say you could have them as wives or did he say that you could have more women than one sealed to you?
He said we could have both. I understood it both ways. I understood that it was both ways.

725: Well did he say it. I don’t want your understanding of it, but I do want what he said?
I say I understood it that way.

726: Well did he say it that way?
That is the understanding I got from him, that a man could have more wives than one, and he could have them sealed to him.

727: Did he say you could have more wives than one for time and eternity?
Yes sir.

728: That is the language he used?
Yes sir, that is the understanding I got of it.

729: That is the understanding you got?
Yes sir.

730: But you do not say he used that language?
No sir. I can’t say that is the exact language he used, but I know that is the understanding I got of it, and I presume he did.

731: Well do you day he did?
Well I could not understand it any other way.

732: Well did you marry more wives than one then?
No sir.

733: You did not?
No sir.

734: Why not?
Because I did not want any then.

735: Well how long was it before you married any other wife?
I don’ t know that it is any of your business when I did.

736: Well how long was it after that before you married any other woman?
I don’t know that it is any concern of yours when I did.

737: Come answer the question for we want to know.
Well I don’t know that I can tell you that.

738: Well I am to understand that you decline to tell it?
I do decline to do so unless I am compelled to do so.

739: Do you decline to answer the question because it would tend to criminate you?
Well sir that is my own personal business, and is no concern of yours.

740: Do you decline to answer the question because it would tend to criminate you?
No sir.

741: Then why do you decline to answer the question?
Because it is none of your business.

742: Well I will insist upon the answer?
What is the question?

743: How long was it before you were married any other woman after Joseph Smith told you that?
Well let me see it was, my first wife died in October, and I married, I can’t say exactly, but it was some year or two afterwards that I married another woman, but I can’t tell you exactly what the date of that was until I go and see the record of my marriage.

744: That is the time you were married the second time?
Yes sir.

745: That marriage was performed after your first wife died?
Yes sir.

746: Well how long was it after you married your second wife, that you took on another wife, during the life of the wife you were then living with?
My first wife do you mean?

747: No I said your second wife, and while she, your second wife was still living? How long was it after you married the second wife that you took another wife?
I think it was perhaps six months. I don’t remember exactly, but I think it was about six months.

748: When you lived in Illinois?
Yes sir.

749: Did you have two wives living at the same time while you were living at Nauvoo, Illinois?
Yes sir. That was before I left Nauvoo.

750: You had two wives living at the same time at Nauvoo?
Yes sir.

751: Who married you to them?
I think it was Heber C. Kimball.

752: Where were you married to them?
I believe it was in the temple at Nauvoo.

753: In what year?
I can’t state the year.

754: Well cannot you state about the year it was?
It was just before we came away a short time. I believe it was in 1846 when we left there.

755: It was in 1846 that you were married to these women?
I believe so, – either 1845 or 1846, – some where along there. I can’t say what year it was that I married them but it was either 1845 or 1846.

756: What was the ceremony that was used?
For time and for eternity.

757: You were married to them for time and eternity?
Yes sir.

758: Was that the same ceremony that was used, – I believe you stated that the first time you were married was by Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.

759: And that was at Kirtland, Ohio?
Yes sir, that was the time I was married first.

760: Well was the ceremony used this time that you were married by Heber C. Kimball in the temple at Nauvoo, Illinois in 1845 or 1846, – was the same ceremony used on that occasion that had been employed by Joseph Smith on the occasion of your first marriage at Kirtland, Ohio?
No sir.

761: What was the difference?
It was not for eternity at all then.

762: Then there was a change in the marriage ceremony was there not?
Yes sir.

763: What was the change?
We were married for eternity as well as time the last time.

764: The marriage ceremony was changed and you were married for eternity the last time?
Yes sir, – that was added on.

765: That is it was extended by the addition of that?
Yes sir.

766: It was broadened out by that addition?
Yes sir.

767: Spread out?
Yes sir, there was more added to it.

768: And that is your understanding of the polygamy doctrine, – that it is just an extension of the polygamy doctrine of the church, – that is that the doctrine of the church in reference to marriage had been extended by the addition of this to it?
Yes sir. Of course.

769: That is the old law of the church before this was injected into it allowed a man to have but one wife, but after this came hew as permitted to have form one wife, up to as many as many as Soloman had?
I don’t know about that, but he might have more than one.

770: Well there is no limit is there to the number?
Well I don’t know anything about that.

771: Was the ceremony that you had repeated to you at the time you were married in the temple at Nauvoo, the ceremony that I read to you here to day from the book of Doctrine and Covenants, section one hundred and one, page two hundred and fifty one, of the edition of 1835?
That which you have just read?

772: Yes sir?
No sir.
No sir, it was a different ceremony.

774: Can you repeat the ceremony?
It was for time and eternity, – I can’t repeat it all. I can’t repeat it all, but that was the substance of it.

775: That is the substance of it?
Yes sir.

776: Well what is the substance of it?
That is that the man and the woman stands up together, and the minister says I pronounce you man and wife.

777: The man and the woman stands up together, and the minister says “I pronounce you man and wife for time and eternity?”
Well that is a part of it.

778: Have you a book that contains that ceremony?
No sir.

779: Is it printed any where?
Not that I know of.

780: Did you take an oath at the time you were married the second time in the temple at Nauvoo?
Yes sir I presume so.

781: What was it, – what was the oath?
Why I presume it was the same as I took the first time, – I presume it was the same as I did the other time.

782: It was the same as you took the first time?
I presume so.

783: Well did you take an oath outside of that?
Yes sir, I don’t know.

784: Do you know whether you took an oath outside of the marriage ceremony or not?
 

785: Did you have to take an oath outside of the marriage ceremony?
I don’t know that I did.

786: You went through the endowments there?
Yes sir.

787: There at Nauvoo?
Yes sir.

788: At the time of your marriage?
No sir.

789: Well about that time?
No sir.

790: Well was it not about the same time?
Yes sir.

791: The same year?
Yes sir.

792: That you took the endowments?
Yes sir.

793: Was it before or after you were married to the second wife?
Before.

794: At the time that you went through the endowments you took an oath did you not?
Yes sir.

795: What was that oath?
I promised to be obedient to the laws and revelations of the church.

796: Did you not promise to be obedient to the officers of the church too?
To the rules and regulations of the church?

797: And to the officers also?
Well, if they were included in the rules and regulations and articles of the church I was of course. It was the rules and regulations and articles of the church that I was to be obedient to, as they were recorded as I remember it.

798: And did you not agree to obey the counsel and commands of the church, and its officers?
It was the rules and regulations of the church, and of course that meant the laws of the church.

799: What were those rules and regulations outside of what is contained in this book (exhibit E) that I now hold in my hand, in, – that is what other book were they in, if any, or where were they to be found?
Well I don’t know that there was anything in particular. We were to be true to all the rules and regulations of the church and be faithful in all dealings and doing, one with another, etc.

800: Do you find in your book of Doctrine and Covenants, that is the book that your church published, – any rules for the performance of the marriage ceremony under which you were married on that occasion in the temple?
At Nauvoo?

801: Yes sir?
I don’t remember that I do.

802: Can you find it in this book (exhibit E)?
I don’t know.

803: Did you find it there in substance?
I don’t remember.

804: Don’t you know it is not there?
I don’t remember seeing it there?

805: Don’t you know it is not there?
I say I don’t remember seeing it there.

806: You have read the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
Yes sir.

807: Did you ever head it in there?
I don’t remember.

808: You say you took the endowments?
Yes sir.

809: Have you been through the endowments more than once?
More than once?

810: Yes sir?
Yes sir, I have gone through, and saw others go through at the same time.

811: And you have been through yourself?
Yes sir.

812: More than once I asked you?
Yes sir.

813: You were baptized first in 1832?
Yes sir.

814: When were you baptized the first time?
That was the first time.

815: Were you ever baptized after that first time?
Yes sir. 816 (This question/answer is missing)

817: When was the next time you were baptized?
When I came out here to Utah. No, – you mean for myself, and not for the dead I suppose.

818: I mean for yourself?
Well I was baptized the next time when I came out here.

819: What were you baptized for the first time?
If you do not know I can tell you. I thought you were posted in the law, but I see you ain’t as well posted as you ought to be, so I can tell you it was for remission of sins.

820: Well what were you baptized for the next time?
For the same thing. I was re-baptized the second time for the remission of sins.

821: You were the second time baptized for the remission of your sins?
Yes sir.

822: What time was that?
Well I got out here in the year of 1847 in the fall of 1847 I think it was. Now I would like to know if all these questions are questions that are necessary to be asked, about the personality of all my family concerns. I don’t think that I should be asked about all these things, for I can’t see what they have to do with this case.

823: You said in your examination a while ago that you had been a member of the church sine 1832?
Yes sir.

824: That was the time you first became a member of the church?
Yes sir, that was the time I joined the church.

825: You were then, – How does it happen that you had to be baptized into the church again in 1847?
I had not to be baptized into it again, for I was in the church already.

826: Well how did it happen that you were baptized the second time?
When I came here I was baptized again, renewing me covenants, with God, and also for the remission of my sins that I might have committed taking this tedious journey out there, through all these mountains and canyons, – we thought it might do us good to be baptized again.

827: You had not broken your covenants that asked the witness for the reasons that the witness has repeatedly answered that he does not remember.
 

808: You say you took the endowments?
Yes sir.

809: Have you been through the endowments more than once? A=More than once?
 

810: Yes sir?
Yes sir, I have gone through, and saw others go through at the same time.

811: And you have been through yourself?
Yes sir.

812: More than once I asked you?
Yes sir.

813: You were baptized first in 1832?
Yes sir.

814: When wer you baptized the first time?
That was the first time.

815: Were you ever baptized after that first time?
Yes sir.

817: When was the next time you were baptized?
When I came here to Utah. No, you mean for myself, and not for the dead I suppose.

818: I mean for yourself?
Well I was baptized the next time when I came out here.

819: What were you baptized for the first time?
If you do-not know I can tell you. I thought you were posted in the law, but I see you ain’t as well posted as you ought to be, so I can tell you it was for the remission of sins.

820: Well what were you baptized for the second time?
For the same thing,. I was re-baptized the second time for the remission of sins.

821: You were the second time baptized for the remission of your sins?
Yes sir.

822: What time was that?
Wel, I got, got here in the year of 1847 in the fall of 1847 I think it was. Now I would like to know if all these questions are questions that are necessary to be asked, about the personality of all my family concerns. I don’t think that I should be asked about all these things, for I can’t see what they have to do with this case. Council for the defendants objects to all the questions asked the witness on the ground that they are largely incompetent, irrelevant and wholly immaterial, and are not cross examination, and are not pertinent to any of the issues in this case.

823: You said in your examination a while ago that you had been a member of the church since 1832? A=Yes sir
 

824: That was the vine you first became & member of the church? A=Yes sir, that was the time I joined the church.
 

825: You were then, How does it happen that you had to be baptized into the church again in 1847
I had not to be baptized into it again, for I was in the church already.

826: Well how did it happen that you were baptized the second time?
When came here I was baptized again, renewing me covenants, with God, and also for the remission of my sins that I might have committed taking this tedious journey out here, through all these mountains and canyons,-we thought it might do us good to-be baptized again.

827: You had not broken your covenants that baptized?
No sir.

828: None of the covenants that you had assumed at that time were broken?
No sir.

829: And yet you were again baptized here in Utah in 1847?
Yes sir.

830: You had not broken the church laws?
No sir.

831: None of them?
No sie.

832: Then why the necessity of being baptized again?
Well that was my private feelings that I should be, and while it was not a matter of neccesity that we should be baptized again, still I felt that it would do no harm to be baptized again.

833: That was the public teaching from the stand was it not?
Yes sir it was considered that every one that came out here should be baptized again.

834: Now in 1832 you were baptized into the church, and don’t the new testament teach that at the time of your baptism, when you are so baptized that you are baptized into Christ?
Yes sir. It does so I understand it to teach.

835: Did you get out of Christ by coming across the plains and through the mountains, and had to be baptized into – Christ again?
 

836: Answer the question, – did you get out of Christ by coming across the plains, and have to be baptized back into him again?
 

836: I don’t know that it is necessary to answer that question.
 

837: Well now was not the second baptism for something else except the remission of sins and baptism into Christ?
Not that I know of.

838: Was it not for the purpose of baptizing ito the spirit of “Brighamism”?
Well there was nothing said or spoken about “Brighamism”. There was nothing said about it at all, – not a word.

839: And into the spirit of polygamy?
No sir.

840: That is not the fact?
No sir it is not the fact, – there was nothing said about that.

841: And did not all the members of the church that came into Utah, – did they not all have to be baptized and were they not baptized the second time?
They were instructed to be baptized.

842: Under Brigham Young?
Well he counselled that of course, but they were not baptized into Brigham Young.

843: I did not say “into him”, but I said “under him”, – were they not all baptized under him?
Not under him, but under his counsel perhaps.

844: Don’t you know that they were so baptized?
 

845: They had all been baptized under the Presidency of Joseph Smith before that time?
Yes sir.

846: And now they had to be baptized under the Presidency of Brigham Young? Is that it?
I don’t know. I know it was done under the revelations of the church, and the advice of its Presidency.

847: That was the way it was done?
Yes sir.

848: That was the order and advice of the church?
Yes sir.

849: Now did not the church here have another reformation after that under which you were baptized the second time here in Utah, or the third time in all?
Yes sir.

850: Well what were you baptized that time for?
For the same thing I suppose.

851: Well what was that?
You can call it what you please.

852: Well I want to know what you call it, was it for the remission of your sins?
Yes sir. I suppose so.

853: Had you got out of Christ that time?
I don’t know anything about that.

854: The original church taught did it not, and does the new testament say you were baptized into Christ?
Yes sir.

855: And that was what the original church taught?
Yes sir.

856: That is what the new testament taught, and what the original church taught?
Yes sir, but our mode of baptism is regarded that we were taught for the, that we were baptized for the remission of sins. It don’t say baptized “into Christ”, but of course although it don’t say that, still of course we believe that Christ is our leader and head.

857: Don’t the new testament say that “as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ”?
Yes sir.

858: Then you were baptized in Kirtland into Christ?
 

859: Answer the question?
Yes sir.

860: You were baptized the first time for the remission of sins?
Yes sir.

861: In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?
Yes sir.

862: That was the ceremony was it not?
Yes sir.

863: And that was baptizing them into Christ?
That was taught in the new testament and the doctrine of the church.

864: Yes sir?
The new testament says, “baptized into Christ” I believe, and that was the doctrine of the church.

865: Does not the Book of Mormon say the same thing?
I don’t know whether the Book of Mormon does or not. I know the New Testament was talked to the people in these days, and it is in there I know.

866: The book of Doctrine and Covenants says “baptized into Christ”?
I don’t know sir whether it does or not. I could not say sir without hunting it up to see if it is so.

867: You cannot say from your memory how that is?
No sir.

868: Were you baptized any more than the three times you have referred to?
I don’t remember.

869: Well, you would remember it if you had been wouldn’t you?
I was baptized for the dead, but not for myself that I remember of.

870: Well I mean for yourself?
I say I don’t remember of any more times for myself.

871: Then you have been baptized three times for yourself?
I think so sir.

872: Did not the members of the church have to be baptized under the Presidency of John Taylor?
I do not remember about that, 873 (Written as 875)

872: Were they not re-baptized under the Presidency of John Taylor?
No sir.

874: Do you testify, swear or affirm, that they were not, – that the members of the church were not re-baptized under the Presidency of John Taylor?
NO that I remember of. I don’t remember of that.

875: Have you been baptized under Woodruf?
No sir not that I remember of. 876 (Written as 976)

875: Have any of the church members been re-baptized under the Presidency of President Woodruf?
No sir.

877: They have not?
 

878: (Speaking to Mr Cannon) Are you on the witness stand when you are sworn and on the witness stand I will be happy to cross examine you, and I will try to do it at least to my own satisfaction if not yours, and until then I hope you will remain silent, and in interject your unsworn statements into the evidence of this witness or any other witness, for it is as uncalled for, as it is out of place?
Well I was just stating the fact.

879: Well that is the kind of a fact that you have no right to state, for you were not asked the question, and I will ask the Commissioner to warn you that it must not be repeated.
 

880: Now if there was no rebaptism for the Presidency of President John Taylor, or under the Presidency of Wilford Woodruf, why should there be re-baptism under the Presidency of Brigham Young?
I don’t know sir. 881 (Written 781)

880: Was not the re-baptism under Brigham Young performed for the reason that you had never belonged to the original church?
No sir.

882: And for the purpose of getting into a branch of your own?
No sir.

883: It was not for that purpose?
No sir, for I was a member of the church at that time, and had been for years.

884: Did you not lose your original baptism under Joseph Smith when you were baptized under Brigham Young?
No sir.

885: You testify that you did not?
No sir, I didn’t that I know anything of.

886: Didn’t it make it void?
What void?

887: Did not your baptism under Brigham Young render void your original baptism under Joseph Smith?
No sir it didn’t make it void.

888: Was your original baptism under the Presideny of Joseph Smith legal and in effect all the time?
Yes sir.
Yes sir.

889: You still retained it all the time?
Yes sir.

890: Then why the necessity of a re-baptism?
Well sir that is because we choose to do it.

891: Choose to do what?
Choose to be re-baptized, that was our business sir.

892: You choose to be re-baptized when you came here to Utah first, and once again after that at the time of the so called “reformation” here, after that, and all the time you claimed to have been a member of the original church under the administration of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.

893: You had been baptized into the church when you first joined it, and yet when you came here to Utah you saw fit to be baptized again?
Yes sir.

894: Is it not the doctrine of your church here that you should be baptized, that all should be baptized when they came here?
Yes sir, that was what was taught when we came here first, that was what was taught when we came here that time.

895: If you had joined the Disciples church at that time, or at any other time would you have been baptized into that church?
What do you mean by that?

896: I mean the Campbellite church, if you had joined the Campbellites, would you have been baptized into it?
I never joined them.

897: Well if you had joined them would you have been baptized?
I expect so.

898: Is it necessary when you join a church to be baptized?
Yes sir I suppose so, it is in our church.

899: The Campbellites are a church that baptize by immersion for the remission of sins are they not?
Well I never joined them, and so I don’t know anything about what they do.

900: Well if you had joined them what would you have done, how would you have been baptized?
I don’t know. I can’t say, for I never joined them. I don’t know what I would gone and done if I had joined them.

901: If you had been baptized by a disciple’s preacher would it not have made void your original baptism into the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by Joseph Smith?
I was not baptized by any of them, and so I cannot say.

902: If you had been baptized by the Congregational Church, or the Methodist church, or by any other church except this one here, wouldn’t it have made void your original baptism?
Well I consider it would be made void any way, it would be void any way, and if it was void if I baptized or was baptized I don’t think there would be any particular virtue in it.

903: What is that, I don’t understand that?
I say that I don’t consider that there was any particular virtue in the baptism out here, it was simply done for out satisfaction, and not because we considered that there was any particular virtue in it. We had come over a long weary way, and had met with many a hardship, and had went through many things to test our temper and some of us we felt might have fallen into sin by the way, and so the baptism here was simply something that was done in view of correcting anything of that kind. It was not necessary in the case of any one who had kept his faith pure, and had not fallen into sin at all.

904: Then you considered when you got here that your original baptism was void?
No sir.

905: Then why were you baptized?
Because I choosed to be.

906: Was it not the law of the church
Not that I know of.

907: Is it not printed and published as the law of the church?
I don’t know.

908: Don’t you know that it was?
No sir.

909: Was it not advised and counselled by every important officer in the church from the President down?
What?

910: That rebaptism should be performed upon the arrival of the people who followed Brigham Young here to the Valley, upon their arrival?
Yes sir, that is a fact.

911: It was advised and counselled by the whole kit and hoods of them?
Yes sir. I suppose so, – when they came here I understand it was, but that had nothing to do with – our original baptism

912: What were you baptized for the third time, – was that because you gout out of Christ the second time?
I don’t know, – I think not.

913: Well what was it for?
I did not say anything about getting out of Christ?

914: Well you were baptized the third time?
Yes sir

915: Had your second baptism been knocked out, and was that the reason you were baptized the third time?
No sir.

916: Was that third baptism legal too?
Yes sir.

917: You first and second baptism was legal and binding?
Yes sir.

918: They were legal and binding?
Yes sir.

919: So you were baptized three times in all?
Yes sir

920: Does it require three baptisms in the kingdom of Heaven, or in this church out here?
Yes sir, three baptisms, – what is the question?

921: I asked you if it required three baptisms in this church out here in the Valley, in Utah Territory here, to enable a member of the church here to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?
No sir, it is not necessary.

922: Now they teach that baptism as a doctrine, – ?
They have taught it.

923: Wait until I get through with the question, – they teach that baptism here as a doctrine, – that re-baptism?
I suppose they have.

924: The authorities in the church here in Utah have?
Yes sir, they taught it.

925: And insisted that every one that came here should be baptized and have baptized them the third time since coming here?
That is the understanding.

926: So the teachings of the church here in Salt Lake City under the Presidency of Wilford Woodruff teaches that persosn must be baptized three times?
It doesn’t

927: It does not?
No sir.

928: Did you not just say that it did?
No sir, it does not say anything about the number of times.

929: Don’t they teach that, and have they not required that of their members?
No sir.

930: Don’t they teach that publicly from the stand?
No sir.

931: And that you solemly affirm to?
They baptized them after they came here.

932: They baptized them after they came here?
Yes sir.

933: Even if they were baptized before they came here?
Yes sir.

934: That did not make any difference?
No sir, for their baptism was good before they came here, –

935: It did not make any difference whether or not they belonged to the church, – they – were baptized when they came here?
Yes sir.

936: Baptism is one of the first ordinances that is required of a man when he comes into the church, is it not?
Yes sir, it is the first.

937: It is the very first ordinance required?
Yes sir for he is not in the church until baptized.

938: Now how does it happen that members of the original church that were baptized in Illinois, or in any other state in the Union or any where in the world for that matter, – Europe or any where else, by Brigham Young must needs be re-baptized when they came here to Utah.
Well you must ask them, for I can’t tell you.

939: Well was it not because of the rules and regulation of the church adopted after they came to Salt Lake City, requiring two baptisms?
After they came here it was required to be practiced because it was the advice and decision of the council and Presidency it was decided that it was best to use the ordinance of baptism for all that chose to use it, and I choose to use it. Now that was the way it was according to my understanding.

940: Now I will leave that branch of my cross examination, and ask you if King James translation of the New Testament was not the law of the church prior to the death of Joseph Smith?
 

941: Was not the new testament, – the King James translation of the new testament the law of the church prior to the death of Joseph Smith, in connection with the book of Mormon, and the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
They are the three books we believe in sir.

942: And were not these three books the law of the church prior to the time of the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, – these were the books we were governed by.

943: And those were the only books that you were governed by prior to the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir. Excepting with the books of Doctrine and Covenants with them.

944: And they contained the law of the church up to that time?
Yes sir. They contained the law we were be governed by we supposed.

945: Now does the Apostle Paul in the new testament in the letter to the Hebrews say you must not return and teach the first works for all men?
 

946: Answer the question?
What is that? I don’t understand it.

947: Does not the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Hebrews teach the people not to return to their first works, and do them over again?
The Apostle says, living the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on into perfection, but Joseph Smith says, “not believing, let us go on to perfection etc”, and that includes baptism, and remission of sins and all these things. It seems that some of the people fell away, and then it was necessary for their re-conversion that

948: That was the way that was?
Yes sir, that is the way I understand it.

949: Now how do you come to get that “not” in there?
That was in the revelation.

950: From whom?
Joseph Smith.

951: When?
In his lifetime.

952: When he translated the bible?
Yes sir.

953: Do you believe int hat translation?
Do I believe in it.

954: Yes sir, and does this church believe in it?
Yes sir, to some extent?

955: To what extent do they believe in ti?
They believe in it where it has not been changed or altered

956: Has that part been altered?
His translation I mean. I don’t know whether that has been altered or not, – I can’t say as to whether that has or has not been altered. – I don’t know anything about that at all

957: Has any part of it been altered?
Well his translation and the bible do not agree in many instances They do not agree in all instances.

958: Well does this church believe in it?
They believe in it as he translated it.

959: Have they accepted it?
No sir.

960: And why have they not accepted it, if you know?
They have not got it to accept it.

961: Don’t you know that they take and accept the King Jame’s translation of the bible here?
Yes sir.

962: You know that?
Yes sir.

963: And you don’t know they don’t accept the new translation of the bible by Joseph Smith?
Well I can’t say.

964: You know whether they do or do not accept the new translation of the bible by Joseph Smith?
well they don’t consider it accepted, -that is by young Joseph Smith, I mean.

965: Well what do you mean by that?
I say I don’t understand that it is accepted by the church but I understand it is by young Joseph Smith and his church

966: Well it is published as his translation of the bible and it does not come through this church?
Yes sir that is the way I understand it, -it don’t come through this church here.

967: Is there any publication of the bible that pretends to be published, -I should say that pretends to be translated by Joseph Smith od Plano, Illinois, or Lamoni, Iowa?
well there was one given out here that was published.

968: By whom?
I don’t know who it was by, but it is here somewhere, for I saw it.

969: Was it not translated by his father?
His father did not publish it.

970: Did he not translate it?
yes sir, he translated it.

971: The first and original Joseph Smith translated it?
Yes sir, so I understand.

972: Do you accept that one, -that translation that was made by Joseph Smith the prophet of the church who was killed in 1844?
He did not publish it, he did not print it.

973: Do you know whether or not it was published just like he translated it or not?
I don’t know.

974: Do you know of a single change that was made in it different from what it was when he translated it?
Yes sir, it was different from the old bible

975: Do you mean to say that it differs from the old bible?
Yes sir.

976: From the King James translation?
Yes sir.

977: Well that is not what I asked you.- I asked you if you knew of a single change that is in the published edition, or the edition as published that is not in the original manuscript?
No sir, I don’t.

978: You don’t know if a single change?
No sir.

979: Then how do you know that it is not as originally translated?
Well I don’t know.

980: Did you say the original translation of the bible is not in the city here?
No sir, I don’t know where it is.

981: Do you say that Wilford Woodruff has not one on the shelves of his library, and Joseph F. Smith, and every one of your apostles?
Well I don’t doubt but that they have, for I have one on my shelves.

982: Do you believe it?
Do I believe it?

983: Yes sir?
No sir, I don’t believe all of it.

984: Well what part of it do you believe?
Well I can’t tell you until I read it.

985: Well what part don’t you believe?
I can’t tell you until I read it.

986: Were you in the counsel here in Salt Lake City when the new translation of the bible first came here?
No sir.

987: And was considered by the counsel,-that is the new translation of the bible was considered in the council?
No sir, I was not here.

988: Did you read anything about that council?
No sir.

989: You say you don’t recollect anything about it, or cannot remember reading anything about it?
No sir.

990: Don’t you know that that council decided that they could not find a single solitary change from the original?
No sir.

991: You don’t know anything about that?
No sir.

992: Not a thing about that?
No sir.

993: Don’t you know that Orson Pratt stated it publicly on the stand afterwords?
No sir.

994: Don’t you know he stated it public or private afterwards?
No sir.

995: And don’t you know that Wilford Woodruff has made that same statement time and time again?
No sir.

996: Who has the charge of the original records of that bible?
I don’t know.

997: That is another of the things that you don’t know?
Yes sir. There is many a thing I don’t know in this world,-there are lots of things I profess to know nothing about.

998: Is that profession true?
Yes sir.

999: Who, -is it by Joseph Smith?
I don’t know.

1001: Who is it professed to have been written by?
I don’t know sir.

1002: It it by Joseph Smith?
I don’t know.

1003: Did you ever see it?
No sir.

1004: Were they ever brought here?
No sir, not that I know of.

1005: The church in Utah never had them so far as you know?
No sir, not to my knowledge. If it ever did I don’t know anything about it.

1006: Then the church here never had all the records did it, if it did not have that?
 
What is that? What is that about the church.

1007: I asked you if it was not a fact that the church here in Utah never had all the records if it did not have that?
Have what?

1008: That translation of the Bible made by Joseph Smith.
Well I don’t know anything about what they had. I don’t know all the records the church had, or whether it had them all or not. They never had that to my knowledge, but I don’t know anything about it.

1009: Have they the first elders journal here?
I don’t know anything about that.

1010: Do you know what books they have?
No sir.

1011: Now in you examination in church, you stated there was no difference in polygamy as taught there in Utah, and the teaching of polygamy as it was taught to, you by Joseph Smith didn’t you?
I don’t know of any difference.

1012: Did you not make that statement on your direct examination, that there was no difference between the doctrine of polygamy as taught here, and the doctrine as it was taught to you by Joseph Smith at Nauvoo before his death?
Yes sir, I never know or could see any difference.

1013: That is what you say now?
Yes sir.

1014: And that is what you stated on your direct examination, or in your examination in chief?
Yes sir.

1015: Why do you say that, when you say that Joseph Smith never said anything to you only that a man could have more than one wife if he wanted to?
Well that is what he said.

1016: Well if he said that to you, what makes you say that the doctrine he taught you was the same as was taught here?
He told me that a man could have more than one wife, and is that not the same thing.

1017: What is that?
I said that was the same thing.

1018: How does that answer include all there is in the revelation on polygamy?
In what way.

1019: Does that answer of yours in which you say that the doctrine of polygamy as taught here was the same as that taught by Joseph Smith at Nauvoo, does that include all that there is taught in the purported revelation on polygamy as given to the church here?
I can’t say. The revelation on polygamy as you call it, is in the book here.

1020: Well why do you say that the teaching here is the same as Joseph Smith taught you?
Well it was. As far as it went it was.

1021: As far as it went it was?
Yes sir.

1022: As far as what went?
As far as what Joseph Smith said to me went.

1023: Well he did not say anything to you , did he, except that a man could have more than one wife. Is that not what you stated he said to you?
Yes sir.

1024: That a man could have more wives than one if he wanted to?
Yes sir. That is about what he said. Of course he went on further to explain it, but that was about the substance of it.

1025: That is about the substance of it, all he told you in substance?
Yes sir.

1026: How could he marry them?
For time and eternity.

1027: A man could have more wives than one for time and eternity?
Yes sir.

1028: He did not teach you that a man could not be exalted in the hereafter unless he had more wives than one?
No sir he did not teach me that. He did not say anything about that.

1029: He did not teach you that, – that is that a man could not be exalted in the hereafter, in eternity, – unless he had more wives than one?
No sir.

1030: Did he teach you that a man could not take a second wife while his first wife, or the wife he might have at the time, was living without first obtaining the consent of the living wife?
No sir.

1031: He did not teach you anything about that did he?
No sir, I can’t say that he did.

1032: Well did he teach you anything about that?
I can’t remember that he did say anything about that at all. If he did I don’t remember it.

1033: Well they teach that here don’t they?
What?

1034: That a man cannot be exalted in the hereafter unless he has, more wives than one, and that a man before he can take a plural wife, must first obtain the consent to his doing so of his first wife?
Well that is what I understand.

1035: Nos is it not a fact that that polygamist revelation teaches that a man can be married to as many women as he pleases without the consent of his first wife?
Well the revelation is in there and you can see what it teaches.

1036: Well does it or does it not teach that a man can be married to a plural wife or wives without the consent of his first wife?
I can’t say.

1037: Do you say that revelation does not teach that a man can’t be married to the second wife without the consent of his first wife?
Why it teaches that he can have the consent of the first one.

1038: That is what it teaches?
Yes sir. 1037 (This is a second 1037)

1038: You are positive of that?
Yes sir I think so. 1038 (This is a second 1038)

1038: Don’t it teach that he cannot be married the second time without the consent of the first wife?
I think not. 1039 (This is a second 1039)

1038: Is that not what it teaches?
I think not.

1040: Don’t you know that that is the fact?
No sir.

1041: Don’t you know that he must have the consent of his first wife before he can take another wife, and if she refuses to give her consent, it is not in the polygamous revelation that she must be killed?
No sir, I never heard of any such a revelation as that.

1042: You never heard of that?
No sir.

1043: Do you say that is not the revelation?
I say I don’t know. If it is I never heard of it, – that she must be killed, – and I don’t believe you did either.

1044: Well what is to be done with her in case she persists in her refusal?
Well it don’t say that she is to be killed, – that I am positive of.

1045: Or put away?
No sir, it don’t say she is to be killed or put away either. It don’t say either of that.

1046: Do you say that is not in the revelation?
I don’t remember any such a thing as that and I wrote it myself.

1047: The Lord gave it to you, – is that what you say?
No sir, I meant to say I copied it. That is what I mean when I say I wrote it.

1048: You copied it in less than an hour?
Well I couldn’t say how long it was that it took me to copy it. I told you before I could not tell how long it took to copy it, whether it was an hour or half an hour or how long.

1049: Well you said it was not over an hour.
I said I thought it wasn’t over an hour, and maybe it was not that long. I can’t say how long it took me. It took me an hour, I should say–maybe not so long, but as to the time I cannot specify how long it was.

1050: Look at section one hundred and fifty-two of the Exhibit offered by the defendants marked “A,” and state what it is. Look at it and see what says about the woman who shall persist in her refusal to giver her consent to the husband taking another wife.
It says she shall be destroyed in the flesh.

1051: Look at section one hundred and thirty-two.
Well, here it is. I have it right here.

1052: Well, that is the revelation which you say you copied?
Yes sir, that is the revelation I copied.

1053: State to the reporter how many pages of that book it makes.
It is eleven pages.

1054: And now you are willing to go on record here as testifying that you wrote that in less than an hour?
No, sir.

1055: Is that not what you stated?
I did not say in less than an hour. I did not say that, for I can’t say how long it took me. I said it was in the neighborhood of an hour, and maybe it was more. I was a pretty good writer in those days, and could write pretty fast when I tried.

1056: Have you not sworn here half a dozen times that you were not more than an hour engaged in the writing of the copy of that revelation?
Well, I don’t think I was, but I don’t know.

1057: Well, do you want to go on record here as testifying that you copied it in an hour?
An hour or more. I could not say as to the time. It was an hour or more, I could not say as to the time. It was an hour or more I should say, but I can’t say positively as to the time, but I know that I copied it whatever the time was that I copied it.

1058: Well, the paper you copied, you copied in an hour?
I presume it was in that time, but I can’t tell you how long it was.

1059: Could it have been this paper then?
What paper?

1060: This paper containing this revelation.
Yes sir, it was that revelation, I remember that.

1061: And you copied it all on one sheet of fools cap paper?
No sir, it took moe than one sheet of paper.

1062: Don’t you know that that could not be copied–that you could not copy that on one sheet of paper, or that you could not copy it on twenty sheets of paper, of fools cap paper?
No sir, I don’t know anything about it.

1063: And that you could not copy it in three hours, letting alone one hour?
No sir, I think I could copy it in nearly an hour. I don’t think it would take me much over an hour to copy it, and I don’t think I was much over an hour copying it, either.

1064: You never saw it from that time to this, did you?
Saw what?

1065: That copy that you made at that time, is it not a fact that you have never seen it from that day to the present time?
No, sir.

1066: You have not seen it?
No, sir.

1067: Then how can you say it was this revelation printed in here that you copied?
Because I read the one I copied.

1068: And you remember what it stated?
Yes sir, I remember enough of it to know that is the one.

1069: Did you ever see this section one hundred and thirty two in this book at any time until after 1852?
In the book?

1070: Did you ever see it in any shape until after 1852?
Yes sir.

1071: When and where?
I see it at the time I copied it.

1072: Did you ever see it in any shape after the time you copied it until after 1852?
No sir, I did not see it from the time I copied it. I did not see it from that time until after I came out here.

1073: Do you swear to that positively?
Yes sir, I affirm to it.

1074: When did you come out here?
In 1847. I never saw it after the time I copied it until I came out here, and then it was printed.

1075: How long after you came out here that you saw it first?
I could not say. It was only when it was published.

1076: Well this book purports to have been published in 1876?
Yes sir, but it was published, – it was printed before that, – there was an edition before that.

1077: And that you sear to?
I think it was printed before that was but in 1876 was the first time it was published in the Doctrine and Covenants I think.

1078: The first edition that was ever published was in 1876, now was that the first time that it was printed that you saw it?
Yes sir, I think that was the first time that it was printed in that form that I saw it.

1079: Now how are you able to tell sir that this section one hundred and thirty two is the same thing as the one you copied in 1843, when you say that you never saw it from 1843, the date you copied it, until it was published here in Salt Lake City which was in 1876?
Well I know it.

1080: How do you know it?
Well it reads the same.

1081: How do you know it is the same?
Because it reads the same.

1082: You know it because it read the same?
Yes sir.

1083: Can you repeat a single paragraph from it from memory?
I don’t know that I can.

1084: Can you repeat four consecutive lines from any paragraph or part of that alleged revelation that you say you copied in 1843, for memory?
I don’t know as I can.

1085: Do you know that you cannot?
I don’t believe I can.

1086: Can you repeat from memory any two consecutive lines of any paragraph in it?
Well I can’t say that.

1087: Can you tell how many paragraphs were in it?
No sir, not unless I look and see.

1088: Do you know how many paragraphs were in the one you copied?
I don’t know sir.

1089: You don’t know anything about that?
No sir I don’t believe I do for I did not notice it to see. That was a long time ago and I can’t remember even if I knew then.

1090: Was there twenty?
I don’t know sir. I don’t know that there were any paragrapgs that were marked off as paragraphs, and I copied it just as fast as I could I remember that, and did not pay much attention to how many paragraphs there were, or whether there were any or not.

1091: Was it paragraphed at all, – the one you copied?
No sir it was not in verse.

1092: How was it paragraphed, if at all, – was it by lines?
Yes sir.

1093: Every line was numbered?
Yes sir, – every line was numbered did you say?

1094: Yes sir?
No sir.

1095: It was not numbered, – that is every line you say was not numbered?
No sir, they were not numbered.

1096: Now is it not a fact that every line was numbered on the paper on which the revelation was written?
No sir. There was no numbering of the lines on the paper that I know of, but it was written on paper that had lines on it.

1097: Can you remember a single solitary sentence in the one you say you copied, without the aid of this book to look at?
I don’t know.

1098: Well I want you to say whether you can or cannot?
I don’t know sir that I can.

1099: Well then, why do you say it is the same thing?
Because when I read it I see it is the same thing.

1100: That is the way you know it is the same?
Yes sir.

1101: And yet you say you cannot remember a single solitary sentence, paragraph or line in the one you copied?
No sir, I don’t know that I can remember it.

1102: Now don’t you know that you copied that along time after 1844 if you copied it at all?
No sir.

1103: Don’t you know that you never copied this at all?
No sir, I know I did copy it.

1104: When?
I copied it at the time I told you?

1105: When was that?
The time I stated.

1106: Can you repeat a single sentence in it without the aid of the book?
I don’t remember now sir.

1107: Do you mean to say that you cannot now remember whether you can do so or not, or do you mean to say that you cannot remember a single sentence in it?
I can’t say.

1108: Answer the question please, – can you remember a single, word, or sentence that was in that revelation you say you copied without the aid of the book?
I say that I don’t know that I can from memory.

1109: Well then, how can you identify it as being the same.
By reading it, sir. By reading it I see it is the same.

1110: Well now is this not the way you identify it, – is it not because of your teachings since you came here to the valley?
No sir that is not the way.

1111: Were you not taught that by Bishop Whitney and Brigham Young?
No sir.

1112: How do you know that Bishop Whitney ever brought this to Salt Lake City?
I don’t know sir only by what he said, and he said he did. That is what he told me.

1113: And that is the only reason you know or say this is the same as he revelation you copied, because somebody else told you so?
No sir, for by reading it I see it is the same. It is the same sentences as the one I wrote, and has the same ideas in it.

1114: Well just repeat a sentence that was in the one you wrote?
Give me the book and I will try.

1115: Can’t you do it without the book?
No sir.

1116: You cannot do it without the book?
No sir.

1117: You cannot repeat one single sentence or idea that was in the one you copied from memory?
No sir, I don’t know that I can.

1118: Did the original that – you copied say “sealing” or “polygamy”?
Sealing or polygamy?

1119: Yes sir?
In what way?

1120: Yes sir, which would did it use?
I don’t remember as it used either.

1121: You say that you don’t remember that it used either?
No sir I don’t remember that it did.

1122: What was it called?
It is called a celestial revelation on marriage I believe.

1123: Was that the title of it, – just give me the title again?
It was the “Celestial Order of Marriage”, – I think it was something like that. Something of that kind I think.

1124: Was that the title of it?
I don’t remember that that was the title of it, or that it had any title in particular.

1125: Was that the title of the one you copied?, – that is what I am getting at?
Yes sir that was the substane of the title.

1126: Well what was that?
The “Celestial order of Marriage”.

1127: Will you swear the word “sealing” was not in there?
Sealing?

1128: Yes sir?
Well I would not swear they were not.

1129: Well were they?
I presume they were. I presume it was.

1130: Was the word “polygamy”, in the one you copied?
I can’t tell you now.

1131: Well do you say it was or was not?
I cannot tell you, for I have not informed myself on these matters.

1132: Was the word “plurality” in the one you copied?
I think so.

1133: How many times was it in there?
I cannot tell you now.

1134: Was it “plurality of gods”, or “plurality of wives”.
Maybe it was both.

1135: Well was it one or both?
I cannot tell you sir.

1136: That is another of the things you cannot remember?
Yes sir.

1137: And yet you say you copied it?
Yes sir.

1138: If this says “plurality of gods”, and does not say “plurality of wives” is it right or wrong? If it says that could you tell whether it is right or wrong?
That is right.

1139: Which is right?
That what is in there.

1140: That which is in the book here is right?
Yes sir.

1141: Well if it says “plurality of gods”, and not “plurality of wives” is it the one you copied?
Well that is the one I copied.

1142: How do you know that?
I know it.

1143: Well you never saw it from 1843 until 1876 the time that it was published? That is over forty years, and I would like to know how you know it?
I have told you how I know it.

1144: Well tell me again how you know it?
I know it by the reading of it.

1145: You know it by the reading of it, and yet you cannot repeat a single solitary sentence or word or idea or paragraph that was in the one you copied, and yet you say you know it by reading it?
Yes sir.

1146: By reading the alleged revelation in this book you identify it as being the same one you copied away back over forty years before the time that it was published, and nearly sixty years from the present time?
It was not forty years and it is not sixty years either since I copied it. It isn’t fifty years either.

1147: Well it was a great many years ago, – and you can identify it as the same, and yet you cannot remember a single solitary sentence that was in the ale you say you copied?
No sir I can’t for my mind is not clear on that question, but I know it is the same.

1148: You could not tell how many paragraphs were in it either?
No sir, for that is some thing that I never noticed.

1149: It covers ten pages, or rather eleven pages of this book?
Yes sir.

1150: And you wrote it in an hour?
That is what I supposed?

1151: Did you not say at first that it did not take you more than half an hour?
I said so. I said that it took me some little time, – perhaps half an hour, – but I say now it took me as much as an hour. It took me as much as an hour anyway.

1152: And did you not in your cross examination refuse to swear that it covered more than one side of a piece of fools cap paper?
Well I can’t say, for I know that I wrote it on more than one piece of paper. I know that.

1153: Well was it on two sheets of paper?
Yes sir it was that much or more for certain.

1154: Well was it three for certain?
I don’t know how much it took, but I wrote it whatever it took.

1155: Well will you swear that it was three for certain?
I would not swear to-anything for certain as to what paper it too, to write it on.

1156: Would not that revelation if written out cover more than twenty pages of fools cap paper?
I don’t know that it would, – I don’t think it would.

1157: Well now if that revelation written out should cover more than twenty pages of fools cap paper, are you willing to swear that it could be written out in an hour, and that you did write it out in an hour?
I said that I could not tell how long it took me.

1158: Then you do not want to go on record as swearing that you could write these twenty pages of fools cap paper in an hour?
I do not know how much I did write or how long it took me, but I wrote it as well as I could, and as fast as I could, and in those days I could write pretty well.

1159: You were a good rapid writer?
Well I wrote pretty well.

1160: How many words could you write in a minute?
I don’t know.

1161: Could you write one hundred?
I could not say.

1162: Well do you say that you could not?
I think not, – I don’t think any one can.

1163: You were not what is called an expert writer?
No sir, not a first class writer, but I was pretty good. I was not a first class extra writer.

1164: Who asked you to come here and testify as a witness in this case?
Who asked me to come here and testify as a witness?

1165: Yes sir?
Mr Hall I think came after me.

1166: Did President Woodruff?
No sir.

1167: Did Joseph F. Smith?
No sir.

1168: Did you not talk with any of the officers of the church here about that?
About what?

1169: About your testimony here?
No sir.

1170: You have not conversed with any of them?
No sir, not with any of them.

1171: Have you not talked with any of them since the tenth of this month about it?
No sir.

1172: Since the First of this month?
No sir.

1173: You want to go on record as saying you have not at any time or place, talked with any of the officers of the church of which Wilford Woodruff is the President about this case?
No sir.

1174: You say you have not talked with any of them?
No sir.

1175: Or about being a witness here?
No Sir.

1176: What business are you in here?
I am over at the Temple gate,-in the office here.

1177: What are you doing here?
Attending to the office there.

1178: You are working under some one elder there are you?
I am working there for the church.

1179: Under President Woodruff?
No sir,-under the presiding Bishop.

1180: Did you get leave of absence of the presiding bishop to come here?
I came here myself, and left word there that I wanted to come here, or that I was wanted here. I left word there with the man that has charge of the block there, that I was wanted to come here, and here is where I would be. I told him that I would be absent and there is no one in my place.

1181: Then you say that the law of the church is that if a first wife refuses her consent to marriage of her husband to the second wife, and persists in her refusal,-the law of the church is that she will die in her flesh?
Whatever that book says it is.

1182: Well is that now what you say it was?
Whatever the book says it is it is.

1183: Well that is your answer,-Whatever it says in the book is right?
Yes sir.

1184: Was that the law of the church prior to the death of Joseph Smith?
Not that I know of.