1: Please state your name to the reporter?
My name is Bathsheba W. Smith.
2: Where do you live, Mrs. Smith?
I live in Salt Lake City, sir.
3: State to the reporter where you lived before moving to Salt Lake City?
I lived in Nauvoo.
4: What state was that in?
In the state of Illinois.
5: State about what time you moved there?
When we moved to Nauvoo?
6: Yes, state about what time it was when you moved there?
I think it was in ’40.
7: What time in the year?
I think it was in the spring of’40 that we moved to Nauvoo.
8: How long did you live there?
Until 1846.
9: State what church you were a member of, if any, while you were living at Nauvoo?
I never belonged to any church but the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I never heard it called by any other name that that.
10: Well is that the church that you belonged to?
Yes sir.
11: At the time that you were living at Nauvoo, Illinois?
Yes sir.
12: Who was the President of that church, -if you knew you may state who was the President of that church?
Joseph Smith, Junior, was the President of the church.
13: I will ask you to state to the reporter what you know, if anything, in regard to the principle of plural marriage, or what is sometimes called polygamy, being taught in the church there at Nauvoo, Illinois, when you were living there?
I heard Joseph once in speaking on the stand say or assert that the ancient order would be restored the same as it was in Abraham’s day, but I never heard him sit down and teach it in private or public but that one time.
14: Is that all you ever heard him say about that?
I heard him tell the sisters one time not to feel worried, -that all was right, -but he would not say what he was talking about, but I thought that was it.
15: I will ask you to state if there was, -if you knew whether there was any conversation had among the members of the church there at Nauvoo, Illinois, when you lived there, in regard to that principle, -plural marriage?
Well I heard it discussed a good many times by different ones and I remember Sister Emma speaking about it at one time about as plain
as any body.
16: When and where was that?
It was in her room, and I was receiving my anointing for endowments, and she said if we permitted it our husbands would be taking a determined stand against it, or something like that, – that we should be resolvte about it or something of that kind.
17: I will ask you to state who “Sister Emma” is or was?
She was Joseph Smithh, Junior’s wife.
18: What Joseph Smith was that?
He was our prophet.
19: What “ancient order” did you understand Joseph Smith to refer to at the time that he made the remark that you referred to in one of your answers?
It was what was practiced in Abraham’s day.
20: Well what was that?
It was having more wives than one. That was what I understood by it.
21: Will you state to the reporter if there was any one else that had the same understanding?
Yes sir, – we discussed it after the meeting was over, – that is, us young girls did, for I was a young girl then, and we talked a good deal about it, and some of us did not like it much.
22: About what year was that?
About the year 1840 I think.
23: I will ask you to state whether or not you ever received any endowments in Nauvoo, before the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
24: Can you state where?
Yes sir.
25: Where was it?
It was in company with my husband I received my endowments and my anointings in Sister Emma’s bed-room, and then we went into the lodge-room over Joseph’s store, and he gave us lectures there, – he and others did that.
26: What Sister Emma did you refer to this time?
The same one, – Joseph Smith, the prophet’s wife.
27: What subject, – upon what subject were these lectures?
They were on religious subjects, – I don’t now what else to tell you.
28: It was on religious subjects, you say?
Yes sir, the lectures were.
29: Did you receive any instructions at that time in regard to the endowments?
Yes sir.
30: You did?
Why we saw the ceremonies.
31: I will ask you to state if the endowments you received under the hands of Joseph Smith, were the same as were given in the temple at Nauvoo?
Yes sir, for I was there the first day, and continued to be there day after day.
32: What difference was there between the endowments as taught to you and practiced by Joseph Smith, and the endowments as practiced by the church here in Utah?
They are the same exactly. They are the same exactly.
33: I will ask you to state to the reporter if you are at liberty to tell the endowment ceremonies at the time they were given by Joseph Smith?
No sir.
34: You are not at liberty to do that?
No sir, we are not at liberty to tell them to any one.
35: Will you state to the reporter if you made any promise not to reveal the ceremonies of the endowments?
Of course we were not to reveal them any more than the Odd Fellows or the Masons are not to reveal their secrets. I suppose they agree to keep their – secrets and we agree to keep ours, and they were not to be revealed. It would not hurt anybody to tell it or it would not hurt anybody to keep it particularly I think, but we were not to tell it.
36: And that is the only reason why you are not at liberty to tell these things?
and immaterial, and is leading.
We don’t consider it anybody’s business at all, and I don’t know that anybody ever asked me any questions about it, and of course I would not tell them anything about it if they did.
37: Where were you born Mrs. Smith?
I was born in Shinnstown, Harrison County, West Virginia.
38: When were you born, – that is in what year?
In 1822.
39: In what month in 1822?
On May 3rd.
40: You lived afterwards in Jackson County, Missouri?
No sir.
41: Did you ever live in Missouri at any time?
Yes sir, I lived in Caldwell County – Missouri.
42: The you never lived in Jackson County, Missouri?
No sir.
43: You never lived at Independence, Missouri?
No sir.
44: Were you ever there?
At Independence?
45: Yes ma’am?
No sir.
46: Did you ever live at Far West, Missouri?
Yes sir.
47: When?
Well it was four miles out of Far West that I lived.
48: Four miles north of Far West?
No sir, I thin it was south of Far West.
49: When did you live there?
Well it was in ’39 I believe.
50: You came there in ’39?
Yes sir, and stayed there only a short time when we had to leave. We came there in 1839 and left in March after that.
51: Then you came to Caldwell County sometime in January 1839?
No sir, it was in October.
52: In October 1839 you came to Caldwell County?
Yes sir.
53: And when did you say you left there?
In the month of October, – I mean in the month of March after that, but we came there in October. Now let me see, I may be mistaken about that, – ’37 or ’38. It may have been in 1838 that we came there, -in October 1838, and we left in March 1839. I think that is the way of it.
54: Then you think you came there in October 1838 and left in march 1839?
Yes sir, that was the way it was.
55: What time in March did you leave there?
It was the 9th of March.
56: Who was in the company?
Let me see, I am not right about that either, for it was in February that we left there.
57: You left there on the 9th of February 1839 then?
Yes sir.
58: Well who was in the company?
I remember that it was in cold, snowy weather that we left there anyway, and it was in February I think.
59: Who was in the company that left?
Oh there was a good many, and I could not say who they all were.
60: Were you at the conference held in October 1838 at Far West?
No sir.
61: Was there one held there that you know anything of?
It was on the 23d of October that we got there, and they generally held conferences on the 6th I believe.
62: Do you know whether or not there was a conference?
Yes sir, I expect there was a conference.
63: But was there one that you recollect of after you got there?
No sir.
64: Was there one after you got there?
There was no conference
held there after we got there or before we left. There was no conference of the church held during the time that we were there.
65: Now did you not hear some rumors or whispering of the plural wife doctrine in 1838 in Far West, or in Caldwell County, when you were there?
No sir.
66: And you are positive of that?
I am positive of that for I know I never heard of it.
67: Now when was the first time you ever heard of that?
It was after we went to Nauvoo.
68: Well just give us the date of it as nearly as you can?
I guess it must have been in 1843.
69: In 1843 you first heard of the plural marriage system of marriage?
Yes sir, I think it must have been about that time.
70: And you never heard of it before that time?
No sir.
71: You did not?
No sir. I heard of being married for eternity before that time, but that had nothing to do with plurality of wives at all.
72: Married for eternity and not for time?
No sir.
73: did you know of anybody that was married for eternity before 1843?
Yes sir, I was myself.
74: Who married you?
I was sealed to my husband by President Brigham Young. After I had received my endowments I was sealed to my husband for eternity.
75: Did you have your endowments before that time?
Before I was sealed to my husband?
76: Yes madam?
Yes sir.
77: When, -was it in 1842?
I don’t remember whether it was in 1842 or 1843. President Woodruff told me the other day he had it on his record and he would find it for me, but he has been so busy he did not have time to do so, and I have been so busy, -well I do not recollect it, -that is I do not recollect the exact date that I had my endowments.
79: Has the church here a record of the endowments?
I think he has a journal of his own that shows it but I don’t know anything about the church records, for I understand they disappeared a good awhile ago, -that is a good many of the records did.
80: Well you were sealed to your own husband?
Yes sir.
81: And you are pretty certain that it was before 1843?
It seems to me now that it was in 1843, -but I am not positive as to that, but it seems to me now that that was the year, but I don’t know whether it was in ‘2 or ‘2, -it was either one of these years though. Let me see, -it must have been in 1843.
82: You think it was in 1843 that you received the endowments?
Yes sir.
83: Was it after the revelation of 1843 or before that?
I can’t say, fot I hadn’t heard about this before.
84: You had not heard about any revelation before?
No sir. I did not know anything about it, only for eternity.
85: You had heard of a revelation on the question of sealing for eternity before that time?
Ye sir.
86: Do you know where that revelation is?
No sir.
87: Did you ever see it?
Yes sir.
88: Where did you see it?
I saw it in the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and it is in that is it not.
89: Is it in there?
I think so.
83: Was it after the revelation of 1843 or before that?
90: Well I don’t think it is Mrs. Smith?
Well I thought it was in the book of Covenants, but if it is not I have seen it, – I have seen it in there too I think.
91: Well if it is in there you are at liberty to point it out?
Well perhaps it is not.
92: You are certain you have heard of one though?
Yes sir, and I have read it many times.
93: Well did you read it before you were sealed to your husband?
No sir.
94: You had heard of it though?
Yes sir. Don’t you know whether there is one in here or not?
95: Well Mrs. Smith I am not on the witness stand now, and so I don’t care about answering questions, but for your information I do not object to stating that it is not in there. Do you refer to the one on polygamy?
Yes sir. I think it is in there too.
96: is that the one you heard of in 1842 or 1843?
I did not hear anything about this then.
97: In 1842 did you hear anything about it?
I did not hear anything about it then I think.
98: Did you hear of the one on sealing?
Yes sir.
99: Sealing for eternity?
Yes sir, sealing for eternity.
100: Well that is the one I am asking you about? The one on sealing for eternity, and not this one on polygamy? Now you said in your examination in chief that Joseph Smith in 1840 taught the principle of sealing?
Yes sir, the principle of sealing did you say?
101: Yes ma’am?
No sir, that was the time I said he said the ancient order would be restored.
102: Speaking about sealing was he not?
Speaking about men having more wives than one I understood, – that was the general impression with reference to what he referred.
103: Well never mind what the general impression was, – the order of Abraham wasn’t it?
Yes sir, that was it.
104: Did he mention any other name?
I don’t remember for I did not pay much attention to it at the time.
105: Well if you did not pay very much attention to it at the time what made you think it was polygamy?
Well the way I considered polygamy was when a man had two wives, or more than one wife, he was in polygamy.
106: Well did Joseph Smith teach that a man could have two wives in 1840?
Well he was speaking about the ancient order that was to be restored.
107: Well did Abraham have more than one wife?
I suppose he did.
108: Well according to the record did he have more than one wife?
According to the bible he did.
109: Do you swear to that?
110: You swear that Abraham had more than one wife at the same time?
You had better read it and see what it says.
111: Well what do you say about it?
I say that he did.
112: Well what wives did he have?
He had Hagar and at the same time Sarai was his wife.
113: Was Hagar called a wife?
Well I don’t recollect what the bible says about it, but I suppose it does call her that.
114: Don’t you know she is not called a wife in the bible?
No sir.
115: Is she not called a bond woman in the bible?
Yes sir.
116: And by no other name, – is that not the fact that she is called a “bond woman” in the bible, and is not called by any other name?
I don’t know what she is called by but she was his wife, even if she was a bond woman.
117: Do you say you do not know whether or not she is called by the name of a bond woman in the bible, and by no other name?
I suppose she was his wife.
118: Does the bible say she was his wife?
Well she had a son.
119: Don’t the bible call her a bond woman all the time and did not the Lord tell Abram to put the bond woman away?
Yes sir.
120: That is what the bible says?
Yes sir, I believe it does.
121: Now don’t you know that the word wife is not used in the bible at all when reference is made to this woman, Hagar?
Well I presume it does, but I don’t know whether it does or not, but I presume it does. But there is no doubt but that she was his wife.
122: You say there is no doubt about that?
Yes sir, that is what I said.
123: Are you willing to swear now that Abraham was the husband of Hagar, – that she was his wife, according to the history of the event or transaction that is given in the bible?
I believe it state that Sarah gave her to him as a wife.
124: Are you just as confident of that as you are of anything else you have testified to?
Yes sir.
125: You are absolutely positive as to that?
Yes sir I am sure that Sarai gave Hagar to Abraham.
126: And you are sure the bible teaches that?
Yes sir.
127: That Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham as a wife?
Yes sir.
128: For his wife?
I suppose so.
129: You suppose so?
Yes sir.
130: Do you know whether or not the bible teaches that?
I don’t know.
131: if you don’t know why do you say it?
Because I believe it.
132: Have you read any place or history in the bible in which it is taught that she was the wife of Abraham, – that is that Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
Well it says that Sarah gave to Abraham he bond woman, and I would like to know what it means if it don’t mean that she gave her to him as a wife.
133: Does not the bible teach that she was a bond woman?
Well did not Sarah give her to him, and it don’t matter what she was before she gave her to him.
134: And did not the Lord tell Abraham to put the bond woman away?
Yes sir, I believe he did, – to please Sarah.
135: Did the Lord approve of Abraham’s transactions with the bond woman?
No sir, I suppose not, for he told him to put her away.
136: Did not Brigham Young teach you and all the people of this church that Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
I don’t know that anybody objected or found fault or thought it was not so.
137: Were you not taught that Hagar was the wife of Abraham by Brigham Young, and the other officers of this church here in this Valley?
I did not need to be taught it, for I could read it, and did read it in the bible for myself
138: Well did you read in the bible that Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
I have answered the question.
139: Will you be kind enough to answer it again?
I read it in the bible that she had a son.
140: Answer my question, – did you read it in the bible at any place that Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
Yes sir.
141: Where did you read that, – please point the place out where you read that?
Well that is what I un- derstood by it.
142: What is that?
That is the way I understood it by reading the bible.
143: Well were you not taught it that way by Brigham Young?
What is that?
144: Were you not taught it that way by Brigham Young, – that is were you not taught that Hagar was the wife of Abraham, – just answer the question, yes or no.
I don’t remember hearing him say anything about it.
145: Were you taught that by Wilford Woodruff?
No sir.
146: Or by John Taylor who was the President of the church here at one time?
Taught what?
147: That Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
I could not say that I heard it taught at any time at all. I can’t say as to that.
148: Were you taught it by Orson Pratt?
No sir, I don’t know that I did. I don’t believe that I did. I may have but if I did I have forgotten it, but I have read the account given of it in the bible and I understood it that way.
149: Did you read it in the bible that Hagar was the wife of Abraham?
Yes sir, that is the way I read it and understood it.
150: What time were you sealed to your husband in Nauvoo?
151: When were you sealed to your husband in Nauvoo?
What time did it occur?
152: Yes?
Well I think it was in 1843.
153: In 1843?
Yes sir.
154: Where was the ceremony performed?
In Nauvoo.
155: Whereabouts in Nauvoo?
In Brigham Young’s house.
156: In Brigham Young’s house you – were sealed to your husband?
Yes sir.
157: By whom were you sealed?
By Brigham Young.
158: Who was present?
I don’t remember just the number.
159: Was there half a dozen?
Yes sir.
160: Was there more than that?
Well I should say there was all of half a dozen. There was that many there at least I think.
161: What time in 1848 was it that you were sealed to your husband?
I haven’t got the date.
162: Was it in August or September or October?
I don’t remember what the date was.
163: Well was it in the first part of the year, or the last part of the year?
I think it was in the first part of the year. – the last part of the year I mean. I really am not sure what part of the year it was for I can’t remember.
164: Is that the time you were anointed in Emma’s bedroom?
No sir, it was before that.
165: What do you mean by that?
I mean that I was anointed before that time.
166: You were not sealed to your husband at the time that you were anointed in Emma’s bed-room?
No sir.
167: What was your relation to your husband before that time?
I was married to him for time but not for eternity.
168: And then in the latter part of 1848 you were sealed to him by Brigham Young for eternity?
Yes sir.
169: Were you married at the time of your anointings?
Yes sir?
170: How long had you been married at that time?
I can’t say, – not very long through.
171: Well about how long had you been married at the time of your anointings, – surely you can remember about how long it was?
Well it was two or three years, – somewhere along there.
172: Had you any children at that time?
Yes sir, I had one.
173: What was your husband’s name?
George A. Smith.
174: When did you receive your anointings?, – what time in the year was it that you received that?
Well that was what I was asking President Woodruff about, and he said he would find it for me, but he has not had the time to do so I guess, for he has not done it.
175: Was he present?
I don’t remember.
176: Well was it before 1848 that you received your anointing?
I think it was in 1843 sometime.
177: Now from whom did you receive your anointing?
Well I think it was from President Young the first time and in the temple.
178: Well I mean the first time, – the time that you were anointed in Emma’s bedroom, – who anointed you there at that time?
Well sister Mary Smith.
179: She anointed you?
Yes sir.
180: Who was she?
Brother Hyrum Smith’s wife.
181: What she did, – what did she do?
She anointed me.
182: Just anointed your head with oil or something?
183: Answer the question?
Well that is my business.
184: What did she do?
It is no matter what she did.
185: What was the ceremony?
I cannot tell you.
186: Do you know what it was?
I do.
187: Well what was it, – we insist upon an answer?
Well you can
insist upon it, but you won’t get it.
188: Do you decline to answer the question?
Well I will not answer that question.
189: What did she do at the time you were anointed in Emma’s bed-room?
Who? What did who do?
190: The party that anointed you?
She blessed me.
191: What did she say?
She said I was a good girl.
192: What else did she say?
Well it is no matter what it is she said. It has been so long ago that I would not undertake to say all that she said, even if I would tell it.
193: Did she pour oil upon your head?
I am not going to tell you all that she did. I am not going to tell you all about it.
194: Did she pour oil on your head?
I decline to answer.
195: Well, we insist upon an answer?
196: Mrs. Smith, will you state to the Examiner, whether you have taken an oath not to answer these question, – that question, – that ceremony with reference to the anointing?
Yes sir, I will answer it, – there was oil poured on my head.
197: Well we have no objections to your answering that question.
198: She poured oil on your head?
Yes sir.
199: What else did she do?
She blessed me.
200: What else did she do, if anything?
That was all.
201: That was all that was said and done, – she just poured oil on your head and blessed you?
Yes sir.
202: You were not undressed at the time?
I had my bonnet off.
203: That was all you had off, and the rest of your clothing was intact and properly upon you?
I was clothed sir.
204: Clothed in the dress that you wore when you went in where you were when you were anointed?
No I don’t think that I was, – not altogether.
205: No, not altogether?
No sir.
206: How much change was there?
I thought you would be asking me something else.
207: Yes, I am asking you something else, but recollect all the time that I am not asking you to disclose anything that occurred there that you took an obligation not to reveal?
208: If you are at liberty to answer these questions, or have not taken an obligation to answer them, – I mean not to answer them, why answer them, and if you have taken an obligation that my answering these question you would violate, why you need not answer them. I make this statement so that the witness may know that her legal rights are in the premises?
209: If this witness will state that she would be violating some obligation that she took not to reveal anything in connection with this matter, she can say so?
Well I don’t think I am under obligation to tell all that occurred there, for if I state that I had my anointing that is all that it is necessary for me to state.
210: Mrs. Smith, you on your direct examination said that the anointing there was the same as it was here?
Well it was. That is so.
211: Well now that is a conclusion of yours, and when you assert these things as positive facts, – that is assert that the anointings there were the same as they were here, that is a conclusion of yours, and it gives us the right to go into the matter of the endowments and the ceremonies connected therewith, and ask you questions regarding it, so that the court my determine whether they are the same or not?
Well I can only say they were the same as I have already stated.
212: Well then I will have to insist upon my question and repeat it to you. How much change was there in your clothing at the time you were anointed by Mary Smith, the wife of Hyrum Smith?
In what way?
213: As compared with your clothing when you went there?
Well we have different clothing put on, but it is not always the same or just alike.
214: Where was the Lodge room in Nauvoo?
It was over Joseph’s store, – in the Masonic Hall.
215: Was that the Masonic Lodge or Odd Fellow’s Lodge you were being initiated into there?
Neither. I was not initiated into either of them.
216: Well whose hall was it you were being initiated in – the Odd Fellows or Masonic?
It was the Masonic Hall.
217: It was the Masonic hall?
Yes sir.
218: Was it the lodge or organization of the Masons into which you were being initiated?
No sir, – it was not the lodge, – it was the room or hall that was used by them.
219: Was this anointing for the purpose of initiating you into a secret society?
The endowment do you mean?
220: Yes ma’am?
Yes sir, that is a secret.
221: A secret order?
Yes sir.
222: What order was it?
The order of endowments.
223: Who was the chief man in the room?
Joseph Smith the prophet.
224: Was he sitting or standing?
Why both.
225: Did he have his had on or off?
Off.
226: All of the time?
Yes sir, all of the time, – that is all of the time he was in the room.
227: Was there anybody else in the room?
Yes sir.
228: How many?
I can’t tell you.
229: Well about how many was there in the room?
Oh, a dozen or two.
230: All ladies?
No sir.
231: About what proportion of them were ladies?
About half of them were ladies.
232: Well what were the gentleman’s names that were in the room at that time?
Well there was my husband and Parley Pratt, and Or-
son Pratt and John Taylor.
233: Was that all?
No sir.
234: Well who else was there?
I don’t remember the names of all that were there. I remember the names I have given you, but I can’t remember the names of any more of the men that were there.
235: Were any of these names you have given officers of the secret order of endowments besides Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, they all had their endowments.
236: Were they acting as officers that evening?
Some of them were.
237: Well which of them were?
I think the two brother Pratts were, and that brother Taylor also was, but it was brother Joseph who gave the lectures.
238: Which way did the room face, that is which reference to the points of the compass, was it east and west or north and south?
I don’t remember.
239: Which side of the room was Joseph Smith on?
I don’t remember that either.
240: Were they, that is all the officers, were they sitting or standing?
Standing I think.
241: All of them were standing?
Yes sir, I think so.
242: Did they have tables or desks in front of them?
No sir.
243: Did they have chairs in front of them?
I don’t think they did. I don’t remember. I had a seat I remember, but I don’t recollect what they had in front of them.
244: You do not remember how that was?
No sir.
245: Was there a stand or something in each end of the room?
I don’t remember.
246: And one on each side of the room?
I don’t remember how that was, but I remember there was at one end of the room a stand.
247: Did Joseph Smith stand there?
No sir.
248: Who did stand there?
There was not any one on the stand that I remember of.
249: That was a stand or platform for speaking from and not a stand or small table?
Yes sir, it was a platform or speaking stand. I remember there was a stand there, because when the relief society was organized we were in that room and the sisters sat there on the stand. I remember that very well, and that is how I know it was there.
250: Was that organization the same as the order of the daughters of Rebecca?
No sir.
251: What order was it?
I can’t say, but I think I had that degree.
252: Was this endowment you took there different from the Order of Rebecca?
Oh yes sir.
253: How much difference was there?
They were nothing alike at all. It was not anything like it.
254: Is the Order of Rebecca a side degree or rather I should say a side order of Masonry, or is it in connection with the Odd Fellows?
I think it is of Masonry, for I think I had one or two degrees of it in the Lodge.
255: What lodge?
They belonged to the new lodge.
256: Who did?
The Masons.
257: What time?
I don’t know.
258: Was it after Joseph’s death?
Yes sir.
259: Don’t you know that the Order of Rebecca is strictly
and purely an order connected with Odd Fellowship? Counsel or the defendants objects to the question asked the witness on the ground and for the reason that it is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, and not proper cross examination.
Well it was not that. It seems to me that that was it, but if it has anything to do with Odd Fellows it was not that, but that is what it seemed to e to be, but ain’t sure of it though, for the one that I mean was connected with Masonry in some way.
260: Was it the Eastern Star that you are talking about?
The what?
261: The Eastern Star degree that you were talking about?
No sir. I can’t remember to save my life what degree it was. I think I remember something about the sign or token, but I have never thought much about it, or cared much about it any way, and so I can’t say exactly what it was.
262: How large was this bed-room that you referred to? A Sister’ Emma’s bed-room?
263: Yes ma’am?
Well it was a pretty good sized room,-it was about the size of this room. (about twenty feet square.)
264: Was she your sister?
Sister Emma?
265: Yes?
No sir.
266: Then what make you call her “Sister Emma”?
Well she was my sister in the church,-you know how that is very well. She was my sister in the church and she was a fine woman, and I loved her dearly.
267: Was she present at the time of this anointing?
Yes sir.
268: Did she do the anointing?
No sir.
269: did she help in the performance in any way?
No sir, but she was sitting there.
270: How many were in the bed-room at the time you were anointed?
There were seven of us I think.
271: Any other ladies besides yourself and the one that did the anointing and sister Emma?
Yes sir, there was two or three sister in there.
272: Was there a bath room or a bath in the bed-room?
No sir.
273: Was there one connected with the bed-room in which the anointing was done?
No sir, I don’t think there was.
274: Well I believe you stated that sister Hyrum Smith performed the ordinance of anointing?
Sister Mary Smith, who was brother Hyrum Smith’s wife was the one that did it. There was no bath room there I think, for in those days we did not have many bath rooms.
275: Now when you went into the hall where these endowments were given, was there curtains separating the ladies from the gentlemen?
No sir.
276: There was not?
No sir.
277: No curtain drawn at any time?
No sir, we did not have anything like that at all.
278: Did you take an oath there then?
I suppose I did.
279: Well did you?
I promised not to tell what the ceremonies were.
280: Did you take an oath there then not to disclose anything that occurred there at that time?
Yes sir.
281: Who administered the oath to you?
I don’t remember.
282: You don’t remember who it was administered the oath to you?
No sir.
283: Was it Sister Emma or Brother Hyrum?
I did not take any obligations or make any promise in that room.
284: You did not take any obligation or give any promise in that connection in that room?
No sir.
285: Then why do you decline to state what occurred in that room? If you did not take any obligation, why do you decline to state what occurred in there?
Well I think it is best not to do so, for afterwards we promised not to reveal our endowments, or tell what it was.
286: That promise was not a part of the endowment was it?
No sir, the promise was not.
287: I mean the performance that was gone through with in the bed-room was not a part of the endowment?
No sir. 288 (Written as 286)
287: That was just the preparation for the endowment was it not, – that which took place in the bed-room was just the preparation for the endowment was it not?
Yes sir.
289: Then if that was no part of the endowment why do you decline to answer questions as to what took place there in the bed-room?
Well I think they are silly questions you are asking me, and so I don’t feel like answering them.
290: That is the reason you refuse to answer them, – because you think the questions are silly?
Yes sir.
291: Are you to be the judge, – are you setting yourself up as the Judge as to whether of not these questions are silly? (No answer.) Did you wash before you were anointed?
Yes sir.
292: In the same room where you were anointed?
Well now is that not a silly question, – what on earth has that to do with this case I would like to know?
293: Well unfortunately for you it would not do for me to acquaint you with our object in asking these questions, and therefore as we conceive they are necessary we ask them, and expect you to answer them for you have said you took no obligation not to ell what occurred there in the bed-room. I want to know about it, that is all, for you said you did not take an obligation not to disclose that?
Well I said I did not there at the time, but I did afterwards.
294: Did you take an obligation afterwards not to disclose what was done when you were making preparations for your endowments in the bed-room?
Yes sir.
295: You took an oath not to divulge that?
Yes sir.
296: Who administered the oath?
I do not remember.
297: Did Joseph Smith administer it?
I do not remember.
298: What was the oath?
We were told not to reveal the endowments.
299: Well was that all that was done?
Well no sir, I don’t expect that was all.
300: Was not this all the oath that was taken there, – did not the priesthood just tell you not to say anything about it?
Yes sir.
301: That was the way it was?
Yes sir.
302: And as a matter of fact you did not take any oath at all?
As much of an oath as I have taken here, I did.
303: Did you hold up your right hand and be sworn there?
I promised not to tell it, and so I have here, – promised not to tell the truth.
304: Not to tell the truth?
I meant to say to tell the truth. I was sworn there not to tell it, and I have been sworn there to tell the truth.
305: And the whole truth?
Yes sir.
306: Well were you sworn there not to tell what you heard and saw?
Yes sir, not to reveal any of the secrets of the endowments.
307: Did you hold up your right hand and be sworn?
No sir, I do not know as I did. Did I hold up my right hand?
308: Yes madam, – did you hold up your right hand and take an oath not to reveal anything that occurred there during the time that the endowments were given to you?
Yes sir, I did.
309: You did?
Yes sir, and I don’t think I ought to tell anything about it, and I think I ought not to be asked any questions about it either.
310: Who administered the oath?
I don’t know. I don’t remember.
311: Was it Brigham or President Joseph Smith, or Heber C. Kimball?
I don’t remember about that. I don’t remember who it was.
312: Don’t you remember who it was, or is that one of the secrets you promised not to reveal?
I don’t think I ought to tell anything about it at all. I promised not to reveal it.
313: Did you take an oath not to reveal it?
Yes sir, and I held up my hand and promised solemnly that I would not reveal it, and I will not either.
314: Do you know of any law of the church permitting secret societies?
Well there never had been any secret society.
315: Was not this a secret society?
We were not to tell what happened.
316: Don’t you know the law of the church was against secret societies at that time?
Yes sir.
317: Well did you not go into that secret society or whatever it was in violation of the laws of the church?
No sir.
318: You did not?
No sir, I don’t think so at all.
319: You did not?
I don’t understand it that way.
320: The laws of the church is against secret societies and was at that time, wasn’t it?
I think there is something said like that somewhere.
321: Where is the law on that?
I think there is something said like that in one of the revelations.
322: Was there any law of the church that directed or permitted anointings of that kind, or any other kind?
I suppose there was.
323: Well was there?
There was a revelation to that effect.
324: A revelation on anointing?
Yes sir.
325: Please point it out?
It is the a revelation on endowments, and the anointing went with them.
326: A revelation on anointing in the endowment siciety is that what you say?
Yes sir.
327: Anointings outside of the temple?
Yes sir. Now it is just this way, – Joseph had commenced everything that ever was in this church. I don’t believe that there is one single principle that he did not commence, and started everything, and all that came afterwards was simply a carrying into effect that which he had started, and did not thave the time to carry into effect himself before he was taken away. I don’t believe though that there has been one single principle practiced since his day but what was practiced in his day, and I don’t believe there has been anything new added.
328: That is your belief?
Yes sir, that is what I believe. That is what I know I may say.
329: That there is no principle taught in the church now, and has not been since his death, that was not taught in his day?
Yes sir.
330: Did he teach the doctrine or principle of blood atonement in his day?
I can’t say for I don’t know anything about that.
331: Did you ever hear him teach the doctrine of blood atonement?
No sir.
332: You never heard him preach that?
No sir. I don’t think I ever did.
333: Well you have heard that preached have you not?
NO sir, I don’t think I have.
334: Well do you say you ever have or have not heard it preached?
I have never head it preached, but I have heard a great deal said about it. I have heard of it, but I don’t know that I ever head it preached.
335: Have you not heard it preached here from the pulpit in Salt Lake City?
No sir.
336: Did you know when Jedediah Grant preached it here?
No sir.
337: Do you know whether or not he did preach it here?
No sir.
338: Do you say he did not preach the doctrine of blood atonement here in Salt Lake City?
No sir.
339: Do you know whether or not George Smith preached it here?
No sir.
340: Do you know whether or not Brigham Young preached it here?
No sir.
341: You don’t know whether any of these whose names I have given you preached it in your hearing?
No sir, and I don’t know that I have heard it preached by any one at all.
342: Have you not heard or read the Journal of Discourses published here in Salt Lake City, containing the sermons or lectures, or utterances delivered here in Salt Lake City, and else where in this territory by persons high in authority in the church here in this inter-mountain country?
I think I have, but it was long ago.
343: And don’t you know that the Journal of Discourses has a number of difference sermons in it that preach and teach the doctrine of blood atonement?
No sir I don’t know it.
344: Do you say it was not taught by Brigham Young and all the apostles of this church here in Salt Lake City and in Utah Territory? All the apostles you have named?
No sir, and I don’t believe any of them taught it. They have been charged with teaching lots of things that I don’t believe they ever taught and that is one of them.
345: You don’t believe they did?
No sir, – no more than the bible teaches it when it says “who-so-ever sheds man’s blood by man shall his blood be shed.”
346: Well you are just as certain of that s you are of anything else you have testified to are you?
Of what?
347: That they did not peach or teach blood atonement?
Oh, I believe that is something that has been gotten up by malice, fot I don’t believe they taught it any more than the bible does at all.
348: well did they teach it at all, without reference to what the bible teaches?
No sir, I can’t tell you anything at all about it
for I never heard them preach any such a thing as that, and beyond that I cannot say.
349: You will not say that they did not teach it and preach it?
No sir, no more than I don’t believe they ever did any such a thing.
350: And you say that when you heard Joseph Smith preach from the stand in 1840, he preached that the ancient order would be restored, you say he preached polygamy, do you?
Well if that is what Abraham practiced he did.
351: Well is that what Joseph Smith said, – that it meant polygamy, – that the ancient order that he said would be restored, meant polygamy?
No sir, he did not say it in that way.
352: Did he say anything about it in any way?
No sir, he did not talk about polygamy. He did not say anything at all about polygamy.
353: They you never heard Joseph Smith teach polygamy did you?
No sir.
354: You never heard him say anything about it?
No sir.
355: Either publicly or privately?
No sir.
356: Did you ever see him sealed to anybody?
No sir.
357: And you lived there in Nauvoo from 1839 or ’40 up to the time that the church left there, or the dispersion?
Yes sir.
358: Now don’t you know that Emma Smith was his only wife there in Nauvoo?
I don’t even know that she was his wife but I have heard so.
359: Heard what?
That she was his wife.
360: You knew her?
Yes sir, I knew her and believe that she was his wife but I did not see them married?
361: Well she was held out there to the world as his wife, wasn’t she?
Yes sir.
362: She lived in the same house with him?
Yes sir.
363: And she was called by his name?
Yes sir.
364: She was called Sister Emma, the wife of the prophet.
Yes sir, I have no doubt in the world but that she was his wife, I am not disputing that at all, – I only say that I did not see the ceremony, but although I did not see them married I believe that she was his wife, and there is not a particle of doubt in my mind about that.
365: Was anybody else held out there as his wife publicly?
No sir, not that I know anything about.
366: Not while you were living there at Nauvoo?
No sir.
367: And down to the time of the death of the prophet?
No sir, not that I know anything of.
368: Were you at the funeral of Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith?
No sir.
369: Where were you?
I was in Nauvoo.
370: Well whereabouts in Nauvoo were you?
I was at home.
371: You were in Nauvoo at home?
Yes sir.
372: And you did not attend the funerals?
No sir. I did not go for I was not able to do so.
373: Do you know of any member of the church having more wives than one there at Nauvoo, during the lifetime of Joseph Smith?
No sir.
374: And you say you lived there all the time from 1840 up to the time that he died?
Yes sir.
375: And you never heard of any such a thing?
Yes sir, I have heard of these things, but I did not know of any such things of my own knowledge.
376: You have heard of it, but you don’t know it to be a fact from your own knowledge?
That is the way it is.
377: You never knew of any one that was held out as Joseph Smit’s wife, or Hyrum’s wife, other than sister Emma and sister Mary?
Yes sir, I did.
378: Or any of the other officers of the church?
Yes sir, I did. I had heard of it.
379: I mean other than Emma Smith and Hyrum’s wife whose name you mentioned a while ago, and the proper wives of the various officers of the church?
Yes sir, I did. I heard some little talk about it, but I never heard much talk about that before their death, but I heard something about it. I know that there were several that were supposed to be their wives.
380: You had heard that?
Yes sir.
381: But you did not know it to be a fact?
No sir, but I believed it to be true.
382: You belonged to the ladies relief society there in Nauvoo, did you not?
Yes sir.
383: And was in the most prominent circles of the ladies there?
I think so.
384: And did not sister Emma,- Joseph’s wife,- teach the ladies society polygamy?
I never heard her speak of it in a meeting.
385: Is it not a fact that you nvere heard her speak of it in the meetings of the ladies relief society, or in any other society of the ladies, nor in any other public place or private place whatever??
No sir, only in the room when we were getting our endownments that time.
386: In the room when you were getting your endowments?
Yes sir.
387: That is the only time?
Yes sir.
388: Was she cautioning you against anything of the kind?
Yes sir,- well what she said, was that our husbands were intending to take more wives if we did not object, abd if we did not wish it we were to be firm against it.
389: You were to be firm against it?
Yes sir, firm in our opposition to it. Now she certainly said that to me on the occasion without any doubt.
390: She said she was not going to premit it?
I don’t know what she said about it in that way,- she said as I have told you that our husbands would be taking more wives soon if we did not object, and if we did not wish them to do so we were to be firm against it.
391: Did you not say you would not permit it?
No sir.
392: Did you not tell her you would not permit it?
No sir, that was not it.
393: Well did you permit it?
She said if you don’t wish it,- she said that our husbands,- some of them,- were intending to take more wives, and if we did not put down our feet and be determined they would do it, , but I dont remember what else she did say, but I remember that she said that.
394: What time was that?
That was after we had our anointing,- It was that same day, but after we had our anointings in her room.
395: Did she tell you that in her room?
Yes sir.
396: About what year was that?
That was I think in 1843.
397: In the spring or fall of 1843?
It was in the winter I think. I don’t remember just what season of the year it was in, but I remember it was in the cold weather, but I don’t know whether it was
398: You cannot remember whether it was in the winter or late in the fall?
No sir.
399: Well it was not long before Joseph’s death was it?
No sir, for he was killed the next summer.
400: And this was in the late fall or winter before he died?
Yes sir.
401: And that was the time that sister Emma told you that some of your husbands, – that is some of the men there in Nauvoo, – were going to take more wives than one, and unless you put your feet down on it, and opposed it resolutely, they would do so?
Yes sir. She said that and a good deal more, for she talked a good deal on the subject, but it has been so very many years ago, – about fifty years it has been since that, or nearly fifty years, – that I can’t remember just what she did say altogether on that question, but she said more than I have stated. I remember that part of it very well.
402: Had you heard the talk then about John C. Bennett’s secret wife doctrine or system?
Yes sir.
403: You had heard that at that time?
Yes sir.
404: Did not the church authorities denounce that at that time?
Yes sir. I think so.
405: Don’t you know they did Mrs. Smith?
Yes sir.
406: They denounced him for that doctrine?
Yes sir.
407: And cut him off from the church?
Yes sir.
408: That is cut John C. Bennett off from the church?
Yes sir.
409: And preached against it?
Yes sir.
410: They preached against it, – that is the authorities of the church did, – publicly right there in the city at Nauvoo at the time, – Joseph Smith with the rest of them, – and particularly Joseph Smith and Brigham Young?
Yes sir, I know they denounced him.
411: What is that?
They denounced him.
412: And did they not denounce his secret wife system, – that is John C. Bennett’s secret wife system?
Yes sir.
413: And did they not say publicly that there was not any such a doctrine in the church?
I think not.
414: You think not?
No sir, – but I don’t know what they said though, – I don’t know all that they said, but I remember that they denounced Bennett for that.
415: And did they not publish their denunciation in the Times and Seasons?
I don’t remember.
416: Will you say they did not?
I don’t remember ever seeing it. It may be in there, but I don’t remember ever seeing it if it was.
417: You say you don’t remember ever seeing it?
I say I might have seen it, but if I did I don’t remember it.
418: Do you remember of its being published in the Times and Seasons and about thirty members of your church including Wilford Woodruff the present President of your church signing it?
I don’t remember now.
419: And a great many members of the Ladies Relief Society also signing a statement or affidavit which was published in the Times and Seasons also denouncing it and denying it in the strongest terms?
I don’t remember anything about that, but it may be so.
420: How does it come that you forget this, and recollect some other things so well?
Well simply I suppose because I was acquainted with the other things that
421: You don’t remember then the statement I have referred to?
No sir, for while it might have been published in the Times and Seasons
and I might not have read it although it was published there.
422: Now there was a great stir in Nauvoo about the secret wife system was there not?
I did not read a word about it, and I did not believe in it.
423: Did not read a word about what and do not believe in what?
In that secret wife business, – I did not believe in it and read nothing about it at all, for I did not want to know anything about it.
424: There was less commotion, – I mean there was a great deal of commotion about it was there not?
I believe so.
425: And in order to show that the church did not have anything to do with it, or the people generally, did not the officers of the church, or some one have a manifesto to the public, or an affidavit prepared, which was signed by the officers of the church, and the members of the ladies relief society, a great many of them including its officers, to the effect that there was no such a doctrine taught, or believed in or practiced by the church, either at that time or at any other time?
I don’t remember it. 426 (Written as 423)
425: And was not that punished in the official church organ at that time, the Times and Seasons?
I don’t remember it.
427: That was the church paper at that time, – the Times and Seasons?
Yes sir, but I did not take it at that time, and I don’t think that I read that that you have described.
428: Well do you say you did not read it?
I might have read it, but I don’t remember one word of it if I did, and I don’t think I did read it either.
429: Well let me read this to refresh your recollection I will read from page 930 of the Times and Seasons, – published October 1st 1842 as follows, – “We, the undersigned members of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and residents of the city of Nauvoo, persons of families, do hereby certify and declare that we know of no other rule or system of marriage than the one published from the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and we give this certificate to show that Dr. J.C. Bennett’s secret wife system is a creature of his own make, as we know of no such a society in this place, nor never did.” Now have you ever heard of that before?
I don’t know anything about that. I can’t say that I know anything about that, and I believe his words were false anyway, for he was a wicked man, and I was pretty sure of that from what I knew of him.
430: Who was a wicked man?
That is Mr. Bennett was a wicked man, and I believe his words were false, and it did not require that to make me think so either.
431: Don’t you know that there was a great stir there in Nauvoo at that time about John C. Bennett’s secret wife system?
Yes sir, I did at the time.
432: And the church published him and expelled him?
Yes sir.
433: And they preached against him from the stand?
Yes sir.
434: And against plural marriage?
No sir, there was not plural marriage about it.
435: Well the secret wife system?
Yes sir.
436: And secret marriage?
Yes sir. What is it they called – it, – was it not “spiritual wifery” or something like that?
437: Well they preached against the spiritual wife system did they not, – that is the officers and leaders of the church did?
Yes sir.
438: And the spiritual wife system was the system by which a man had two wives at the same time?
Yes, – no, no that was not the way I understood it.
439: Well what was the spiritual wife system?
The spiritual wife system was if a man had a wife living and a wife dead, if she was sealed to him that was his spiritual wife, – the dead one.
440: Was that the doctrine of John C. Bennett?
That was the way John C. Bennett talked it.
441: Well then John C. Bennett’s theory or doctrine did not allow a man to have more than one wife living at the same time?
I don’t know about that. I don’t think that he did.
442: Did he not preach it, and have more than one wife at the same time?
Well no, but he had better had.
443: Did he not have several women there in Nauvoo at the same time, and was not that the cause of the trouble there in which he figured?
Well some of my young friends I know, – –
444: And did they not turn his house over into the ditch because he had so many wives?
Well he did not have many wives, – I did not understand that he had many wives, –
445: Did he not have several women there that he had as wives?
I don’t know whether they were his wives or not. I don’t know anything about that.
446: Well didn’t he have several wives or women there that he cohabited with?
Well there was several young girls went there I know, one of whom I was well acquainted with.
447: Well that was the spiritual wife doctrine, and he called them mistresses?
No John C. Bennett did not pretend that he was present at anything like that. He did not pretend to say anything like that as I understood it. He was denouncing that in other people as I understand it.
448: Then this certificate that says that “John C. Bennett’s secret wife system is a creature of his own make” is false? Is that what you say now?
Yes sir.
449: Then he did have secret wives?
No sir.
450: He did not, and yet you say that certificate which says that his secret wife system is a creature of his own make is so?
Yes sir, for John C. Bennett never had any wife that I knew anything of, – he never had one wife that I knew anything of in Nauvoo.
451: Well I would like for you to state what was his secret wife doctrine that they saw fit to denounce?
Well he was trying to put it on some one else, – that some one else had secret wives I suppose.
452: Was he charging members of the church with it?
That must have been it I think.
453: And then the church said there was no such thing in the church? The officers of the church signed that certificate certifying to the fact that there was no such a thing in the church?
Yes sir.
454: No such a doctrine in the church?
No sir, no such a doctrine as he had.
455: No such a doctrine as he had?
No sir, and I don’t believe there was either.
456: Now I will read you this from the Ladies Relief Society of which you were a member?
All right.
457: It is from the same book and page as that which I last read to you, – namely on page 940, – “We, the undersigned members of the Ladies Relief Society, and married females, do certify and declare that we know of no system of marriage being practiced in the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, save the one contained in the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and we give this certificate to the public to show that J.C. Bennett’s “secret wife system” is a disclosure of his own make.” Now that is the certificate, and it is signed by Emma Smith, President; , – Elizabeth Ann Whitney, Counselor; , – Sarah M. Cleveland, Counselor; , Eliza R. Snow, Secretary; , and the following members, – Mary C. Miller, – Lois Cutler, – Thirza Cahoon, – Ann Hunter, – Jane Law, – Sophia R. Marks, – Polly Z. Johnson, – Abigail Works, – Catherine Pettey, – Sarah Higbee, – Phebe Woodruff, – Lenora Taylor, – Sarah Hillman, – Rosanna Marks, – and Angeline Robinson. Now what do you say to that?
Well sir, I believe that that shows that they simply denounced him and his doctrine, and I believe that is all that is to be understood by it, and all they meant.
458: Then this certificate signed by the Ladies Relief Society of which you were a member, was true then was it not? According to the best of your recollection and belief you may state whether or not it was true?
Yes sir, and my best recollection is that that John C. Bennett’s doctrine was all false.
459: And as such was denounced by the members of your society?
Yes sir, perhaps that was so, but as I told you before I did not remember this well enough to say positively how it was.
460: You heard the named that I have read here?
Yes sir.
461: Do you recognize them as being members of the Ladies Relief Society?
Yes sir, some f them I do, but I have no doubt but that they all did. I see that the members of our society denounced it, but I was not there at the time that that action was taken so I cannot say what was done, but I presume their action is correctly reported there.
462: Was it true at that time that there was no other rue with reference to marriage practiced other than that set forth in the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
No to my knowledge there was not.
463: That was the only method of marriage?
Yes sir.
464: Was that disclosed in the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
Yes sir that was it, and I was married by that myself.
465: Now in your examination in chief you said that you
heard Joseph Smith at one time say to the sisters, that all was well, and you understood what he meant by that?
Yes sir, I heard him say that the ancient order of marriage would be revived, and we all understood that he meant by that polygamy or plural wives. That is what we all understood he meant by that, and I think that was the only meaning that could be extracted from it.
466: Well now as a matter of fact did he say anything about polygamy?
Well he did not use the word “polygamy” but he said “some of your sisters are in trouble” and he went on to say “now don’t be alarmed all will be well in the end” or “all will be right in the end” or something like that.
467: Were the sisters worrying over polygamy?
I don’t know what was the matter, but I remember that he said that.
468: Well were you worrying over the question of polygamy?
No sir.
469: Do you know any of the rest who were?
No sir.
470: And so you just jumped to the conclusion that that was what he meant?
Yes sir. I did not at that time. I did afterwards when I thought over it.
471: And if any of them were worrying over it, Joseph Smith gave them to understand that it was all right that there was no such a thing in existence? Is that not the fact, that they worrying over that very thing and he gave them that assurance to set their minds at rest?
No sir, he did not say there was not any such a thing, but he told them it was all right.
472: Did he say that polygamy was all right?
No sir, he did not say any such a thing. I never in my life heard him mention the word polygamy.
473: You never heard him mention polygamy you say?
No sir, I never did.
474: Did you ever hear him mention sealing?
Yes sir.
475: Sealing for time and eternity?
Yes sir.
476: Was it for time or for eternity?
It was for both time and eternity, but I did not know at the time, – I did not know anything about anything but one wife. I know I was sealed myself.
477: Who were you sealed to?
Of course I was sealed to my husband and I was sealed to him for time and eternity. I knew that but I did not know anything more about it than that.
478: Well now was not the sealing that was practiced by the church under Joseph Smith a sealing of a man’s wife to her husband?
Yes sir.
479: That was what it was?
Yes sir.
480: He did not teach the sealing of somebody else’s wife to your husband?
No sir, he did not either.
481: He didn’t either?
No sir, that is what I said.
482: And you never saw him seal some one else’s wife to some other man, did you either?
No sir. 483 (Written as 485)
482: Was it about 1840 that you received your endowments in Emma’s bed-room?
I think it was in 1843.
484: Yes I believe you did say it was in the fall or winter of 1843?
Yes sir.
485: Well I believe that is all.
486: Now Mrs. Smith you stated in your examination in chief that you had conversations with several in regard to this question of plurality of wives, – this question of plural marriage, – I believe you sta-
ted before the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
487: Now state to the reporter if you can, some of the parties that you talked with about that question?
I think the main one was Sister Emma Smith. Of course we talked to each other about it a little bit but I did not pay much attention to it, for I was not concerned about it myself,- I hadn’t any trouble myself, but of course we talked to each other a little about it, but not much. It was a kind of a private thing that we did not care to talk much about, for we did like Paul directed, we went to our husbands if we wanted to know anything or wanted advice and direction,- when we wanted to know anything we went to our husbands instead of going to our neighbors when we wanted to know anything about principles we did not understand and if they did not know what to advise us they secured the information and gave it to us.
488: Now you stated in your cross examination that you did not know any one that was publicly known as the wives of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
489: Now I will ask you if you knew any one who was considered as his wife, but not publicly?
I can’t tell you that I did. I can’t say that I did at that time, but I got acquainted with them afterwards, and they told me that they were his wives. Different ones did, but I don’t remember one in his life time that I knew was his wife, or who told me that they were his wives.
490: Now you were asked the question if there was any doctrine taught in the church to the effect that a man could be sealed to some one else’s wife
Yes sir.
491: Now will you tell the reporter if you remember that there was any thing said in regard to a man being sealed to a woman, that was not somebody else’s wife?
I believe there were a good many women that were sealed to Joseph Smith in his life-time, but I never was present at the sealing of any one of them to him.
492: You cannot say whether there was or was not any such a principle tuaght?
When?
493: In the life-time of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, I believe it was taught, for I know that Sister Emma referred to that. I know that I heard of it before she referred to it, but I had not been worried about it myself, but I heard there was such a thing taught before she spoke of it, or mentioned it to me, but there was not one of them that ever come to to me and told me that she was Joseph’S wife until after that, until after he was dead I think.
494: They told you that after Joseph’s death?
Yes sir.
495: They told you that they were, or had been Joseph’s wives?
Yes sir.
496: Now will you state to the reporter if those parties who referred to the principle of plural marriage before the time that Emma Smith spoke to you about it, – state whether they were members of the church or not?
Yes sir.
496: Who were they?
They had spoken to me about it before the time that Emma spoke to me about it, and they were sisters in the church, but remember that at that time I had not heard any one say that they were wives of Joseph, but we heard that they sealed to Joseph before his death, and before we had our endowments. Now the time that Emma talked to us was that day I was taking my endowments.
497: You may state to the reporter whether or not you heard any mention of a revelation that had been given on that subject by Joseph Smith, in any of these conversations?
I expect I have heard of it, but if I have I don’t remember it. I can’t remember the day and date and all about it, but of course I believe there had been a revelation upon that subject. When Sister Emma talked with us upon the subject, I believe that at that time there had been a revelation on the subject.
498: Did Sister Emma say anything to you about a revelation?
I don’t remember what she said, but I remember that distinctly, – I distinctly remember about her saying that our husbands were intending to take other wives if we didn’t hinder it.
499: That is all I believe Cross examination by P.P. Kelley, –
500: Did she say anything about sealing or a revelation on that subject at that time?
I don’t remember, but I presume she did. She said a good deal more than I can state here for I don’t remember it, and it is probable that she said something on that.
501: Well do you remember that she did?
I don’t remember that she did.
502: Do you remember that she did not?
I don’t remember anything about what she said only what I have told you, but I do remember that she talked with us quite a little bit, – she talked quite a while to us, but what she said I cannot remember.
503: Now Mr. Hall got you to say that you had heard talk there amongst the women about a man being sealed to a woman?
Yes sir, I had heard of that.
504: About a man being sealed to different women?
About women being sealed to men.
505: Well it was about a woman being sealed to different me, – I mean a man being sealed to different women?
Well that was not what he meant.
506: Well that was that the question was, and you answered it “yes” or in the affirmative?
Well I answered it that way because I knew he did not ask it right, it was just as if he had asked me if women were sealed to women.
507: Then you want to go on record here as swearing that you heard it talked of at Nauvoo, that a man could be sealed to two different women?
Well I meant to say that two different women could be sealed to one man, but a man could not be sealed to two women, but two different women could be sealed to one man, – a man could have two different women sealed to him, but he cannot be sealed to them.
508: Do you say that was talked about there in the church at Nauvoo while you were there.
Yes sir.
509: Where was it talked about?
It was talked about among the sisters?
510: That was just gossiped about among the ladies, – is that what you mean to say?
About a man having more than one wife?
511: Yes, that was just the gossip that passed among yourself and the other ladies there, – is that not the fact, – that that was just the common gossip among the ladies there?
Yes sir, certainly, we talked about it.
512: Was it preached from the stand?
No sir, of course not, because it was a penitentiary act to do so.
513: Yes of course it was?
Yes sir.
514: You knew that?
I expect I did.
515: Now was it a penitentiary act to preach it?
Well I don’t know what it was to preach it, but it was to practice it.
516: You think it would not have been a penitentiary act to preach it, but it would have been to practice it there?
Yes sir, I think it would have been in Illinois, and I guess it would have been also in Massachusetts.
517: Do you think Joseph Smith would have gone into it if it had been a penitentiary act?
I believe he had to go into it.
518: Now do you believe he had to go into it, or did go into it?
Well as I said I never was present when he had a wife sealed to him, and so I can’t say as to that, but I have seen many a man and woman that was present when they were sealed to him.
519: How do you know they were present? Do you know it from what they said?
Yes sir, from what they said, for I was not there.
520: They told you they were present?
Yes sir.
521: And they told you that after he was dead?
yes sir.
522: You never heard it before he died?
Yes sir.
523: Heard what?
That he had women sealed to him, but I never had any of them tell me so before he died.
524: Did you ever hear a woman say before he died that she was the wife of Joseph Smith?
No sir, I don’t think they ever did before he died, but after he died they did.
525: Since he died there has been a great many women say they were his wives, or were sealed to him? Is that not the fact Mrs. Smith?
Yes sir.
526: They have been willing to pop up and show themselve
a great many of them?
Yes sir, some.
527: You can find thirty five or forty of them here in Salt Lake City, or in this territory?
Well not that many I don’t think. I guess not that many of them.
528: Well twenty five or thirty of them say?
No I don’t that many either.
529: Well this historian, Jenson, does he not give the number as twenty seven?
No I think not. That refers to President Young, does it not? I don’t know how many there was of Joseph’s wives here.
530: Were you not about Joseph Smith’s house in Nauvoo often?
I was.
531: Often?
Yes sir, quite frequently.
532: Did you see the women there, – ten or a dozen women living there with him?
I can’t say how many there was, but I saw women there that I thought were his wives.
533: That you thought were his wives?
Yes sir, I supposed they were.
534: Why did you suppose it?
Well I did not at the time, but I afterwards supposed they were his wives.
535: You supposed it afterwards?
Yes sir.
536: Who were the women?
Melissa Scott was one. I believe you have seen her and she has it down in her bible the day she was sealed to him.
537: What was she doing there?
She was working there for Sister Emma when I saw her.
538: Well what was she doing, – that is, what kind of work was she engaged in?
She was a sewing girl or woman or something of that kind.
539: Are you willing to go on record as saying that Joseph Smith married his sewing girls?
Married what?
540: I asked you if you were willing to go on record as saying that Joseph Smith married his servant girls?
Yes sir, I am for a servant girl is as good as any body, – if they are good they are just as good as anybody.
541: So the facts is then that Joseph Smith got girls to work for him and then married them?
No sir, I don’t think that was his business to see about the hired girls, for Emma was capable of seeing about them herself.
542: Well she got them to work for her, and then permitted her husband to marry them? Is that the way it was?
Yes sir.
543: And that you are willing to go on record as swearing to?
Yes sir, for I believe she did give some of them to him with her own hand.
544: Joseph Smith was a relative of your husband?
Yes sir.
545: What was their relationship?
They were first cousins.
546: And you visited there often?
At Joseph’s place?
547: Yes ma’am?
Yes sir.
548: You never suspected that he had any other wife but Emma until after the time of his death, and had no reason to suspect it?
Yes sir, I had reason.
549: Well did you suspect it?
Yes sir.
550: Well who was it you suspected of being his wife?
Louisa Beeman. She was the first one I suspected.
551: Did she go by the name of Smith?
No sir.
552: What name did she go by?
Louisa Beeman was her name, and that was the name she went by.
553: Did Melissa Scott go by the name of Smith?
No sir.
554: She went by the name of “Melissa Scott”?
Yes sir.
555: Where did Louisa Beeman stay
I believe she lived with her sister, – Noble.
556: Did she live with Joseph Smith in his house at any time?
No sir.
557: She never lived with Joseph Smith, or in his house as her residence?
I don’t believe she ever did.
558: Well what makes you suspect her of being the wife of Joseph Smith?
Well I heard it.
559: And that is what caused you to believe that she was a wife of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, and I knew her, and I believed it was so.
560: Is it not because she has stated to you since he died, that she was his wife?
Yes sir, – No sir, not that either, for there was none of them said they were his wives while he was living. They did not tell me that until after he was dead, but I suspected her before he died.
561: Is it not a fact that you believe that because of the fact that she has so stated it to you since he died?
No sir, not that, for I had a good many reasons to know that he had more than one wife. There can be no manner of doubt about that.
562: You had a good many reasons to know he had more than one wife you say?
Yes sir.
563: Well what were they?
Circumstances.
564: Did you ever see him out to church with any one except Emma as his wife?
Yes sir.
565: Take them home with him, and to and from church?
Yes sir, I have seen them hanging on his arm.
566: Who has you seen hanging on his arm?
Well, I have seen Mr. Law, if you want to know.
567: William Law’s wife?
Yes sir.
568: Well that is one?
Yes sir.
569: Well who else have you seen? Was he married to her?
To whom?
570: To William Law’s wife?
You can’t prove it by me for I was not present, but I believe it.
571: Did she not have a husband at that time?
Yes sir.
572: Well how could she be married to Joseph Smith if she had a husband living at that time?
Well I believe she was sealed to him for eternity.
573: Sealed to who for eternity?
To Joseph Smith.
574: Is that what you mean by “marrying” or “married”, – sealed to one for eternity?
Yes sir.
575: That is what you mean by being “his wife”?
Yes sir, but sometimes they are married for time and eternity, and sometimes only for time. Sometimes for time and sometimes for eternity.
576: And she was sealed to him for eternity?
I believe she was.
577: But you don’t mean to say that Joseph Smith had that man’s wife living with him as his wife?
No sir, I mean that she was sealed to him for eternity and I think that it was a good thing for her, for she will be much better of in eternity, – much better off in the next world than if she had stuck to Law.
578: Do you believe a woman can’t be saved unless she is sealed?
I believe every woman has to be sealed in order to be exalted.
579: In the hereafter?
Yes sir.
580: Is that the doctrine of the church out here in Salt Lake now?
Yes sir.
581: That is the doctrine of the church here in Salt Lake at the present time?
Yes sir.
582: And it is the doctrine of the church as taught here not in the church in Utah Territory under the administration of President Woodruff? The doctrine is that a woman cannot be exalted in the hereafter unless they are sealed. Counsel for the defendants objects to the question asked the witness on the ground and for the reason that the books which contain the doctrine of the church are themselves the best evidence of what the church teaches, and of its doctrine.
Yes sir, we believe that they cannot be exalted in the Celestial kingdom, – that is the man will be alone and the woman will be alone.
583: That is what the church teaches here?
Yes sir.
584: Now that is what you have been taught by the officers of the church here in Salt Lake City since you have been here in Utah Territory?
Yes sir, and I was taught that in Nauvoo also.
585: Do you swear solemnly that you were taught that in Nauvoo while you were there?
Yes sir.
586: Who taught it to you there?
Brother Joseph.
587: Did he teach it personally?
Yes sir.
588: When did he teach it to you?
Well I can’t remember just the day and date when he taught it to me, but he taught it or I would not have been sealed to my husband.
589: Well when did he do that?
After he gave us our endowments, and he taught us to have our prayers answered and so on.
590: Did Joseph Smith teach you that a man must have more than one wife?
To be exalted?
591: Yes madam?
No sir, I never heard of that.
592: But you were taught that a man must be sealed to his wife?
Yes sir, that his own wife must be sealed to him.
593: But you were never taught by Joseph Smith, that a man must have two wives sealed to him?
No sir.
594: He did not teach that, not did any one else teach that in Nauvoo prior to Joseph Smith’s death?
Yes sir, I believe they did, but I don’t know it for certain. I only think they did, for I don’t know anything positively about that.
595: Well now they teach here in Salt Lake City, – President Woodruff and President Young and President John Taylor, taught you and all the rest of the ladies, here in Salt Lake City that attended church that a man must be sealed?
No sir.
596: Well what was it?
That a woman must be sealed to a man, but not a man sealed to a woman.
597: That a man in order to be exalted in the kingdom celestial must have more than one wife?
Yes sir, they taught that a man could have more than one wife.
598: That is what they taught?
Yes sir.
599: And that was a means of exaltation?
Yes sir, and I believe that Joseph said that a man that had one wife had a jewel, and a man that had more than one wife had more jewels.
600: Who did you say said that?
Joseph Smith.
601: Did you hear that?
Did I hear him say that?
602: Yes madam?
No sir.
603: You are not willing to sear to that as a fact?
No sir, but I have heard that a good many times.
604: Now you say that is an expression of Joseph Smith’s?
Yes sir, I so understand it.
605: Now don’t you know that it is in a sermon of Brigham Young’s preached after Joseph Smith’s death?
Well I think Joseph said that.
606: But you are not willing to swear that he did say that?
No sir, I am not willing to swear that he said it, but I think that he said it for I think I have heard it state that he said it.
607: And that is the reason you believe it?
Well I believe everything he taught, and if he taught any thing I was just as certain it was right as I could be.
608: But you did not hear him say that a man that had a wife had a jewel, and the man that had more than one wife had many jewels?
No sir, but I believe he said it.
609: You believe he said it because some one told you he did?
Yes sir.
610: Do you believe everything that people tell you?
No sir.
611: But you believe that?
Yes sir, I believe that everything he said was just as right as it could be.
612: You don’t believe he could make a mistake or err in anything?
Well hardly anything.
613: You thought he was about right?
I thought he was just about as perfect as a man could be.
614: You thought he was infallibel?
No sir, I thought he was mortal just as we are, but I thought he was as nearly a perfect man as could be. I think he was inspired, and I think there was hardly any of the time that he was un-inspired.
615: You did not think it was hardly possible for him to sin?
No sir, I don’t put it that way. 616 (Question and answer are missing)
617: Well what way do you put it?
I think he might sin, – but it was hardly possible that he would sin, – he could commit sin if he wanted to so so, but I don’t think it was at all likely that he would do so. Of course I can’t say as to that, for he might have sinned.
618: Do you think that he was inspired at the time that he told you that he was not inspired?
Was not.
619: Don’t you remember his declaration to the effect that he was not inspired?
No sir.
620: Don’t you remember that he at one time declared that he was not inspired?
No sir.
621: And that he did not want the people of Nauvoo to follow him?
No sir, I don’t recollect that either, but I do not say that he was all the time inspired, but I think as a general thing he was. I know that I had the greatest faith in him and in everything that he taught, and if he taught anything I believed it was the truth or he would not teach it. That is what I believe, for I believe that everything he taught was right and righteous if it had been carried out right.
622: Well now he taught when he preached from the pulpit or platform, any where he preached, the doctrine of the church as laid down in the bible the book of Mormon and the book of Doctrine and
600: Who did you say said that?
Joseph Smith.
601: Did you hear that?
Did I hear him say that?
602: Yes madam?
No sir.
603: You are not willing to sear to that as a fact?
No sir, but I have heard that a good many times.
604: Now you say that is an expression of Joseph Smith’s?
Yes sir, I so understand it.
605: Now don’t you know that it is in a sermon of Brigham Young’s preached after Joseph Smith’s death?
Well I think Joseph said that.
606: But you are not willing to swear that he did say that?
No sir, I am not willing to swear that he said it, but I think that he said it for I think I have heard it stated that he said it.
607: And that is the reason you believe it?
Well I believe everything he taught, and if he taught any thing I was just as certain it was right as I could be.
608: But you did not hear him say that a man that had a wife had a jewel, and the man that had more than one wife had many jewels?
No sir, but I believe he said it.
609: You believe he said it because some one told you he did?
Yes sir.
610: Do you believe everything that people tell you?
No sir.
611: But you believe that?
Yes sir, I believe that everything he said was just as right as it could be.
612: You don’t believe he could make a mistake or err in anything?
Well hardly anything.
613: You thought he was about right?
I thought he was just about as perfect as a man could be.
614: You thought he was infallibel?
No sir, I thought he was mortal just as we are, but I think he was a nearly a perfect man as could be. I think he was inspired, and I think there was hardly any of the time that he was un-inspired.
615: You did not think it was hardly possible for him to sin?
No sir, I don’t put it that way. 616 (This number and question as missing)
617: Well what way do you put it?
I think he might sin, but it was hardly possible that he would sin, – he could commit sin if he wanted to do so, but I don’t think it was at all likely that he would do so. Of course I can’t say as to that, for he might have sinned.
618: Do you think that he was inspired at the time that he told you that he was not inspired?
Was not.
619: Don’t you remember his declaration to the effect that he was not inspired?
No sir.
620: Don’t you remember that he at one time declared that he was not inspired?
No sir.
621: And that he did not want the people of Nauvoo to follow him?
No sir. I don’t recollect that either, but I do not say that he was all the time inspired, but I think as a general thing he was. I know that I had the greatest faith in him and in everything that he taught, and if he taught anything I believe it was the truth or he would not teach it. That is what I believe, for I believe that everything he taught was right and righteous if it had been carried out right.
622: Well now he taught when he preached from the pulpit or platform, any where he preached, the doctrine of the church as laid down in the bible the book of Mormon and the book of Doctrine and
Covenants, is that not it?
What is the question?
623: I asked you if it is not a fact that when he preached from tha platform anywhere or from the pulpit or stand, -when he preached publicly and laid down the doctrines of the church, he taught the doctrine of the church as it is laid down in the bible, the book of Mormon, and the book of Doctrine and Covenants, did he not?
Yes sir.
624: And that was the doctrine of the church, as you understood it?
Yes sir.
625: And that was the only doctrine there was to the church was it not?
Yes sir, but when he gave us our endowments I thought that was another notch ahead, and when he authorized sealings for time and eternity that was another.
626: These were simply, according to your understanding, notches in the progressive action of the doctrine of the church?
Yes sir.
627: Had the church as a body directed that the endowments be given?
Yes sir.
628: When?
Before Joseph died.
629: I do not believe you understand the question, -I asked you if the church had directed or authorized that the endowments should be given?
Yes sir.
630: When did they authorize it?
Before Joseph died.
631: Where did they take that action?
It was done by authority of President Joseph Smith and the Twelve apostles and Hyrum.
632: When did they do it?
I believe it was in 1843.
633: At a meeting?
Yes sir. It was at a meeting.
634: And they submitted that question to the congregation and had it voted on?
Yes sir.
635: Who was it submitted to?
To the Twelve and a few others.
636: To the Twelve and a few others you say?
Yes sir.
637: That is what it was submitted to?
Yes sir, I think that was it.
638: Do not the rules of the church require that the doctrine of the church shall be submitted to the church as a body and be accepted by the church in that capacity before it can become a law binding upon the church?
Yes sir. I believe it does.
639: Well was that submitted to the church, or only to the Twelve?
Well to the church, -I think that was the intention, and I have heard him say that he had no right, -if he had a revelation he had no right to teach it or preach it until he had submitted it.
640: Until he had submitted it to the church?
Yes sir.
641: To the whole church?
Well not to the whole church but to the members of the church.
642: To what part of the church was it to be submitted?
To the Twelve apostles.
643: Well were not all the revelations that were submitted to the church, that were received through Joseph Smith, submitted to the whole church, and voted on by the general church?
No sir.
644: Do you swear positively they were not?
Well not by all the church.
645: Well were they not submitted to all the church that came to a general conference?
Yes sir. All that chose to come to the conference voted on it, and so it was with the revelation an celestial marriage, for I was told that it was voted on in that way.
646: But you were not present?
No sir.
647: You were simply told that it was voted on in that way?
Yes sir.
648: Where was it so voted on?
I don’t know. I suppose it was at Nauvoo though.
649: Were you told that?
I think so.
650: Well were you?
Yes sir.
651: Who told you that?
My husband I guess.
652: When did he tell you that?
Right then and there.
653: And you believed it?
Yes sir.
654: Well if that was submitted there and adopted by the church, what was the necessity of resubmitting it here in Salt Lake City in 1852?
Well I don’t know.
655: You don’t know anything about that?
No sir, unless it was for the reason that it was not publicly done, there.
656: Was not publicly done where?
In Nauvoo.
657: Don’t you know it was not submitted there at all?
Well I was not there of course when it was done, but I believe it was, for I have heard men testify that they were present at the high council when that was submitted and accepted. They believed it and I believed it too and I believe it yet.
658: Do you believe everything you hear?
No sir, there is lots of things I hear that I don’t believe, but you can’t help believing these things sometimes when it comes to you in that way, and that is one of the things that I hear that I can’t help but believe it.
659: Well suppose half the high council said it was not submitted, then what would you say about it?
I would say they did not speak the truth.
660: Well suppose they believed they were speaking the truth, then what would you say?
I would say they did not tell the truth.
661: You would say that irrespective of whether they were speaking the truth, or were not speaking the truth?
Well if they said that they would not be speaking the truth.
662: Why would you say that?
Well there was not half of them that did not approve of it, there was only one or two that made any objects to it, if I have been told correctly what occurred there.
663: Which ones were they that objected to it?
Well I forget which ones it was.
664: Well which ones said it was voted on?
Well there was different ones told me that?
665: Members of the high council told you that?
Yes sir.
666: Who were they?
I cannot tell you.
667: Name one of them?
I cannot tell you.
668: Do you not remember some of them that told you that?
I don’t remember who the high counselors were at that time, I can’t remember their names at all.
669: The Twelve Apostles were not the High Counselors or members of the High Council. Neither of them were, were they?
I don’t remember whether they were or not.
670: Name one of the members that told you that it was submitted to the High Council and voted on?
Well I think Bishop Samuel Wooley was one of them.
671: Was he a member of the High Council?
No sir, but I think he was present or knew some one who was present.
672: And he hold you that it was adopted by the High Council?
Yes sir.
673: And you believe that statement in the face of the statement that there were two or three voted against it?
I believe it was all right anyway, but I can’t tell you whether I heard that or not.
674: Did you not just say that you heard that it was adopted by the High Council with the exception of two or three that voted against it?
I said I heard that they was only two or three that did not agree with it, but I don’t know who told me that or where I heard it. I can’t say whether I heard it from them or not.
675: Well you heard there was two at least voted against it?
Yes sir, – one or two at any rate.
676: Did you not say that there was one who claimed that it was never submitted to the High Council at all, – one of the High Council who made that claim?
Well I don’t know that I said that, but I have heard that much.
677: You have heard that, – that there was one member of the High Council who made the claim or statement that it was never submitted to the High Council at all?
Yes sir, I have heard that.
678: Don’t you know that the rules of the church require that it must be passed by an unanimous vote of the High Council before it can become a church law?
No sir, I don’t know that it must be unanimous, – I think it has to have the consent of the majority of the members of the High Council.
679: Don’t you know that all the quorums must be unanimous, – that there can’t be nary a man in any of the quorums that can vote against it?
No sir, I don’t know that.
680: Do you say that is not the law of the church?
No sir.
681: Is that not the law of the church, and has it not been the law of the church since 1829?
Well I can’t say, I don’t know whether it is or not.
682: Do you say that you do not know that the law of the church is on the question of the acceptance of the church law?
I say that whatever the book says about it is correct. 683 (Written as 693)
682: And don’t you know that the High Council of the church was not the proper council to submit it to at all?
Well I don’t know that that was all that it was submitted to.
684: Well was it submitted to the quorum of seventy?
I can’t say, but I think that perhaps it was submitted to the quorum of Twelve.
685: Well was it submitted to the quorum of Twelve?
I believe it was.
686: How do you know, – or who told you that it was submitted at all?
I don’t know.
687: Did anybody tell you that?
Yes sir.
688: Well who was it told you that?
Somebody told me but I can’t remember who it was now.
689: Well was it submitted to the quorum of elders?
I don’t know because I did not meet with the elders and so I cannot say.
690: Well did you meet with the High Council?
No sir.
691: Did you ever meet with the Twelve?
Yes sir, I did at times.
692: Did you meet with them when this purported revelation on polygamy was submitted?
No sir.
693: Then how do you know it was submitted?
Well I was told that it was and I believe it was. I believed them when they said it had been submitted.
694: I refer to the submission of their revelation on polygamy?
Yes sir, I understand what you mean.
695: That is what you mean was submitted to the High Council?
Yes sir.
696: Is your testimony in this case based on hearsay in that way?
Yes sir, but what I know of my own knowledge I say I know of my own knowledge, and what some one else told me I say they told me. What I know I say I know, and what I have heard from some one else I give you as having heard it from some one else, but still I believe a great many things that great and good men tell me, – just as fully and freely as if I saw it with my own eyes. Now I have told you that I have never heard Joseph Smith say much about it himself, and yet I believe that he did what is said to have been done by him in that way.
697: Well Joseph was dead before this revelation was submitted to the High Council?
No sir.
698: Well when was it submitted to the High Council?
When he was alive.
699: The revelation on polygamy was submitted to the High Council before his death, – Is that what you say?
Yes sir.
700: Who told you any thing about it while Joseph Smith was alive?
I guess my husband did. I don’t recollect, but I guess it was my husband.
701: Well did anyone else say anything about it?
Yes sir, I have heard it talked of by different ones while he was alive.
702: Did your husband tell you anything about polygamy while Joseph Smith was alive?
Yes sir.
703: He did?
Yes sir, I believe he did.
704: You believe he did?
Yes sir.
705: Well did he?
I believe he did I say, – I know he told me about time and eternity and all that.
706: Did you not say a while ago that there wasn’t anybody said anything to you about polygamy until after Joseph Smiths’ death?
Well I am not sure that they did in the way of calling polygamy, for it was sealing for time and eternity then.
707: There is a difference between the revelation on sealing and the revelation on polygamy, is there not?
Yes sir.
708: They are two different papers, or revelations, entirely, are they not?
No sir, I think the same revelation tells it all, – contains it all.
709: Do you say the same revelation tells it all?
Well don’t it?
710: Well I am asking you the question if the revelation on sealing contains the revelation on polygamy?
It is for time and eternity, – that is the revelation on sealing.
711: The revelation on sealing a man’s wife to him is you say a different thing entirely from the revelation on polygamy?
No sir, I don’t say any such a thing. If you read the two, – if you read it altogether you will see that it is all there.
712: Well I have read it right together?
Well don’t it teach polygamy?
713: Well I am asking you now what you know about it?
Well sometimes I have got it and read it to the sisters, and that is what I
understood by it. I tried to make the sisters at first believe that it meant but one wife, but it is as much as a bargain for you to extract that meaning out of it, – it is a hard thing to make it mean that.
714: Well now let us understand each other, for this is what I am getting at Mrs. Smith, – when the question, – in 1842 or ‘3 there, there was a revelation on sealing, – on sealing a man’s wife to himself was there not?
Yes sir.
715: And that was the practice was it not?
Yes sir.
716: You were not sealed to somebody’ else’s man were you?
No sir.
717: You were sealed to your own husband?
Yes sir.
718: You were taught that you were to be sealed to your husband?
Yes sir.
719: You were not taught that you could be sealed to Brigham Young or some one other than your own husband?
No sir, I was not taught that, for I would not have swapped him off for any man I ever saw.
720: And the revelation on polygamy teaches that you could be sealed to other men?
Yes sir.
721: That is that you could, for instance, be sealed to Heber C. Kimball or George Q. Cannon or to the other Cannon or to any one else?
Yes sir.
722: Well what do you call that?
I suppose that is polygamy.
723: Well not don’t you know thare was two distinct and separate revelations on these two different subjects?
I believe this that Joseph Smith had more than one or two wives. I do believe that sir.
724: Well that is not an answer to my question, – my question is if there were not two entirely different and distinct revelations?
I don’t think they were, – I think they were all in the one, – I have tried to make myself believe that that revelation did not mean polygamy, but I can’t do it, and I can’t see how any other meaning can be got out of it.
725: Now did you over read this revelation on polygamy when you were living in Nauvoo?
No sir.
726: You never read it there?
No sir.
727: Did you ever see it when you were there?
No sir.
728: You never saw it there in print?
No sir.
729: Nor in any other form?
No sir.
730: You never saw it in print or writing there?
No sir, I never saw it in any shape until after I came here.
731: You husband was a counselor to Brigham Young?
Yes sir, he was here.
732: Now don’t you know that this revelation on polygamy was submitted to the church here in 1852, – I mean to the church here in Utah Territory, – was submitted to the church at a conference held in the tabernacle in this city in 1852?
Yes sir, it was publicly submitted.
733: With the declaration of Brigham Young himself, that nobody knew it was in existence but himself?
Oh, no, I don’t think that statement was made.
734: That he kept it under lock and key and nobody knew of its existence but himself, – nobody knew that it was in existence but himself?
Well that might be so and it might not be so.
735: Well did not President Brigham Young say that publicly on the stand in the Tabernacle, and is it not given publicity in the Journal of Discourses, as having been preached by Brigham Young?
I cannot say.
736: Well do you say it is not?
I suppose it is. If you say it is in there I do not dispute your word, for I don’t know that it is not in there.
737: Do you say you have never seen it and read it in the Journal of Discourses?
I say I have no recollection of it if I have.
738: if it is in the Journal of Discourses it is correctly reported is it not?
I cannot say. I presume it is though. I have heard it discusses about Sister Emma burning, that is burning the original, but they had a copy of it.
739: Did not Brigham Young say on the occasion of the presentation of that alleged revelation to the church here in the tabernacle in Salt Lake City in 1852, Emma, Joseph Smith’s wife had burned the original, but that he had had a copy of it and kept it under lock and key, and nobody knew it was in existence but himself?
Well no, I don’t recollect of his saying that, but still I believe they did have a copy of it for it was read around there in Nauvoo.
740: Was that before Joseph Smith’s death?
I think so, and afterwards too.
741: Did you read it alos?
No sir, but I heard it was in existence.
742: Now as a matter of fact what is the truth as to these parties telling you about it that copy that was alleged to be in existence before or after the death of Joseph Smith?
Well I can’t say positively as to that, but I rather think it was since.
743: And is it not a fact that they told you about it since you came here to Salt Lake?
No sir, it was before I came here. It was while we were in Nauvoo.
744: Well was it not after Joseph Smith’s death?
I don’t know sir, that I hear it before his death, – I rather think it has been since he died.
745: After you heard there was such a revelation, did you not enquire after it?
No sir.
746: You did not concern yourself about it?
No sir, for I thought they had it all right.
747: What had it all right did you think?
The proper officers of the church.
748: Well did you not try to find it?
No sir.
749: Why not?
Because it was no concern of mine at all.
750: Your husband was one of the chief officers of the church?
Yes sir. And he knew where it was I expect.
751: Did you ever ask him anything about it?
Yes sir we have talked about it.
752: Did he say there was such a thing in existence?
Yes sir. 753 (This question is missing)
754: When?
Well he said it was in existence when we were in Nauvoo, but as I have already stated, I did not see it.
755: He said there was a revelation on that subject?
Yes sir.
756: Your husband told you that?
Yes sir.
757: When did he first tell you that?
At Nauvoo.
758: Well was it before or after Joseph Smith’s death?
It was before his death.
759: He told you that then, before Joseph Smith died?
Certainly he knew of it before Joseph’s death.
760: Then he told you of the existence of this revelation before the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, that is what I said. Well now I would like to qualify that answer for it is possible that he did not tell me of it before Joseph died, it is possible that he did not tell me of it until afterwards, it seems to me now that he did not, but I am not sure of that either. I can’t say as to that positively.
761: Well after you came here to Salt Lake city, your husband was counselor to Brigham Young?
Yes sir.
762: And you had a good place in the tabernacle here to sit, where you could hear everything that was said and see everything that was going on in the church?
Yes sir. I had to be pretty well posted in Mormonism to be able to get along in the position I was in of course.
763: Well were you present when this revelation was presented for adoption by the church?
I think I was there.
764: You heard what was said?
I think I was there.
765: Well you heard what was said?
I presume I did.
766: Well you know whether or not you heard what was said?
I presume I did. I was there I think and I presume I heard what was said.
767: There was three or four or five men preached sermons there that time before it was finally presented to the church for adoption?
I believe so.
768: Don’t you know that Orson Pratt preached in the forenoon of that day, and referred to the fact that in the afternoon a revelation would be presented to the church?
Yes sir, I think so. I believe I remember that, and I believe I was there when it was presented.
769: And there was a vote taken on it?
Yes sir.
770: And you raise your hand on it when it was voted on?
Yes sir, I think I did. I think I was there, – there isn’t much doubt about that, and I know one thing that I was just as positive that that revelation was true, and I was just as sure of it as of any thing that could possibly happen, – there wasn’t a particle of doubt in my mind at the time as to the truth of the revelation.
771: Well we don’t care about that?
Well I care about it, for it was and is a matter of conscience with me.
772: Well that is immaterial, for it is not a question of the truth or falsity of the revelation that men cannot take two or more wives now, – it is because of the veto that “Uncle Sam” through the minions of his law has put upon it?
Yes sir, and that is a disgrace to this great county the way that they have acted, –
773: What is a disgrace, – the way the church out here has acted or the way the officers of the civil law of the country has acted?
Well it don’t matter, it is all right I suppose.
774: Has the practice of a man having as many wives as he wanted out here ceased because the church has abandoned the practice?
Yes sir.
775: Or is it because the church here has voted to abolish it?
Yes sir.
776: The church has voted to abolish it?
Yes sir.
777: Could anybody go into the practice of polygamy before the church decided to abolish it?
Yes sir, I suppose so.
778: Could they go into the practice of polygamy before the church directed it or authorized it?
No sir.
779: They would not do it until it was directed by the church, then?
No sir.
780: If they did do such a thing they were violators of the law were they not?
Yes sir.
781: If they did that, they were not only violators of the law of the church, but of the state in which they lived at that time?
Yes sir. That is so. Now sir, I will tell you another thing, – you may say everything you please against that principle, and you may deny as much as you please that he ever preached it, but I believe that Joseph Smith did preach it, and not only preached it but secretly practiced it. Yes sir, I believe that he both preached it and that he practiced it too.
782: Now I will ask you what your business has been in the territory since you have been here?
In what way.
783: Well say in connection with the church, – what your business has been in connection with the church? What position have you held?
Well I have been in so many things it is hard to say. I have been working at the endowment house for sixteen or seventeen years, and I have been associated with the relief society of which I am president now for some times, and I ought to be at their meeting right now, and would be if you were not detaining me, and I have been Counselor for this stake, – that is Sister Home, – that is in the relief society, and I have been in various other things, – I might say too numerous to mention and not be very far out of the way. I have had a good many important offices since I have been here.
784: Then you ought to be able to know something about what I am going to ask you?
Yes sir, I probably might, and I might not.
785: You said you were president to some one, – I mean counselor to some one, – who was that?
Yes sir, I am counselor to some one, – who was that?
Yes sir, I am Counselor to Sister Zina Young, who is President of all the relief societies over the world some three hundred or four hundred in number.
786: Holding these multifarious offices, if there is any thing in connection with the work of the church you ought to be the one to know it?
Yes sir, I will probably know as much about it as anybody. I remember that when I had my patriarchial blessing from the prophet’s father in Missouri, I remember that when he blessed me he said that I would not in my understanding come a whit behind anybody. I do now want that to go down, for that is something that I said in friendly badinage with this gentleman here. (Mr. P.P. Kelley.)
787: Now you have been in the endowment house you say for about sixteen years, and during that time you have trained yourself and other ladies?
Yes sir, we have been trained in everything that is good, and nothing that is bad.
788: And you understand all about the endowments, – about endowment matters?
Well I understand a good deal about it. Not all, – but a good deal.
789: Well now I will ask you if you don’t know, in taking the endowments, how the ladies are dressed?
Yes sir.
790: And whether or not they are not dressed differently from what they were when you took your endowments in Nauvoo?
Yes sir, they are dressed differently but that don’t make any difference in the ceremonies or in the blessings, for they are the same.
791: Well they are dressed differently you say?
No sir, you are mistaken. I know what you are talking about, but you are mistaken for they are dressed exactly the same, because they keep the same doctrine.
792: Well how could they dress differently if they were the same?
What is that, – that is something I don’t understand?
793: How were they dressed differently if they were the same?
I know what you are thinking about. You are talking now about when I had my anointing.
794: Well are they dressed differently now from what they were when you had your anointing?
Yes sir.
795: Well why did you not state that before?
Well I could have done so, but I did not think it was material.
796: Then they take their anointings differently now?
No sir, they do not.
797: Well how do they take them now?
They take them just exactly the same now as they did then, – there is no change at all, – they are precisely the same and they dress exactly the same.
798: Well now I want to get this thing definitely settled, – do you say that the anointings now are the same as they were in the days of Joseph Smith, and that the dress worn by women is the same in taking their endowments?
Yes sir, they are exactly the same. The pattern was given to Joseph and he gave it to the church, and when he saw it he said it would do very well, – said he “they will do for your burial clothes.”
799: They are dressed just the same when they take their endowments?
Yes sir, and after they get pretty much through with their endowments they take other clothes then, – they do not wear the same clothes all through.
800: Don’t they have a veil between the ladies and the gentlemen?
No sir.
801: A veil or curtain?
No sir.
802: They do not?
No sir.
803: Well what do they have?
Well now this is the way, – if we were taking our endowments here, we would go from this room into that one say,
804: Don’t they seperate when they take their endowments?
They do when they wash and anoint of course. That s all the seperation there is.
805: Don’t they come together in seperate rooms, and don’t they see each other at first?
Yes sir. When they are ro be washed and anointed they are seperated.
806: That is the way it is done here?
Yes sir.
807: Well did they do the same thing in Nauvoo?
Yes sir.
808: They did it just exactly that same way in Nauvoo?
Yes sir.
809: Without any variation?
Yes sir.
810: Was there two rooms there at Nauvoo at the time you had your endowments?
No sir, there was not, and that was the reason we had to use Sister Emma’s bed-room, because there was not but two rooms that could be used, and the men had one of them, and so as the other was Sister Emma’s bedroom we had to go to that.
811: Was there not two rooms in the lodge room?
Yes sir, there was the lodge room and a room just off it.
812: Well now in taking the endowments, what position were you in here, – when they take the obligation, what position are they in with reference to their being sitting or standing?
Standing.
813: They take the obligation standing?
I guess so.
814: You guess so?
Yes sir.
815: Do they have their hands clasped, -each man’s hand clasped with his wife?
No sir.
816: They do not?
No sir.
817: Is there a partition between the gentlemen and the ladies?
When they are taking their anointings there is.
818: When they take their obligations there is?
No sir.
819: Are not the women and the men separated until they play Adam and Eve?
I refuse to answer the question, -it is something that has nothing on earth to do with this case, and I can’t see what you mean by asking the question. What do you keep on in that strain for?
820: Well just because I want to know?
You need ask me no more questions for I will not answer them, and you have already found out more than you can comprehend.
821: Are they not separated until the time comes when they are prepared to play Adam and Even in the garden
Now you are at it again, –
822: Well never mind what I am after again, but just answer the question?
Yes sir, I told you they were separated until after the anointing.
823: Did anybody play Adam and Even when you took your anointing in Nauvoo?
Well it don’t make any difference about that, -it don’t make a particle of difference about that.
824: Well did they?
It don’t make any difference about what the ceremonies were.
825: Well I insist upon the answer?
Well I insist that I am not going to tell you, for you have no right to know about this, and I have no right to tell you anything about it, and so I will not tell you. I never saw anyone playing Adam and Eve any place, -I will say that much.
826: In Nauvoo did you not?
No sir, not here or any other place.
827: And did you not represent Even when you went through the endowments?
No sir.
828: Who did you represent?
I represented myself. Now you have asked me enough questions about this endowment, and so just stop please, for everybody is tired of it I know.
829: Were you baptized after you came here to Salt Lake?
Yes sir.
830: What for?
Yes sir, I was baptized after I came here.
831: Well what were you baptized for?
For the remission of my sins.
832: For the remission of your sins?
Yes sir, so I could start anew again.
833: You were baptized when you first joined the church?
Yes sir.
834: When was that?
That was in 1837.
835: Who baptized you?
Elder Gladden Bishop.
836: Who baptized you in Salt Lake, – do you recollect?
Yes sir, I remember who it was.
837: Well who was it?
My husband.
838: George A. Smith baptized you?
Yes sir.
839: He baptized you here in Salt Lake?
Yes sir, here in this territory.
840: Have you been baptized more than once?
Out here in this territory do you mean?
841: Yes ma’am?
Yes sir, I was baptized again after that. We had a reformation out thee and we were all baptized again, but I believe I do not remember who it was baptized me that time.
842: Have you not been baptized into the order of Enoch?
No sir, there is no such an order as that that I ever heard of.
843: You have been baptized two times since you have been here in Salt Lake City for the remission of your sins?
Yes sir, I was baptized for my health last summer also.
844: Had you broken your first covenant that you made when you were baptized in 1837, and was that the reason of your being baptized again when you came out here to this Valley?
No sir.
845: You had not?
No sir.
846: Then why did you be baptized when you came out here? Why were you baptized the second time?
Well you know people are apt to commit a great many little follies and sins when they are on a long journey like we took, and go through the perils and privation that we went through, and while I do not think that I committed any sins in particular, still I felt like all the rest did about, that there would be no particular harm in our being re-baptized for the remission of any sin or error that we had fallen into, – we just felt that we had better be re-baptized and that it would not hurt us if we were. 847 (Written as 837)
846: And that was the reason of your baptism when you arrived here?
Yes sir.
848: The bible teaches that if you commit any sins they have an advocate with the father?
Yes sir.
849: Then what was the occasion or necessity of your being baptized again?
Well if they have not lived their religion, – if a person has not lived his religion they ought to be baptized again not-with-standing that.
850: Do you recognize that by your first baptism you were baptized into Christ?
Yes sir.
851: You recognize that you were baptized into Christ by your first baptism you say?
Yes sir.
852: And by coming out here you got out of Christ and had broken your covenants?
No sir.
853: Then why were you baptized the second time if you had not broken your covenants, and got out of Christ?
No sir, we did not consider that we had broken our covenants, but we thought it was best for everybody to be baptized anew, and start afresh again as it were.
854: Then you were baptized into another covenant?
No sir, it was the same covenant.
855: Did not the revelation on polygamy teach it as another covenant, and is not that the reason you were baptized the second time?
No sir.
856: Will you swear that it does not teach it as a new covenant?
What kind of a covenant?
857: Why a covenant like all other covenants, a new and everlasting covenant?
A new and everlasting covenant?
858: Yes, and different from the one you were baptized in before?
No sir, I don’t know that it was.
859: Well it was given after you had been baptized the first time?
Certainly.
860: Then it must have been a different one, was it not?
No sir, for I think the first covenant comprises it all.
861: You think the first covenant comprises it all?
Yes sir.
862: There was no revelation on polygamy when you were baptized the first time in 1837?
No sir.
863: So you did not have the new covenants to be baptized into at that time did you?
I think it comprehends it all.
864: You think your first baptism comprehends it all?
Yes sir.
865: Then why were you baptized here the second time, and the third time and the fourth time out here?
Well as I said before we thought we would start anew.
866: You were rebaptized when John Taylor became the President of the church here?
No sir. It was long before that time I was baptized for I came here in 1849.
867: You were baptized right away after you got here?
Yes sir.
868: And you were baptized again after that?
Yes sir.
869: That was the time of the reformation?
Yes sir.
870: The time of the reformation was under the Presidency of Presidency John Taylor?
Yes sir. No sir, I was mistaken in that, it was not under his Presidency.
871: Well whose Presidency was it under?
President Brigham Young.
872: Was it at the time of the reformation that Brigham Young issued the proclamation for all the wives, or that all the wives in the territory were free to leave their husbands?
No sir, that was not a revelation or proclamation.
873: Well did he not preach that from the pulpit?
No sir.
874: Did he make a statement to that effect that all the wives who wanted to leave their husbands could do so?
No sir, but I know what you are after. I remember what you mean, yes he did too. I remember it now, and I remember that it made some of the sisters pretty cross too, for they did not like it a bit, but then it did not amount to anything for there was nothing came of it.
875: I will ask you if all the sisters that came from this territory from Nauvoo, as far as you know, have been instructed that they must be rebaptized?
Yes sir, and I believe that is the practice yet.
876: Do you know whether Brigham Young and all the Apostles were rebaptized?
Yes sir.
877: And you husband?
Yes sir.
878: They were all rebaptized?
Yes sir.
879: And all the officers in the church were rebaptized?
Yes sir, I think so.
880: Into this new and everlasting covenant?
No sir, it was the same ceremony exactly that was before. The same ceremony that we were baptized into first.
881: Was it into the same covenant?
I don’t know that we could be baptized back into something that we had never got out of, for we had not broken our covenants but we felt that there would be no harm done if we were baptized again, and so we were, but it was,
882: Was what?
Was to a large extent optional with us.
883: What was optional?
Whether we should be baptized or not, – that is there was nothing obligatory about it, but it was recommended, but it was not compulsory.
884: now you say that this re-baptism was the same ceremony, – what do you mean by that?
The first baptism, – it was the same as the first ceremony of our baptism.
885: Now I will read to you paragraphs three and four of section one hundred and thirty two of exhibit “A” on page three hundred and sixty four, and ask you to pay particular attention to it. – It is as follows, – “And verily I say unto you that the conditions of this law are these – – All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred) are of no efficacy, virtue or force, in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end, have an end when men are dead. Now that is the eighth section of the paragraph, – the eighth paragraph of the section I mean, and I will now read to you the third and fourth paragraphs of the same section, – “Therefore prepare they heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same; for behold I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant, and he permitted to enter into my glory.” Do you recognize that s a part of the revelation of polygamy?
Yes sir, that is a part of the revelation on marrying for time and eternity.
886: Now are you willing to say that this is the new covenant, – are you willing to say now that this revelation teaches a new covenant?
No sir.
887: Is it not a new covenant?
No sir, it is the same thing. It is the same covenant which we took when we went down into the water of baptism.
888: After you got to Salt Lake?
No sir, it was the first time.
889: The third paragraph which I have read says “therefore – prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same; for behold I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant, and if ye abide not in that covenant then are ye damned, for no one can reject this covenant and permitted to enter into my glory.” This was received several years after you were baptized in 1837 was it not?
Yes sir, of course it was.
890: Then the instructions were to be given after that “for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same”?
Well what about that?
891: Now was it not because of this revelation that you were baptized the second time out here?
No sir, but I had to be sealed to my husband for time and eternity, or else death would separate us.
892: Death would separate you?
Yes sir, and that is what it means
and nothing more in my opinion. 893 (Mistakenly listed as 895)
892: You believe and your church here teaches, that id you were not sealed to your husband for time and eternity, that you would be lost?
Please repeat that question, for I don’t believe that I quite comprehend it.
894: I asked you if you did not believe, and your church here did not teach, that if you were not sealed to your husband for time and eternity, that you would be lost?
No sir. No sir, we would not be lost, but we believe and our church teaches that a man cannot be exalted unless he has a wife, and a woman cannot be exalted unless she has a husband, – in other words they have to be married before they can be exalted.
895: Well I will read the sixth paragraph?
Read it all – –
896: Now I will read the sixth paragraph, as follows, – “And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fullness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fullness thereof, must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.” You have read that I suppose?
Yes sir, well what do you want to know about it?
897: Now do you understand that is teaching that this revelation is the new and everlasting covenant?
Yes sir.
898: That is what you understand it to be?
Yes sir, in that sense I do.
899: And you understand by the ninth paragraph which I have just read to you that after a man, – that if a woman refuses to abide by the law and be sealed, she will be damned?
I understand that she will not be exalted with her husband. I understand that.
900: Well according to the revelation she will be damned won’t she? Unless she receives it and is sealed to her husband she will be damned?
Well I don’t know that that is exactly what it says.
901: Well read the sixth paragraph and see what it says?
I heard you read it, and I don’t know that it is necessary for me to read it. I can’t read it anyway for I haven’t my glasses here, – I know that I understand the law to be, to be sealed for time and eternity.
902: Well I will read it to you again, – “And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fullness of my glory, and he that receiveth a fullness thee of must and shall abide the law of he shall be damned”?
He must have his wife sealed to him.
903: Or he shall be damned, – is not that what he says, – that “he must abide the law or he shall be damned.” Is that not what he says?
Yes sir, and that means that his wife must be sealed to him.
904: He will be damned if he does not receive the law?
Well that is a hard way of putting it.
905: Well that is the way it is there?
Yes sir.
906: Well I will read now a little further?
That is right, – you will probably find polygamy in it a little further on.
907: “And verily I say unto you that the conditions of this law are these, – all covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associates or expectations, that are not made, and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy by revelation and commandment, through the medium of mine anointed whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this
power, and the keys of this priesthood are conferred) are of no efficacy, virtue or force, in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contrscts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.” What does that mean?
Well now that is strange, – can’t you see through that easy enough.
908: Well now I don’t know that I do , but I think I do. Under this revelation would not your covenants that you received in your baptism in 1837 be void unless you were re-baptized, – would not your original covenants have been void unless you had been re-baptized?
No sir, I don’t think so, – it says there is but one man on earth at a time who has the power, – who holds the keys of that priesthood, and that man was Joseph at that time, and it means that at that time there was but one man on the earth who had the power to give a man more than one wife.
909: It was Joseph Smith at that time?
Yes sir.
910: And he had the power to give a man more than one wife?
Yes sir, – through the power of revelation he did. When it was revealed to him he had the power of promulgating the decree of the Lord, but of course he did not have any power only what he received from God.
911: And after him it was Brigham Young who had the power?
Yes sir.
942: After Joseph Smith died it was in Brigham Young, – the power was?
Yes sir, and now it is in President Woodruff.
913: How do you know that?
That there tells it plain enough.
914: Does this say that the power that Joseph Smith held was conferred upon Brigham Young?
Yes sir.
915: It does?
Yes sir.
916: Where does it say that?
Well it don’t say so in so many words, but in effect it does.
917: Did Brigham Young seal you to your husband?
Yes sir.
918: In Joseph’s day?
Yes sir.
919: He sealed you to your husband while the prophet Joseph Smith was still living?
Yes sir.
920: Why did he do that?
Because he had the power and authority to do so? If I had been a second wife Joseph would have had to have given me to him. Joseph would have to have done it, or have given him authority before he could have done it.
921: Don’t the revelation teach that no one except Joseph held the power to seal?
Not more than one wife without power to do it from Joseph.
922: Did they have that power under this revelation?
To seal a man’s wife to him?
923: Yes madam?
Yes sir, but they did not have power to seal more than one wife to one man unless they had special authority to do so.
924: Then Brigham Young did not seal you under this revelation, – Brigham Young did not seal you to your husband by virtue of this revelation?
Yes sir, and he had authority to do so under that, for you see I was not a second wife.
925: But this doe snot say anything about a second wife or a first wife or anything of the kind?
Well there was but one man on earth at a time you see that could do anything about this revelation unless he could delegate his power to another. This revelation had nothing to do with the old order, – it applied to the new order, and the law that regulated a man and his one or first wife was the old law and under the Brigham had a right to seal me to my
husband, but under the new law as given in that revelation he could not seal a man’s second or third wife to him without authority from Joseph to do so.
926: Well your sealing to your husband was not by virtue of this revelation, but by virtue of the other revelation whereby it was direct to seal a woman to her own husband?
Well of of course my husband had the liberty of take me, but then, – don’t you see that you have gotten into polygamy now, – you are getting things mixed up, and we don’t understand each other apparently.
927: This does not say a word about polygamy, – this revelation does not say a word about polygamy so far as I have read?
Well if you will read it through you will see.
928: Now could Brigham Young during the life-time of Joseph Smith, have performed the ordinance of sealing you to your husband under this revelation, when the revelation itself says there is not but one person on earth authorized to do so, and that is Joseph?
Well of course Joseph gave his consent, – of course he did.
929: Could Joseph Smith seal by proxy?
Yes sir.
930: Oh he could?
Of course he could.
931: And could Brigham Young seal by proxy?
Yes sir, all of them could.
932: Could Wilford Woodruff seal by proxy?
Yes sir, but he don’t do it.
933: Do you mean to say that a prophet was greater than the law, and could do as he pleased?
Well I mean to say just what that does there in the book.
934: Well this says that there is no man on earth could seal but Joseph Smith?
I know that, but if you will take the time to hunt it all out, you will find out just what it means.
935: Were you not, as a matter of fact, sealed to your husband after Joseph Smith’s death, by Brigham Young?
No sir.
936: You swear positively you was not?
I was not.
937: And did you not go through the endowment house after Joseph Smith’s death?
Through the temple I did but I was not sealed there.
938: Did you not pass through the endowment in the temple?
No sir. Yes sir, I meant to say.
939: And take your obligations there in the temple?
Yes sir, I did.
940: Then you were sealed by Brigham Young after Joseph Smith’s death?
There was no Brigham Young about it at all.
941: That ceremony was not conducted by Brigham Young?
No sir.
942: What was it by?
Orson Hyde.
943: Well that was after Joseph Smith’s death?
Yes sir, but I was sealed first by Brigham Young before Joseph’s death. I was first sealed when Joseph was living.
944: Were you sealed under this revelation by Orson Hyde?
Yes sir, – under the covenants in this revelation.
945: And that was after Joseph Smith’s death?
Yes sir.
946: Now don’t you know there is no other revelation on sealing?
Well I don’t know about that.
947: That was not a plural wife revelation, and were you not sealed under that by Orson Hyde?
Well is this not the same thing?
948: I think not? I think the first one you were sealed under was a revelation that permitted a man’s wife to be sealed unto himself only?
Well there wasn’t any “only” about it at all.
949: Well it did not permit any other sealing than the
sealing of a man’s wife to her husband, that was all the kind of sealing it permitted, is it not?
Well it was the same thing.
950: Well then you were not sealed properly?
Yes sir I was. I was sealed as proper as anybody could be.
951: Were you married properly also?
Yes sir, I was properly married by Don Carlos Smith, Joseph’s brother, he was Joseph Smith’s youngest brother.
952: Well when was it you were married?
It was in 1841.
953: What ceremony was used?
The right one.
954: Well what one was it?
The one of, the one in the book of Doctrine and Covenants.
955: It was the one in the Doctrine and Covenants?
Yes sir.
956: Now you say you were married in 1841?
Yes sir.
957: Where were you married?
In Nauvoo.
958: Who was present when you was married?
My mother and brother and all the family.
959: Was there not a great many there?
No sir, there was not a great many there. We were just there with our own family and a few others, and when we were married we went off to meeting together, and my husband preached.
960: And you were dressed as a bride at the church that day?
Yes sir, I was, and Joseph was there and congratulated me on getting such a good husband.
961: Did you ever see any of these secret wives, dressed as brides in church or any where else, there in Nauvoo?
No sir, it was only a man and his wife that would be dressed that way so far as I remember.
962: Well I asked you if you ever saw any of these secret wives dressed as brides there at meeting?
Do you mean there in Nauvoo?
963: Yes sir?
No sir, I said I did not.
964: I mean in Joseph’s time?
No sir.
965: The ceremony that was repeated to you when you was married to your husband, George A. Smith, was the ceremony that was published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants at that time, was it not?
Yes sir.
966: Now I will ask you if when you were taking your endowments in the lodge room, whether or not there was anybody representing Jehovah, and anybody representing Adam, and if there was anybody representing Satan during any part of the ceremony?
Well now sir, that is my business.
967: Well answer the question please?
Well that is my business.
968: Do you decline to answer the question?
There is no use in your asking it or in my answering it, for I am not going to tell you everything that happened there.
969: Well do you decline to answer the question?
I do.
970: Don’t you know that there were parties that represented all these personages there?
I will not tell you.
971: Don’t you know that there was nobody there that represented any of these personages?
I know there was lots of people there that did not represent them, and lots of people that were not there that did not represent them.
972: Well now don’t you know that nobody represented either of these personages, when you were taking these endowments at Nauvoo, prior to Joseph Smith’s death? Don’t you know that right well?
I have seen it in the paper.
973: Well don’t you know that when you were taking your endowments at Nauvoo, that there
was nobody there that represented or purported to represent any of these personages? I refer to the time when the endowments were given over Joseph’s store there in Nauvoo, in the lodge room, and before the time of Joseph Smith’s death?
I don’t see what that has to do with this case,
974: And at the time that you were anointed in the bedroom,- in Emma Smith’s bed-room?
No sir.
975: There was not anybody that represendted Adam and Eve, nor was there anybody that represented Jehovah in any part of that ceremony?
That is a question that I don’t want to answer.
976: Well do you say there was?
Was what?
Do you say there was any one present at the time of your anointing in Emma’s bed-room or in the lodge room over Joesph’s store there in Nauvoo, at the time of the giving of the endowments during the life time of Joseph Smith, who,- any person at either of these places at the time specified, who represented Adam and Eve or Satan and Jehovah?
I have not said that there was.
978: You have not said there was?
No sir.
979: Have you said there was not?
I decline to answer the question.
980: Don’t you know there was not any one?
I don’t remember all about it.
981: Well don’t you know there was not?
You have asked me plenty.
982: Do you refuse to answer the question?
Yes sir I do.
983: Well I insist upon an answer?
Well you will not get it.
984: Well I insist upon an answer, and I want to tell you now that if you answer it I will not ask you any more on this line?
Are you sure of that?
985: Yes I am sure of it?
Well what is it?
986: I asked you if at the time you received your anointings in Emm’s bedroom and the time of the giving of the endowments in the lodge room over Joseph Smoth’s store in Nauvoo, during the life time of Joseph Smith, if there was any one present during any of these ceremonies, who represented Adam and Eve and Satan and Jehovah? Now don’t you know at the time you were taking your endowments and anointings in Emma’s bed room, during the life of Joseph Smith, and afterward when you went up into the lodge room,- don’t you know that there was not anybody that represented Jehovah during any part of that ceremony, or that represented Adam and Eve, or that represented Satan during any part of that ceremony?
Nor any one of them,- is that your question?
987: Yes ma’am?
I don’t want to answer that question.
988: Now I do not ask you to tell what they did represent,- I am only asking you if you do not know that they did not represent these personages? Any of all of them?
I agreed not to reveal what transpired there.
989: You understand that you are not called on to violate any promise or oath you made?
I can’t say this ain’t so or that ain’t so, when I promised not to tell anything about it at all, and if I answer these questions I would be violating my agreement. (The foregoing question No. 989 was asked the witness in the way of instruction by Mr. Cabell.)
990: Well you did not take an obligation not to tell what did not occur, did you?
No sir.
991: Well no that is what I am asking for,- something that did not occur?
No sir.
992: Well I say that is something that I asked you for,-what I ask you for was something that did not occur?
Well I can’t tell you, and you con interpret that answer in any way you please. I am not going to answer any such a question as it did or did not occur. It seems to me that the question is too foolish to call for an answer.
993: Well are not these four characters represented here during the ceremony of taking the endowments?
I think I have told you several times I would not answer any such a question, so what makes you repeat. I will not answer any of these questions at all.
994: Are they not and were they not represented during the ceremony of the taking of the endowments here?
I will not answer that question,-if I did you might ask me a dozen more.
995: Well do you decline to answer it?
I don’t wish to answer it.
996: Do you decline to answer it for the reason that it might tend to incriminate you?
Yes sir.
997: You do?
Yes sir,-and because I do not think I am at liberty to answer it.
998: Did you notice Mr. Hall a moment ago,-I mean the gentleman there who conducted your direct examination, shaking his head at you when I was asking you questions?
It was only when I asked him a question.
999: Well did he not shake his head signifying to you not to answer a question that I asked you?
well I asked him or was about to ask him if it was right that I should answer it, and I don’t think he meant anything wrong by what he did.
1000: He shook his head at you?
Yes sir.
1001: Andy you did not refuse to answer until he told you not to?
He did not tell me not to answer it.
1002: Well you did not refuse to answer the question until he indicated to you that you were not to answer it?
Yes sir, but I told you before that that I did not want to answer it.
1003: Well I want to ask you one more question? Mr. Hall,-“I object to each and every question that Has been asked the witness on the ground that it is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, and not re-cross examination.”
1004: Now you have been a member of the church, and the wife of a prominent officer of the church ever since the death of Joseph Smith, and during that time have held many important offices in the church yourself have you not?
Yes sir.
1005: During all that period you have occupied that position,-that is you have been a member of this church, and the wife of one of its prominent officers and have held important offices in it yourself?
Yes sir.
1006: Now I will ask you to state to the reporter, if you can, why it was, or way it is, that the church of which Wilford Woodruff is not the president, and of which Brigham Young was formerly the president, published the revelation on polygamy, the same being sec-
tion one hundred and thirty two of exhibit “A” and incorporated that into the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and took out the book of doctrine and covenants published before that time section one hundred and one, the same being the section on marriage. Can you tell why that was done?
Why they took that out?
1007: Yes madam, – can you tell why they went to work and took that out?
What you want to know is why they took that out, and put the other in its place?
1008: Yes, why they took the revelation, or rather the section on marriage out and put this polygamous revelation in in its place?
You will have to ask some one else that question.
1009: Do you know why it was done?
No sir. I don’t know why it was done. I don’t know why they did it.
1010: Now I will ask you one more question, – since the “manifesto” was published, – I mean the manifesto renouncing polygamy was published by President Woodruff, has the church here re-adopted section one hundred and one of exhibit “E” as being the section on marriage?
1011: What do you say to that?
I don’t know anything about it.
1012: Has the church adopted this as the section on marriage in the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
I do not know.
1013: Have they ever done so to your knowledge?
No sir.
1014: Then the law of marriage is just the same now in this church here in Utah, as it was before the publication or issue of the manifesto of President Woodruf is concerned, – it is just the same as it was before the issue of that manifesto, so far as any public action of the church is concerned?
Ask that again? 1015 (Part of question written in pencil in margin)
1014: I asked you if to your knowledge that section one hundred and one as it is in exhibit “E” had been put in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the church here, since the issue of the manifest by President Woodruff and you said that to your knowledge it had not; and now I ask you if it is not a fact that the law of the church here in Utah is the same as it was before the issuance of that manifesto by President Woodruff so far as any action taken by the church as a body is concerned?
1016: So that the law of the church here in Utah is just the same as it was before that manifesto is concerned, – so far as any formal action of the church is concerned?
Well all that I know about it now is that there is not any such a thing as second wives at all now.
1017: Have they adopted any new revelation on that question of marriage? Has the church adopted any new revelations on the question of marriage that supersede, or displace that revelation, – that polygamous revelation?
The ceremony of marriage is the same with the first wife, or with the second one too for that matter. There is no reason why it should be changed at all.
1018: Have they adopted, – that is has the church here adopted any new rule of marriage since the manifesto was issued?
Not that I know of.
1019: Then there is none except as it is contained in this revelation on polygamy?
Has no what, –
1020: Has no law of the church on the question of marriage been adopted by the church since the issue of that manifesto, – has there any law been adopted by the church in the place of this revelation on polygamy?
Well, I don’t know what you mean, for the manifesto is a law.
1021: The manifesto itself you say is a law?
Yes sir.
1022: The manifesto is that you don’t practice or take more than one wife, – is that it?
Yes sir. That is what it says.
1023: But if there are any marriages performed, were, or are they not married according to the provisions of the law contained in this section one hundred and thirty two, – married to one wife?
So far as that is concerned the marriage ceremony is and always has been the same.
1024: The ceremony you say is and always has been the same?
Yes sir.
1025: They were sealed?
Yes sir, for time and eternity.
1026: Then section one hundred and thirty two is operative in the church yet, so far as marriage is concerned, that is sealing one man and one wife?
Seal-on wife to one man, it is the woman who is sealed to the man, and not the man to the woman. So far as I am aware it is the same, -just the same.
1027: Then section one hundred and thirty two is the law of the church on marriage, – that is in reference to sealing one man to one wife is concerned?
Yes sir. I suppose so, but I have not heard it talked of much, if any.
1028: Well now is it not the law Mrs. Smith, except perhaps for the fact that the manifesto perhaps prohibits a man from taking more than one wife?
Yes it does.
1029: Does what?
The manifesto prohibits a man from having more than one wife.
1030: But it is the law of the church just the same as it was before the manifesto was issued, excepting that one man cannot take but one wife, and can not have more than one wife?
Yes sir.
1031: That is the law of the church at this time with this exception?
Yes sir, so far as I know it is the same.
1032: Well now suppose a man should take two wives now, what law of the church would be violated?
He would violate his covenants.
1033: What covenants?
When he raised his hand and covenanted to obey the ministry. Everybody did that at the time that manifesto was issued, and that is a covenant that he would violate if he would take two wives now.
1034: That is the law of the church though?
Yes sir. There is no man in the church can take another wife without permission, and he cannot get permission, – he can’t get the permission to do so.
1035: Well now that is not the answer to the question I asked you. Suppose a man did take two wives, where is the law of the church that would discipline him for it?
Well he would be cut off from the church for it?
1036: By what law could that be done?
By reason of the fact that he violated his covenant in that manifesto.
1037: Is that the law of the church?
Yes sir.
1038: What made it so?
Because they accepted it and swore to it.
1039: What was it they swore to?
The manifesto, – they swore to it and promised to obey it, and it is the law on that question. I thought you were not going to ask me any more questions.
1040: Well I have thought of one or two more you see, but I did not know it at that time, – and my promise not to ask you anymore questions was a conditionsl one based upon your assenting to answer a question I asked you, which you refused to answer. It is because of an obligation that they took in the endowment to obey the counsel of the church?
Is that what?
1041: Is that the rule by which they would be disciplined?
No sir.
1042: That would not be the rule by which they would be disciplined?
No sir.
1043: Well what would be the rule?
By the action they took at the conference, and raised their hands and swore that they would obey the manifesto.
1044: They swore that they would obey the manifesto?
Yes sir, at the conference they did that.
1045: And you say that manifesto is the law of the church?
Yes sir.
1046: Is it in the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
No sir, I think not.
1047: Does not the book of Doctrine and Covenants contain the laws of the church?
Yes sir, but that is not in there I think.
1048: Does not the book of Doctrine and Covenants contain all the laws of the church, – that is the law of the church with reference to the rules of disciplining?
Well no, I don’t suppose it does. At any rate this manifesto has come out lately, and it is a law of the church that has not had time to be put in the Doctrine and Covenants. There is not at the present time anything in the book of Doctrine and Covenants about it.
1049: Now the doctrine of the church has always been has it not Mrs. Smith, to be the bible, the book of Mormon and the book of Doctrine and Covenants, – these three books have been the doctrinal books of the church, have they not?
Yes sir.
1050: And the book of Doctrine and Covenants contains the revelations that were given to the church by the Lord, through his prophet, Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
1051: That was the law of the church?
Yes sir.
1052: Was the manifesto a revelation?
Yes sir.
1053: Whom did it come through?
It came through the Lord.
1054: The Lord speaking through whom?
Through Wilford Woodruff.
1055: It was given to Wilford Woodruff?
Yes sir.
1056: How do you know that to be a fact?
He said so.
1057: Who said so?
He said the Lord revealed it to him.
1058: Wilford Woodruff said that?
Yes sir, he said that.
1059: Said what?
Said that they had to stop that, and I have heard him say it privately too.
1060: Told them they had to stop polygamy?
Yes sir, that they had to stop having more than one wife.
1061: is it the same thing as the Lord told Abraham when he told him to put away Hagar?
Yes sir it is the same thing.
1062: Then the Lord communicated through President Woodruff to the church, that they had to stop the practice of polygamy, and put their surplus wives away, – how was it to be stopped? If the Lord in the first place authorized the practice of polygamy in
the church, and then afterwards interdicted it, would you not think that the Lord was rather gone back on himself?
It is not for me to criticize the Lord’s actions.
1063: Well if he authorized polygamy in the first place and if it is an institution of the Lord it must be one that he authorizes or approves, else he would not permit it, and then he afterwards goes back on it, does it not look like he would be going back on himself?
I say it is not for me,
1064: Answer the question?
No sir, I don’t think so. I don’t think so at all. I think the people have gone back on it themselves.
1065: Well is it not more consistent to believe that the polygamous revelation was a fraud than to believe that the Lord would go back on himself in that way?
No sir, for it is not a fraud.
1066: Now you said that the manifesto was a revelation from the Lord?
Yes sir.
1067: Given to the church through Wilford Woodruff?
Yes sir.
1068: And you say also that the polygamous revelation was a revelation from God to the church through Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
1069: Now if that polygamous revelation was not a fraud why does the Lord step in and say that the people must stop that which they were commanded to do by the polygamous revelation, – why does he step in and say that they must not do that which they are directed and commanded to do in the polygamous revelation?
Well it is not the first time he has done that a and it is all right.
1070: When did he ever step in at any other time and tell you that you must stop practicing polygamy?
He told the Nephites the same thing.
1071: Was it in reference to the practice of polygamy?
Yes sir.
1072: It is?
Yes sir.
1073: Did he ever tell them to commence it?
1074: Did the Lord ever tell the Nephites to commence the practice of polygamy?
I don’t know. I suppose he did. He told them to stop it.
1075: Well do you know he did?
Well it don’t say in the book of Mormon that he told them to commence it but it says that he told them not practice it until, – he puts it “without I the Lord command thee” or something like that.
1076: Are you certain that is in the book of Mormon that way?
Yes sir.
1077: That they must not practice polygamy without the Lord commanded them to do so?
Yes sir.
1078: And you are certain that the Lord told the Nephites that they should not practice polygamy until he revealed it unto them, or told them to practice it?
1079: I think the evidence shows that she is capable of answering not only this question but a great many others that she had refused or declined to answer. If she is not competent, I would like to know who is? What do you say to the question I asked you?
Well if you will read that you will see that it is true.
1080: Well now I will read from exhibit “B” on page 132 paragraphs 24, -23, 24, and 25, and I will ask you if that is the part of the book of Mormon you referred to, – “But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold thus saith the Lord, – this people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures for they begin to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which are written concerning David and Solomon his son. Behold David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord. Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. Wherefore, I, the Lord God, will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. Wherefore, brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord, for there shall not any man among you have, save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none. For I, the Lord God delighteth in the chastity of women, and whoredoms are an abomination before me, thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Wherefore this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things. For behold I the Lord have seen the sorrow the heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem; yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.” Now I heave read to you from the 23rd paragraph to the 31st paragraph inclusive?
Yes sir, that is it there, – there it is entirely.
1081: Is that the part of the book of Mormon you referred to when you said the Lord commanded them not to take more wives than one?
To not take any more than one?
1082: Yes madam?
Yes sir, and I said it was stopped them.
1083: It was stopped then?
Yes sir.
1084: Well does it say that he ever started it?
Yes sir, it says it plain enough.
1085: Don’t the very passages I have rad condemn the practice of polygamy wherever it had been started?
No sir.
1086: It does not?
No sir, for it talked like as if it was all right in the beginning.
1087: He said “behold David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me”, and then to show who was speaking it goes on to show that the Lord said that, – the words are “thus saith the Lord”?
Yes sir, but you read there that they began to be wicked, and that shows that they were not that way in the beginning, but after a while they began to wax wicked.
1088: It read “This people began to wax in iniquity;
they understand not the scriptures for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David and Solomon his son.” Now does that not show that they had lapsed into wickedness of which polygamy was one phase?
They had been practicing it according to this, but they had run it into wickedness, and he gave them a revelation commanding them to stop it.
1089: Now is it not a fact, and the truth that they wanted to go into polygamy and took the cases or examples of David and Solomon as an example or excuse to justify their action, and the Lord called that a crime?
No sir.
1090: It is not?
No sir.
1091: Is that the only place in the book of Mormon that you referred to?
I believe that is all.
1092: And you are willing to rest your case on plural marriage on that as a starting point?
Yes sir. As a starter and an end too.
1093: Well now will you tell me where the Lord ever revealed to the Nephites that they should go into polygamy?
No sir.
1094: Is there any such a doctrine in the book of Mormon as the command of the Lord for anybody to go into polygamy, or have more wives than one?
I believe that is all I know of.
1095: That is the only thing you knot of in the book of Mormon?
Yes sir.
1096: And that says in distinct terms that a man shall not have more than one wife?
Well it says they are to stop it and not have more than one wife until he permits them to have them, – and they were to live pure, and if it had only been kept in its purity from that day to this it would have been a grand and good thing.
1097: Have you been taught that as the interpretation of this?
Yes sir.
1098: You have been taught that by the President and leaders of the church here?
Yes sir.
1099: By Brigham Young and John Taylor and Woodruff?
Yes sir.
1100: You have been taught that?
Oh, yes, I guess so. By some of them at any rate.
1101: You were married in 1837 to your present husband?
No sir.
1102: No not in 1837, but in 1841 I meant to say?
Yes sir, that is right.
1103: And your husband, George A. Smith, is living yet?
No sir.
1104: Did he ever have more than one wife sealed to him?
Oh do stop now. You said a long time ago that you only had one more question to ask me, and you have asked me more than a hundred I know since that time, so do stop now, and don’t go into that for it can do no possible good. Let us go home.
1105: Well if you will be patient and answer the questions I ask you I can promise that you can go home pretty soon, – did your husband
George A. Smith, have more than one wife?
I don’t see what that has to do with this matter, –
Yes sir.
1106: Did you consent to your husband George A. Smith having more than one wife?
Yes sir.
1107: How many?
Well there you go, – can’t you let me go?
1108: Yes when you answer these questions, – and I will say right now you can go as far as we are concerned if you will answer a very few questions more, – how many wives did you consent to your husband having?
It is no matter how many there was. 1109 (Mistakenly listed as 109)
1108: Well was it two or more than two?
Two.
1110: Was it more than two?
Yes sir.
1111: Was it four, – just state the number and it will save time?
Well it was five.
1112: It was five?
Yes sir.
1113: Do you know Mrs. Thompson that lives here in Salt Lake City, three blocks west and one north of here?
Yes sir.
1114: How long have you known her?
I have known her a great many years, – over half a century.
1115: Where did you know her?
I knew her in Nauvoo and in Missouri.
1116: What is her first name please?
Mercy, I believe it is, – yes I believe that is it.
1117: Did you know her when she was the wife of John Taylor?
I knew her when she was Robert Thompson’s wife.
1118: Did you know her when she was the wife of John Taylor?
I did not know that she was his wife. If she was his wife I didn’t know it.
1119: Did you know her when she was the wife, – did she hold herself out as being the wife, or being sealed to John Taylor?
I never asked her, and I don’t know that she was his wife, or was sealed to him.
1120: Have you heard her say so?
Say so, what?
1121: That she was or has been the wife of John Taylor, or was sealed to him?
No sir.
1122: They you don’t know anything about it?
No sir, I don’t know anything about it at all.
1123: Did you ever hear her say anything about her having been sealed to Hyrum Smith?
No sir.
1124: Did you ever know her when she was the wife of a man by the name of Lawson?
Yes sir.
1125: You have heard of that?
Yes sir, and I think that when I came to the Valley she was Lawson’s wife then.
1126: That was in 1849 about?
Yes sir, that was in 1849, and I think she was living with him then.
1127: She lived with him here quite a while?
Yes sir and I have heard her say she was married to him.
1128: Was John Taylor living at the same time?
Yes sir, I suppose he was.
1129: Well was he?
Certainly he was. It was when we first came here, and of course he was living, for it is only a few years since he died. I don’t know mind you that she ever was his wife.
1130: Did you know whether or not John Taylor was living at the same time that Lawson was?
Yes sir, of course he was living, but then he was not her husband that I knew of.
1131: How do you know that?
I say I don’t know that she was.
1132: That is you don’t know that she was ever married to John Taylor?
No sir.
1133: But you do know that she was married to Lawson?
Yes sir, I suppose so. She lived with him, and she has told me that she was married to him, and I suppose she was.
1134: How long did she and Lawson live together?
I don’t know.
1135: Did they live together until he died?
No sir, for he is living yet I believe.
1136: Do they live together now?
No sir, they have not lived together for along time, – several years anyway, – I don’t know how long it is. They parted several years ago, but I don’t know the time or the particulars about it.
1137: How have you been taught here, and is it the law of the church here, that a woman can have two husbands living at the same time?
No sir.
1138: That is not the law of the church?
No sir.
1139: And you have never heard it taught here by the church, – that a woman can have two husbands living at the same time?
No sir, I have never heard that taught.
1140: Would it be a violation of the law if it was taught?
Yes sir.
1141: Would the woman that had two husbands living at the same time unless they had been divorced by a court be guilty under the law of your church?
1142: Well I will waive that question, – would it be violation of the laws of the church for one woman to have two husbands living at the same time, without being divorced from one of them?
I think it would.
1143: Would it not be contrary to the laws and rules of the church as found recorded in the book of Doctrine and Covenants?
1144: That would be in violation of the law in the book of Doctrine and Covenants, would it not?
Well you said a little while ago that all the covenants were done away with.
1145: No, – I was reading a new and everlasting one, – that is the one that is not done away with according to the doctrine of your church?
No sir, I guess that is all right.
1146: Well would it not be a violation of that new and
everlasting covenant for one woman to have two husbands living at the same time?
I think it would be.
1147: That is all.
1148: I want to re-introduce this witness for a few questions that I neglected to ask her?
1149: You were acquainted with Joseph’s, – Joseph Smith’s family intimately were you not?
Yes sir.
1150: Your husband was a relative of Joseph’s was he not?
Yes sir, a first cousin.
1151: Consequently you were well acquainted with the family?
Yes sir.
1152: You knew his children?
Yes sir.
1153: Did you know any children of Joseph Smith except Joseph, David, Alexander and Frederick?
No sir.
1154: That was all?
Yes sir, that was all that I knew
1155: Were you subpoenaed to come here today?
No sir I was not subpoenaed.
1156: Then you came here without being subpoenaed?
Yes sir, I presume so.