1: Mr Whitehad, I believe you testified here in this case before did you not?
Yes sir.
2: It was in February that you testified?
Yes sir I think so. I am pretty hard of hearing and you will have to excuse me sir, – you will have to speak loud if you wish me to hear you.
3: Well I ask you if you did not testify in this case in February?
Yes sir. I guess it was in February. I did testify here last winter, – not in this room however, but in the other room where the testimony was taken.
4: And on that occasion you testified that you were the private secretary of the prophet Joseph Smith I believe?
Yes sir, and I was.
5: how long were you engaged in that capacity?
A little over two years.
6: Were you so engaged at the time of the death of the prophet?
Yes sir.
7: You said you were the private secretary to the Prophet Joseph Smith at one time?
I was, sir.
8: Were you a member of the church of Latter-day Saints during the time that you acted in the capacity of private secretary for the Prophet Joseph Smith?
I was.
9: How long prior to that time had you been connected with the church/
How?
10: As a member?
I was baptized on the 18th day of October.
By E.L. Kelley, – “That has already been all gone over, and it is not necessary to go over all that again, but let the witness go ahead and answer the question.
I was baptized on the 18th day of October 1837.
11: What, if anything did you know, or do you know about the doctrine of polygamy ever having been taught in the church by Joseph Smith at any time prior to his death?
Nothing Sir.
12: You didn’t know anything about it?
I never heard him teach it sir at all, – neither privately nor publicly. He never said a word to me about it in at all, and I never heard it taught either privately or publicly before his death.
13: Well I am going to prove it all together outright if you wil possess your soul in patience for a minute or two. What opportunities have you had of knowing that fact, had it existed?
Yes sir.
14: Did you have an opportunity of knowing it if it had existed?
Yes sir.
15: What were they?
Well I think they were very good
16: Well what were they?
Well I say they were very good.
17: Well now you have state that they were “very good” but you have not state what they were?
Well I was there in his office, and I was there with him continually, and I was well acquainted with his family I was well acquainted with Sister Emma, and I never saw anything or heard of any such thing being taught there in Nauvoo prior to the time of the death of the prophet, I never even heard of it one way or the other.
18: That is the practice of it?
Yes sir.
19: You never heard of it before the deeath of Joseph Smith, is that what you say?
Yes sir.
20: Well what about the teaching of it?
Whether it was taught by Joseph Smith?
21: Yes sir, or by any one else in his life-time?
I never heard him teach it sir.
22: Did the elder in the church or any one else in authority in the church during the time you were there in Nauvoo occupying the position you said you did with Joseph Smith, did they at any time during that period teach it?
No sir.
23: Did you ever hear any person holding any office in the church speak or preach upon doctrinal points?
Yes sir, I have heard them a great many times. I have heard preaching a great many times, both by Joseph Smith and others.
24: Have you ever heard Joseph Smith talk to the elders and and other officers in the church upon doctrinal points?
Yes sir. I have heard him preach to them a great many times upon doctrinal points.
25: Have oyu ever heard him talk to them in a conversational way upon doctrinal points?
Yes sir.
26: Where would these conversations take place?
Very frequently in his office.
27: Would you be present at any of these times?
Yes
sir, I would be present.
28: Where did you say these conversations would take place? I think you stated where it would be but I don’t recollect it?
I said they would very frequently be in his office, and I would be present.
29: Would you hear what would be going on in these conversations, what would be said and done?
Yes sir, they would not always be in his office however, for sometimes it would be at his house. I have heard him talk in his office, and in his house about all these things.
30: Upon what subject would he talk?
Upon the doctrines of the faith of Christ, upon the gospel, upon the gospel of grace, faith, repentance, baptism, the laying on of hands, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the resurrection from the dead, etc. I have heard him talk about all these things.
31: When you say you have heard him talk about “all these things” you mean the things or subjects you have enumerated?
Yes sir.
32: Did you ever hear him say anything about a plurality of wives?
No sir.
33: Did you ever know a man by the name of Kingsbury?
I did sir. I knew him.
34: When?
there.
35: Well where?
There at Nauvoo.
36: Well when did you know him in Nauvoo?
Do you want the date?
37: Yes sir, as nearly as you can give it?
Well he was in the office, that is in the storeroom delivering out supplies, provisions and clothing and such things to the ones that labored on the temple and other places for the church under the direction of Newel K. Whitney.
38: Who was Whitney?
He was the Bishop.
39: What was his first name?
Whose first name?
40: Kingsbury?
Joseph C.
41: What, if anything, did he have to do with the duties of secretary to the prophet Joseph Smith?
He did not have anything to do with that, nothing at all sir.
42: Did you know a man by the name of Clayton?
William Clayton do you mean?
43: Yes sir.
Yes sir, I knew him also.
44: Where did you know him?
I knew him in England and I also knew him at Nauvoo.
45: Did you know him at Nauvoo before or after the prophet’s death?
I knew him many years before the prophet’s death, for I knew him in England before he joined the church.
46: Where was he during the time that you were performing your duties as secretary to the prophet?
He was a clerk for me, or with me I should say, in that office for quite a while.
47: He was a clerk in the office?
Yes sir.
48: What were his duties?
He had different duties, clerking in the office, examining and writing.
49: Were his duties the same as yours?
No sir, not exactly. He did not have exactly the same duties to perform that I did. He was there helping on the books and doing whatever he was directed to do.
50: You say he did not have the same duties to perform that you did?
No sir, not exactly the same.
51: Well what were the duties he performed?
Well I was in the possession of Joseph’s private papers, in a desk I had them and I had the key to that desk myself, and William Clayton was more of a clerk and attended to a great deal of the business on the outside. That is about the difference.
52: Well was he Joseph Smith’s private secretary in any sense of the word?
Well he was in some parts of the business, for he attended to the outside business. He was in some parts of the business, for he attended to the outside business, and I attended to the inside business, – to the books.
53: Who attended to the books?
Clayton.
54: How long did William Clayton attended to any part of the business of the prophet?
Well he was there before I was, but he was not in that office all the time after I came there. There were some things that took place in connection with Clayton that gave dissatisfaction. There was money disappeared that was not accounted for, and for that reason he was removed from that office, but he did outside work, and other work in another capanity, and I was put in charge of the office in his place.
55: Then he was removed from his position as private secretary?
Yes sir.
56: By whom was he removed?
By Joseph Smith and the committee.
57: What committee do you refer to?
That was the temple committee.
58: Well do you remember the year in which that occurred? If you do you can state it?
Yes sir, that occured in 1843.
59: Well about what time in 1843 did that occur according to the best of your recollection?
It was in 1843 in the beginning of the year.
60: Well not then, – what was the nature of the other employment that he was engaged in. I mean that Clayton was engaged in?
Why it was going out and attending to business generally. There was a good deal of business done in regard tot he lots and farms of the church.
61: Well what was the nature of that business?
Well the church would buy in property and sell it out again, and he attended to most of that business. I did not attend to that at all, and Clayton would look after that sir.
62: Well was that after he and been removed by the prophet?
Yes sir, that was after he had been removed from the office of private secretary by the prophet, and from this other office by the prophet and temple committee.
63: Did you ever hear or know anything of an ordinance of the church, – an ordinance in the church or out of it for that matter, called sealing?
Yes sir.
64: You have heard of that?
Yes sir, I heard about it.
65: Now you may state when you first heard of that ordinance, and all you know about it?
All that I know about it, – is that what you want?
66: Yes sir, state all you know about it?
Well I could not tell you the date that I first heard of it, that is the time of the year, but it was in 1848, – in the early part of the year, I think, – it might possibly be the latter part of ’32, for I would not be positive about the date, that I first heard of that ordinance, the sealing as they called it of husband and wife. They would be married according to the ordinances of the laws of God, not only for time, but
for eternity as well.
67: They would be married for time and eternity as well?
Yes sir, but that applied only to husband and wife and a man could not have but one wife, – they were not allowed to have more than one wife.
68: A man was allowed, then, to have but one wife, and he would be sealed to her for hit life as well as the life to come?
Yes sir.
69: Was that ordinance the result of a revelation?
I do not understand about that.
70: Well was the authority for that ordinance derived from a revelation?
Why it was according to scripture, -according to what was written. It was a setting apart, – not only uniting – but they were bound to stick together, unless they were divided by the law of the land, for we never went against the law of the land in anything.
71: Do you know anything at all in reference to a revelation on sealing?
That is all I know about it, – what I have told you is all I know about it sir. Perhaps I don’t quite understand what you want.
72: Well I don’t think you do either?
Well ask me the question again and then perhaps I will understand you.
73: What I want to know is this, whether the prophet or whether you ever saw or heard of what was claimed to be a revelation on this subject from Whitney or any body else?
With regard to polygamy?
74: No sir, – with regard to sealing?
Why that was the law of the Lord. It was the law of God as it is written, but it was to be done in the spirit of holiness, – in the purity of the spirit of holiness, but it only applied to a man and his wife, and they could be sealed to each other for time and for eternity, and that bond could not be broken only by the law of the land.
75: Did Whitney ever show you a revelation on any subject whatever?
Yes sir, he showed me a revelation.
76: Well what was it?
Well sir, I can’t repeat it.
77: Well I don’t ask you to repeat it. I asked you what subject it was on?
It was on what we are talking about now.
78: I understood you to say that you did not know of any revelation upon that subject?
I don’t know what you mean by “revelation on that subject.”
79: Well sir, I mean simply a revelation on the subject of sealing? That is what I mean?
Well that was all the subject that was talked about as far as I remember.
80: I understood you to say that the sealing was founded upon the scriptures?
Well sir, so it was. It is founded upon the scriptures.
81: You say that Whitney showed you a revelation at one time?
He did sir.
82: Well now what had this rexelation of Witneys to do with the matter of sealing?
Yes sir, that is what the revelation showed, and the Lord says so by his written law too.
83: Well that was in the revelation that Whitney showed you?
Yes sir. Yes sir, that was in the revelation.
84: And Whitney showed you the revelation?
Yes sir.
85: To whom was that revelation given?
To Joseph Smith sir.
86: It was given to Joseph Smith?
Yes sir, to Joseph
Smith the prophet.
87: You are sure of that?
Yes sir.
88: Well can you tell any more definitely what its contents were?
Oh I don’t know any further than it was on that subject of plural marriage, but I can’t repeat it for it has been so long since I saw it. I remember that it was before they went to Salt Lake.
89: What was before they went to Salt Lake?
That Whitney showed me that. It was before they went to Salt Lake, for at that time they had arranged to go to Salt Lake, or I should say to go westward into the wilderness, for at that time they did not know they were going to Salt Lake.
90: Well was it before or after the prophet’s death?
It was after the prophet’s death. It was after Joseph’t death that he showed me that.
91: Under what circumstances did he come to show you that?
I went up to winter quarters or to Omaha to settle my account with the church and make my report. That was after they had left Nauvoo and were in winter quarters at Omaha or near there. Well as I said I went up there to make my report, and I did not stay there, for as I said when I was giving my testimony before I saw things going on there that I did not like, –
92: Well you need not state what caused you to leave there, but go ahead and state what you saw there, – what were the circumstances I mean under which you came to see this revelation?
Well as I said I was there to make my settlement with the church, and while I was there, before I left, I went and stayed all night with Bishop Whitney, and he showed it to me then.
93: Now when was that?
That was in the spring of 1848.
94: Do you know when the revelation purported to have been given?
No sir, I don’t recollect the date, – that is I don’t recollect the date positively, but as far as my recollection goes it was in 1842, – I think it was about 1842. Now I am not positive about that, but I think it was about 1842.
95: how much of a document was it?
Well sir, it was as much about as would fill this leaf, – both sides of it (referring to a sheet of fool’s cap paper) I should think it was about three sides of a sheet of paper like that.
96: Was it in manuscript?
Yes sir, it was written.
97: Did you write it?
I did.
98: I asked you if you wrote it?
I did not understand the question, – I thought I was asked if I read it. No sir, I did not write it.
99: Well did you read it?
I did sir.
100: Do you recollect whose handwriting it was in?
Well I would not be positive, but I think it was William Clayton’s. I could not tell in a moment if I could see it for certain, but I think now it was in William Clayton’s, I am not sure about that, but I think it was in Clayton’s hand.
101: Since that time have you seen it?
No sir, I haven’t seen it since that time, for I haven’t been near them since then.
102: Do you know what became of it?
No sir.
103: Was it ever printed that you know of?
I never saw it printed. I saw what they claimed was it, or what purported to be it, that was published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Brighamite church in Salt Lake.
104: Was that the same one that you had given you Bi-
shop Whitney, and which you read there at winter quarters?
No sir, it was not the same.
105: What difference was there in them?
It was not the same at all. It was entirely changed.
106: It was changed you say?
Yes sir.
107: Can you tell in what particular it was changed?
It was changed so that it sanctioned polygamy, and that change was made by the Brighamites, for there was no such a thing in it when it came from Joseph the martyr. You can find it for yourself in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Brighamites at Salt Lake, and you will see in it as published by them that it sanctions and imposes polygamy on the church, but there was not such thing in the revelation that Whitney showed me, – nothing of the kind at all sir. I remember when I first saw that revelation, they have in their books of Doctrine and Covenants, for it was brought to me by a man from Salt Lake, and he showed it to me, and asked me what I thought of it, and I told him that it was spurious.
108: Did you recognize that revelation as published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants from Salt Lake, – did you recognize it as the revelation you had seen at winter quarters?
No sir, I told you it was not the same, – that it was changed so that it sanctioned polygamy, and there was nothing about polygamy or plural marriage in the revelation that Whitney showed me. It was changed entirely.
109: Well I know you say that, but did it have, or did you recognize in the revelation published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah Mormon Church any part of the revelation that was shown you when you were at winter quarters?
It was entirely changed, but there was some points of similarity.
110: How do you know it was changed?
Well it did not have the same language at all.
111: Well now might it not have been an entirely new revelation?
Well sir I could not tell about that.
112: Well that might be the case might it not?
Well I could not say about that, for there were some parts of it if it was the same, that were turned and twisted around and warped so that they had another meaning entirely from what the one had that Whitney showed me. I know that I considered when I read it that they had got that revelation from Bishop Whitney, and they had changed it entirely and added to it a great deal. I know that for it had nothing to do with polygamy when it came from Joseph Smith. On the contrary it was entirely opposed to it, but they had changed it around until they had made it sanction polygamy.
113: You refer to the purported revelation published by the Salt Lake church, when you say the revelation was changed so as to countenance polygamy?
Yes sir, and the revelation that Whitney had did not say anything about polygamy.
114: And is that revelation the revelation under which polygamy was practiced in the Salt Lake church?
Well sir, all I know about that is what I have heard. I never was there and I don’t know what they did practice there.
115: Well if they practiced polygamy was it under that revelation it was done?
Well I say that that revelation that was published in their book of Doctrine and Covenants sanctioned it, but there was nothing about polygamy in that revelation that bishop Whitney had, and I think they took that revelation that Whitney had and changed it so that it read to sanction polygamy, and now they try to pass it off as one of Joseph Smith’s revelations.
116: Did it bear the same date?
What?
117: Did the revelation, or purported revelation published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah Mormon church have the same date as the revelation shown you by Bishop Whitney?
Well my recollection is that the one published in the Salt Lake book of Doctrine and Covenants, did not bear any date. It had no date in the book of Doctrine and Covenants that I recollect of.
118: Are you positive as to that?
No sir, but if it had a date I don’t recollect of it.
119: But you do remember that the one you saw at winter quarters was dated?
What is that, – ?
120: The revelation as you saw it at winter quarters bore a date did it not??
I could not say, I don’t remember much about a date for I just read the revelation, and the man that gave it to me asked me what I thought about it, and I told him it was not right, – that it was spurious and a fraud, and that Joseph Smith never gave that.
121: Well you refer now to the revelation printed in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Salt Lake church?
Yes sir.
122: Well I am asking you about the revelation that was shown you by Bishop Whitney, – did that revelation bear a adte?
I told you that I thought it was dated in 1842.
123: When that revelation was handed to you at Omaha for your perusal, was there anything said to you at that time about where it had been kept from the time it was given down to the time you saw it?
Bishop Whitney had kept it himself.
124: How do you know that to be the fact?
Well he told me so himself. He told me that he had kept it.
125: That he, Whitney, had kept it?
Yes sir.
126: Did he tell you where he had gotten it?
He said he had gotten it from Joseph Smith.
127: Did he tell you when?
No sir, and I did not ask him when he got it.
128: Well what did he say about that?
He said that Joseph gave it to him to keep and take care of. That is all that I know about that.
129: What reason have you for thinking that that revelation that you saw at winter quarters was a part of the revelation incorporated in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah church?
Well I will tell you what the reason was, – because the man that had it told me that that was the revelation of Bishop Whitney, I mean that the revelation that Bishop Whitney had, and that it was put in the book of Covenants. Now that is all that I know about it.
Well I say that that revelation that was published in their book of Doctrine and Covenants sanctioned it, but there was nothing about polygamy in that revelation that bishop Whitney had, and I think they took that revelation that Whitney had and changed it so that it read to sanction polygamy, and now they try to pass it off as one of Joseph Smith’s revelations.
116: Did it bear the same date?
What?
117: Did the revelation, or purported revelation published in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah Mormon church have the same date as the revelation shown you by Bishop Whitney?
Well my recollection is that the one published in the Salt Lake book of Doctrine and Covenants, did not bear any date. It had no date in the book of Doctrine and Covenants that I recollect of.
118: Are you positive as to that?
No sir, but if it had a date I don’t recollect of it.
119: But you do remember that the one you saw at winter quarters was dated?
What is that, -?
120: The revelation as you saw it at winter quarters bore a date did it not??
I could not say. I don’t remember much about a date for I just read the revelation, and the man that gave it to me asked me what I thought about it, and I told him it was not right, – that it was spurious and a fraud, and that Joseph Smith never gave that.
121: Well you refer now to the revelation printed in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Salt Lake church?
Yes sir.
122: Well I am asking you about the revelation that was shown you by Bishop Whitney, – did that revelation bear a adte?
I told you that I thought it was dated in 1842.
123: When that revelation was handed to you at Omaha for your perusal, was there anything said to you at that time about where it had been kept from the time it was given down to the time you saw it?
Bishop Whitney had kept it himself.
124: How do you know that to be the fact?
Well he told me so himself. He told me that he had kept it.
125: That he, Whitney, had kept it?
Yes sir.
126: Did he tell you where he had gotten it?
He said he had gotten it from Joseph Smith.
127: Did he tell you when?
No sir, and I did not ask him when he got it.
128: Well what did he say about that?
He said that Joseph gave it to him to keep and take care of. That is all that I know about that.
129: What reason have you for thinking that that revelation that you saw at winter quarters was a part of the revelation incorporated in the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah church?
Well I will tell you what the reason was, – because the man that had it told me that that was the revelation of Bishop Whitney, – I mean that the revelation that Bishop Whitney had, and that it was put in the book of Covenants. Now that is all that I know about it.
130: When you were at Nauvoo, where did you reside with reference to the prophet’s home?
Where did I reside with reference to Joseph Smith’s home?
131: Yes sir.
Oh, I lived maybe three hundred yards from where he lived.
132: Home often would you see him?
Oh I saw him frequently.
133: Well about how often did you see him?
Oh I saw him every day.
134: You saw him every day you say?
Well perhaps not every day, but I saw him almost every day that he was in Nauvoo. I saw him on Sunday, because if I was not busy I would go and hear him preach, and as I did not make a practice of doing any work on Sunday in the office I generally went to hear him preach.
135: Now you have testified that you were in the office of the prophet down to the time of his death?
I was sir. I was there in his office at the time that he was murdered.
136: Right up to the time of his death you were in his office, and acted in the capacity of private secretary for him?
Yes sir, I was in his office at the time he was killed.
137: Well were you in his office at the time he was killed, or were you at Carthage where he was killed?
No sir, I was not at Carthage. I was in his office on that day, and I was keeping the books at that time.
138: Then you were not present at the time he was killed.
No sir, I was not at Carthage, I was not there when he was killed.
139: How many days had he been gone from Nauvoo before he was killed?
Well it was but a very short time. I remember the circumstance very well and he was gone but a very short time, for I know that the governor came down there to Nauvoo and made a speech to the people. I remember that right well for he said in that speech that “stands as though it was over one hundred kegs of powder, and if you don’t give up Mr. Smith you must take the consequences”, and he had left there before that, and the time that the governor was making that speech Joseph and Hyrum was shot dead at the Carthage jail.
140: I don’t quite understand you when you say that they demanded that they should be given up?
I said that he demanded that Joseph Smith should be given up.
141: Well I understand that, but I don’t understand how he should demand that they must be given up when he were already in the jail at Carthage?
Well he did say so. I understand that is another speech you have reference to. You must understand that the governor was there more than once, for he was there at Nauvoo two or three times making speeches. It was Joseph was given up that he made that inflammatory speech about the powder and when would happen if he was not given up. I remember that now, for they gave themselves up, or rather went to Carthage and gave themselves up, and it is my opinion that it was right the next afternoon they were shot. At any rate they were there but a very short time before they were murdered. I remember that the Governor came down again and he made another speech, and he told the citizens that they must be careful and keep the law, and made a long speech, and while he was there making that speech both Hyrum and Joseph Smith were shot dead in cold blood in the Carthage jail, and Willard Richards and John Taylor were there also, and John Taylor
was shot in the wrist.
142: Well, that don’t make any difference?
Well, I thought I would tell you, for I did not think there was any harm in telling you all I knew about it, and I knew they were shot for I saw the wounds myself.
143: Well how many wives did the Prophet have?
How many wives did Joseph Smith have?
144: Yes sir?
He had one.
145: What was her name?
Emma.
146: Do you know of any other woman who claimed to be the wife of the Prophet?
No sir, I don’t know of any other.
147: Do you know of any other woman who claimed to be the wife of Joseph Smith there at Nauvoo?
No sir, I don’t know them.
148: Or any where else other than at Nauvoo?
No sir,
149: You don’t know of any wives he had other than Emma at any time or place?
No sir, and I never heard of such a thing.
150: And you don’t know of any women who claimed to be his wives or plural wife?
No sir, I don’t know anything about it. I never saw any of them, but I don’t know about what they might claim, – I don’t know anything about that.
151: Did you ever hear anybody claim except Emma Smith, that she was the wife of Joseph Smith?
Did I ever hear any other woman but Emma claim that she was Joseph’s wife?
152: Yes sir?
No sir, I did not, – not that I remember of, I don’t believe that I ever heard that claim made. I don’t say that I did or did not, – I say that I have no recollection of it, – I know this that there never was anything said in my hearing about that.
153: Did you ever hear any of them, – any one but Emma Smith, – did any of them ever come to you or to the Prophet in your presence for money claiming to be the wife of the prophet?
Just state that again.
154: Did any woman ever come to you, or to Joseph Smith in your presence, during the time of your employment, for money, claiming that she was the wife of Joseph Smith?
Never.
155: They never did?
Never.
156: Was any entry of that kind ever entered on the books by you? Was any claim, or any money paid out by you, or by him, and an entry made of it having been paid to any woman claiming to be the wife of Joseph Smith?
No sir.
157: You say no?
Yes sir.
158: You mean to no woman other than to Emma Smith?
Yes sir, of course excepting his wife Emma. Of course that is another thing.
159: There was no other woman?
No sir.
160: That is all.
161: Here is a book marked exhibit “A” and entitled the “Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, containing the revela- tions hiven Joseph Smith, Jr, the Prophet, etc”, – it is too long to read, but it is published at Salt Lake City, Utah, and I believe it will be admitted to be the book purporting to be the book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the Utah church at Salt Lake City?
Is that the book that was published by the Salt Lake people?
162: Yes sir?
Yes sir, that is the book I believe.
163: Now I want you to read from page four hundred and
and sixty four.
—”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 the earth to hold this power, (and I gave 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 is that what you want me to read?
164: —Yes sir?
—Well sir, I have read it, —now what do you want to know about it?
165: —Did you ever hear that before?
—No sir.
166: —You swear you never heard that before?
—I have read it in there before this, but I never heard of it or saw it anywhere but in there, I know nothing about that at all but what I see in there.
167: —Can you swear that that is not the Whitney revelation that you have referred to, —about which you have been testifying?
—Sir?
168: —Can you swear positively here today that that is not the Whitney revelation?
—What revelation?
169: —The Whitney revelation, —the revelation you have testified as having seen and read when it was in the possession of Bishop Whitney at wonter quarters?
—With regard to this?
170: —Yes sir?
—With regard to whether it is the same as the revelation that Whitney had?
171: —Yes sir?
—Yes sir, I swear it is not the same, for that revelation that Whitney had there had no such words in it to my knowledge. Not the part which I read I know, and if it was ever put into it it was put into it by Brigham Young or some of his clique, for it was not in there at the time that Whitney showed it to me, of that I am positive.
172: —What was not in it?
—That part which I have read, That is the first time I ever have seen that to remember it I think. I saw this revelation or alleged revelation before, but this is the first time that my attention was called specially to this particular part of it sir, and I know that that was not in the revelation that Whitney showed me.
173: —Well I believe you stated that there was enough of the Whitney revelation, or the revelation which he showed you, in this revelation in the Utah book of Doctrine and Covenants for you to identify it?
—To identify it with the one that Bishop Whitney had?
174: —Yes sir?
—No sir, I did not say anything of the kind, for there was nothing of that sort in it.
175: —Well I believe you did state that there was enough in it of the revelation that Whitney showed you, to identify it?
—I don’t understand you.
176: —Did you not testify here that there was enough in the revelation, —the Salt Lake City revelation, —I mean the revelation as published in the Salt Lake edition of the book of Doctrine and Covenants, to identify it with the revelation that Bishop Whitney had shown you?
—I said that if it was the same or any part of it
that there were words and sections or paragraphs added to it in such a manner as to entirely change its meaning, that is what I said sir. I said that they were mixed up in such a manner and manipulated so as to change its meaning entirely sir. There has been a word or two taken from one place, and some more from another, and it has been warped around so to change its meaning entirely if it is the same, which I don’t say is the case.
177: Did you not say that there was enough of the original language in it to identity it, for you to identify it as having been the original revelation?
No sir, I said that they had taken parts of that revelation perhaps, and had added to it in such a way as to change its meaning entirely. I did not say that was the same revelation, and I don’t know now that it is or that it is not, but if there is any part of the revelation that Whitney showed me in this, it has been so mutilated and changed around as to entirely change the meaning from what it originally was.
178: You give that as your pinion?
Yes sir, and that was enough for me to know. That was my opinion the first time I saw this one here in this book, and it is my opinion now.
179: At what time did you read this Salt Lake revelation so called?
I read it, let me see, I read it five or six years ago. There was a man at Belleville and he can tell you for he showed it to me, and his name is Joseph Betts, Joseph Betts, senior. He showed it to me out of the Book of Covenants from Salt Lake, and that was the first time I had seen it, for I never was there.
180: You mean that you were never at Salt Lake?
Yes sir. I never was there.
181: Well that was five or six years ago?
Yes sir, maybe six or seven years ago, and maybe not so long and maybe it was longer ago than that. I can’t be positive as to the length of time.
182: When did you see it in the hands of Whitney?
Which one?
183: There is only the one that I understood you to say that Whitney had, and now I ask you when it was that you saw the one that he had in his hands?
That was in 1848.
184: What time in the year was it?
It was in the spring of the year at the time that I was leaving Salt Lake. I mean Omaha, or winter quarters. I stopped there before I left with Whitney all night, and I read it then, for he gave it to me to read.
185: When did you leave there?
Winter quarters do you mean?
186: Yes sir.
Well that was in the spring of 1848 and I left there the next morning, for I stopped with Bishop Whitney the night before I left there for good. I just happened accidentally to stop there with him that night, for I should have gone away the night before, but I could not get over the river for th ferry had stopped, and that was the reason that I stopped with Whitney as I did, and that was the time and the only time I read it.
187: How many times did you read it?
Once.
188: Having read it but one, are you prepared to say from memory, after the lapse of nearly or quite forty years, are you prepared to say that the revelation published in the Utah book of Doctrine and Covenants has been changed from the revelation that Bishop Whitney showed you?
Yes sir, I say if it is the same revelation it has been very greatly changed from what it was when I read it at Bishop Whitney’s house.
189: Now upon what do you base for that?
Well I can not understand that question.
190: I asked you upon what basis you based that opinion?
Well I can’t tell you other than my remembrance of these things. I can remember whether a thing contains certain matters after forty years. Now take that so called revelation in this book, – if you were to ask me forty years hence if it had been changed. I could tell you, for if there had been any material change in it I would remember it. That revelation as it is now teaches polygamy, and if it is changed by taking that out of it, I would remember it although I might not see it for forty years, and I would be able to tell you that there is a change in it too.
191: You never saw that revelation but the one time, and that was at winter quarters, and in the hands of Bishop Whitney?
Yes sir.
192: Was that the only time you saw it?
Yes sir.
193: And you read it once?
Yes sir.
194: Was it written in a good clear hand?
Yes sir.
195: Was it written in black ink or blue ink?
In black ink.
196: You are sure of that?
I think so.
197: Do you know who it had been written by?
Yes sir.
198: Who had written it?
I told you that I thought it had been written by Clayton.
199: By W. William Clayton?
Yes sir.
200: Did you see him and ask him about it?
No sir, for he was not there.
201: Why should he have written that?
I don’t know anything about that and I did not ask him.
202: Did you know his hand writing?
Yes sir, I did know his hand writing.
203: You say it was in William Clayton’s hand writing?
I say I think it was, but I don’t say that positively, for others might write the same, – I don’t know anything about that, but I think it was his hand writing.
204: Now could you thirty five or forty years ago read over a page of manuscript, and remember what was in it so well as to testify forty years afterwards what was in it so well, as to testify what was in it?
Yes sir, I could at that time, and I can tell you things now that transpired over fifty years ago. Now I don’t say mind you, that I could do it forty years hence.
205: You say then that you could read over two or three pages of manuscript forty years ago, and tell what was in it?
Yes sir, if it was something that particularly impressed itself on my memory, and that was some thing that left a very strong impression on my mind, for that was the first time I had seen that revelation on sealing, and the only time I saw it, and I was interested in it to a great extent, and I observed it closely, and I remember about what the doctrine was that was taught, and I know that this doctrine of polygamy was not taught in it.
206: Could you recollect it accurately?
I could remember when I saw it whether it was the same or not, if it was anything like that sir.
207: Are you willing to rely on your memory in relation to this matter and testify that these revelations we not the same, – that is that the revelation that Whitney showed you was not the same as this published in this book?
Yes sir, I would swear positively that they were not the same at all.
208: Well wait a moment, – are you wiling to say that forty years after you had read two or three pages of a manuscript that you are able to capable of identifying what purports to be that manu-
script or a copy of that manuscript?
In what way?
209: In any way, – from memory?
Yes sir, I can to some extent, I can tell, for I know what you mean, – I can tell that there are principles taught in this book here in this alleged revelation that are not taught, – I mean were not taught in that revelation that Whitney had. I know that of my own knowledge sir, and you can make what you please out of it. Now wait, don’t interrupt me, – give me a chance to explain myself, – I have given you the reasons as to why I would be more than likely to remember this rexelation and what was in it that Whitney showed me, and I do remember it, and I know that the principles that were taught in the one that Whitney showed me, are not in this one in this book, and if it is the same revelation it has been added to and changed so that there is not the same meaning in it that was in the original. I say, mark you, if it is the same, for I don’t say that it is the same, by any means.
210: Well they are not the same?
No sir, for that did not teach any such stuff as this here in this book, not any like stuff.
211: Then I understand you to say also that you remember the language of that manuscript so well that you can tell that some of the language that was in that manuscript is in this Salt Lake book?
Is in there?
212: Yes sir?
In that book?
213: Yes sir, in that Salt Lake book?
Yes sir, there is some of it in it I think, or something like it.
214: Then it is a fact that you remember it so well that you can remember some of the language that was in there?
Yes sir.
215: And some of it had been changed, – you remember that also?
Yes sir, it has been changed, and a good deal put in there that was not in there at all, – that is some has been put in that was not in the manuscript some has been put in that was not in the manuscript at all, – that is assuming that they are the same, for I don’t say that any part of this manuscript was put in this book at all.
216: Well assuming that it was it has been changed?
Yes sir, it has been changed from what it was there.
217: But some of it is the same?
Yes sir.
218: Were there any other principles taught in what you read from the Utah book of Doctrine and Covenants but the principles of polygamy?
I cannot say. I never read but that one principle, for I did not have it any time, – I was disgusted with it when I read it. I just read it the one time and handed it back to the man who had given it to me.
219: Was that piece you looked at just one part or just one section?
Yes sir, he just handed it to me and asked me what I thought about it, and I expressed my opinion and handed it back to him.
220: You read it of course before you expressed your opinion?
Yes sir, certainly I did.
221: You did not look at any thing only what he called your attention to?
That is all.
222: And that was on the question of polygamy?
Yes sir.
223: Well as it was a very important matter, as you regarded it, this doctrine of polygamy, why is it that you did not when you first saw how the Utah church was – using it, or handling it, why did you not then look over all that was said?
I did not have any interest in it at all. It was a matter of no special interest to me, for I knew long before that from what I had heard the position they had taken and what the claimed and taught. I had nothing to do with them and I would not be with them on account of their wick-
edness. I did not care anything about them or what they taught for I knew they were lost in their wickedness.
224: Then you did not care whether they practiced polygamy or not?
No sir.
225: Why did you not take an interest in that?
Well I did not care anytging about it for that was their business, and not mine, and I did not see that I had any particular interest in it.
226: It was a matter of indifference to you then?
No sir, not exactly that, for I knew that I could not do anything with them and I did not have to answer for their crimes.
227: Your conscience was easy on that score?
Yes sir perfectly easy.
228: You have testified here today as to what you understood sealing between husband and wife to be?
Yes sir.
229: What was that?
They were to be married according to the ordinances, – that is all.
230: Well then did sealing mean marriage?
That is what I understand it to be, and that is about all I did or do know about it.
231: Sealing then was not only for time but for eternity as well?
Yes sir, that was what was provided for in that ordinance.
232: Who could be sealed?
It was for husband and wife that was all, – they could be sealed for time and eternity, and they were the only ones that could be sealed.
233: that was done through a revelation?
What is that?
234: The authority for that was through a revelation through Joseph Smith, was it not?
That was done by the authority of the church sir.
235: It was authorized by the church then?
Yes sir.
236: And not by a revelation?
They said it was by a revelation, but I never read it, and I don’t know what it was for I never had anything to do with it.
237: Your garments were clear from sin?
Yes sir, they are clear from polygamy entirely. There is no taint of polygamy on my garments, – I have kept clear of that sir.
238: Now what I was going to ask you was this, – how if a man was sealed for time and eternity to his present wife, and she died and he married another, and he was sealed to her, – how would it be in the hereafter with that woman?
Oh I don’t know that they were that way.
239: Well wait a moment, – would not that man have two wives in eternity?
Well sir, I don’t know. I could not say anything about that for I never knew of a circumstance of that kind. I will tell you what I think sir, – I believe that polygamy was from the devil from the beginning, and that is my opinion and I don’t care who knows it either sir.
240: Now under that revelation did not a man have a right, if he was a member of the church, did not – a man have a right to be sealed to his wife?
No sir.
241: He did not?
No sir, he had a right to have his wife sealed to him.
242: Well suppose that a man had one wife, and she was sealed to him and then died, and then he married another woman how would it be?
What is that?
243: Supposing I say that a man had a wife, and she was
sealed to him and she died, and then he married another wife, – how would that be then?
Well that would be all right, – but I don’t know much about that, – I did not have anything to do with the business of sealing.
244: Well would not that man have two wives in eternity?
No sir.
245: Why not?
Because they would not seal two wives to him for eternity.
246: Well how do you know that?
Well that is what they said.
247: Well was there not a revelation to that effect?
I don’t know anything about it, – I did not read the revelation.
248: Well now is it not a fact that this practice or doctrine of polygamy grew out of that sealing doctrine, and that they were sealed as you have suggested for eternity, and being sealed for eternity, was not the next subject and suggestion, that if they were sealed for eternity they might also be married for time?
Well I can’t answer that question, for I don’t know anything about it sir. I can’t answer that question for it is something I don’t know anything about.
249: Well is it a fact that if Joseph Smith had any extra wives, or other wives than Emma Smith, if he did that, – had these extra wives and practiced it, – that in practiced polygamy, he would not be likely to let you see him at it?
Well I don’t believe he ever did any such a thing.
250: Well if he did that he would not have let you know anything about it – it is altogether probably that he would not let you know anything about it if he could prevent it?
Well I say I don’t believe he ever did any such a thing.
251: Well sir, answer my question, – is it likely that when he practiced polygamy – if he did practice it, that he would have invited you to witness it?
I don’t believe that he ever did practice it.
252: Well is it probable that he would have invited you to see him practice it?
I don’t know anything about that. 253 (Written as 233)
252: Well now answer that question, – is it probably that he would have invited you to witness it, – to witness his practicing it?
Well I say I don’t know. I don’t think he is guilty of practicing it sir. I don’t believe he was ever guilty of practicing it.
254: Well supposing that he was guilty of it, would he have invited you to witness his practicing it?
I can’t answer supposed cases.
255: You decline to answer that question?
Yes sir, for I can’t answer it.
256: Well now does it follow that because you did not see him practice polygamy, that he did not practice it?
I told you that I did not believe that he ever practiced it, and I told you that he never taught it to me not to anyone else that I knew of, and that I never heard him say anything about it one way or the other.
257: He did not talk to you about it?
No sir.
258: Now the question is, – you say you did not hear him say anything about it one way or the other?
No sir.
259: Now I am not denying that, but the question is, does it follow that he did not practice it because you did not see him practice it?
I can’t answer these questions because I don’t know anything about it. 260 (Written as 360)
259: Well I will ask you this as matter of reason, and
within the workings of your own mind, – does the fact that you did not see him practice polygamy, prove to the satisfaction of your own mind that he did not practice it?
I cannot say.
261: You have no answer to make to that at all?
No sir, I have nothing to say to that at all.
262: Well then you say you never spoke to him about polygamy?
No sir, and he never spoke to me about it.
263: Well I will ask you this question, – did Joseph Smith know that you were opposed to the practice of polygamy?
How could he know it when he never mentioned it to me one way or the other. There never was anything said about it between us, and he could scarcely know that I was opposed to it.
264: he did not talk to you about it?
No sir, he never did. He never mentioned it to me one way or the other, and I think I have told you that at least a dozen times.
265: Well do you think that his confidence in you was so great, that if he had more than one wife, or a dozen wives, that he would keep the accounts of these wives there with you, or allow you to keep them for him?
Well I know that I never did keep any accounts of that kind and I don’t think he ever did have but the one wife.
266: Did you ever know Melissa Lott?
Melissa who?
267: Melissa Lott?
Melissa Lott?
268: Yes sir?
No sir, I don’t know that I did. I don’t recollect the name at all.
269: You do not recollect the name of the woman at all?
No sir, I have no recollection of it at all.
270: Did you know Eliza Partridge?
No sir, that was before I went there, and I don’t know anything about it at all.
272: You did not know either Emily or Eliza Partridge?
No sir.
273: Did you know Maria Lawrence?
No sir, I did not know her by that name.
274: Did you know her by the name of Smith?
What Smith was it?
275: The one that was Maria Lawrence, – did you know her?
I knew William Smith and his wife, and I knew Samuel Smith and his wife, but I don’t know what their first names were.
276: Did you know Sarah Lawrence?
I don’t recollect the names at all. If I knew them I don’t recollect these names now, and that was a very long time ago you know for a person to remember the names of people that he was not very well acquainted with, if he was acquainted with them at all, and I don’t say that I ever knew these people for I don’t remember them at all now if I did.
277: Did you know Sarah Walker?
No sir.
278: You did not know her either?
No sir.
279: If these, or any of these women whose names I have mentioned were at any time the wives of Joseph Smith you never knew anything about it?
No sir, I never did, and I don’t believe that any of them ever were.
280: Well if they were his wives, he would not have been likely to have told you about it would he?
I don’t know. I know he did not tell me, or say any thing about it one way or the other, and I don’t believe they were his wives either.
281: Were you in and about Joseph’s residence often?
Yes sir.
282: How often would you be there?
Oh I would be there very often.
283: Well how often would you be there at Joseph’s house?
I could not tell you, – I would be there I should say about every week, more or less. I would be there just when I had business there, or felt like going when I had the time.
284: What business would take you to Joseph’s houw?
I can’t say, for just when I had business that would take me down there I would go down to see him perhaps, and very often I would go when perhaps I would have no business at all. When I had business there and would go there, I can’t tell you now what that business was.
285: Well what business did you have, or would you have in his family?
Only to talk with him on any business that might come up that might come up and that would be urgent and I felt that it was necessary to see him.
286: Well that is what is what would take you down there to his house?
Yes sir.
287: Just general business?
Yes sir, anything that would come up that I wanted to see him about.
288: Was it not your custom generally to transact your business at the office?
It was.
289: Well then what occasion did you have to go to his house at all on business?
Well only as I told you when there would be something come up that required his attention, or I wanted his advice about it, and I knew that he was at his home, why I would go up to his house and see him, and ask him about it.
290: Well where would you find him at his residence?
Where would I find him?
291: Yes sir?
Why there at his house of course. Where else would I find him?
292: I mean whereabouts at his residence would you find him?
Why in one of the rooms of course.
293: Would he always be in one room?
No sir, sometimes he would be in the kitchen, some times in the dining room, – in one room and another the same as any man would be around his home.
294: Did you ever see anybody in a room with him?
Yes sir.
295: Who have you seen?
I have seen his wife in a room very often.
296: Was she always in the room with him?
No sir, of course she was not, – sometimes she would be in the room with him, and sometimes some of his children would be with him, and sometimes he would be alone in the room.
297: How many rooms did he have in his house?
Well he had a very comfortable residence, – I can’t say how many rooms there was in it, but it was a very comfortable residence.
298: Did it have rooms up stairs and down stairs both?
He was living in the “Nauvoo Mansion” most of the time I was there during his lifetime, and there was rooms both upstairs and downstairs.
299: Was not his family pretty extensive at that time?
Yes sir, he had considerable children.
300: He had how many children at that time living with him?
Well all he had were living with him.
301: Well how many children did he have, if you remember and what were their names?
Well he had Joseph and he had Alexander and he had Fred, – I remember that these three boys used to come and play with my boys. I remember that they used to do that for I lived not a great ways from where they lived, and they
would come over to play with my boys occasionally.
302: Well was that all the children he had at that time.
Yes sir, I think so, – yes sir, that was all.
303: No did he not have another son?
He did not at that time, for David was not born then, he was not born until after Joseph was martyred.
304: Did you ever know Eliza Snow?
Yes sir, I have known her and I have seen her.
305: Were you well acquainted with her?
Well well enough to know who she was.
306: Did you ever see her there at Joseph Smith’s?
Yes sir, – did you ask me if I ever saw her at Joseph’s? You must excuse me for I am rather hard of hearing.
307: Yes sir, I asked you if you had ever seen Eliza Snow at Joseph Smith’s?
No sir, I never saw her there that I remember anything about.
308: Did you know where she lived?
Yes sir.
309: Did you ever see Joseph Smith at her house?
No sir.
310: Did you ever see him at her house, – at her father’s house I mean?
Did I ever see Joseph at her father’s house?
311: Yes sir?
No sir, I never did. I knew her and I knew where she lived, but I never saw him at any of these houses. I knew her pretty well, but I never saw him at her father’s house, or her at this house.
312: Now you say you saw her, – where did you see her?
On the street and at meetings on Sundays.
313: How did you know her?
How did I know her?
314: Yes sir?
Just the same as i would know you if I were to meet you on the street, or any where else.
315: Did you ever see her and Joseph Smith together?
No sir.
316: Did you know Mrs. Law?
Who?
317: Mrs. Law?
317: William Law’s wife?
318: Yes sir?
Did I know her?
319: Yes sir?
No sir, for I never was in his house, but I have seen her. I had no more acquaintance with her than merely knowing her when I would see her.
320: Did you ever see her and Joseph together?
No sir, I never did. I never did sir.
321: Did you ever have any conversation with Joseph about her?
Never sir.
322: Did you ever have any conversation with her?
About what?
323: About what, – about anything?
No sir.
324: Had William Law become disaffected towards the church wlile you were there?
Disaffected?
325: Yes sir?
Why he went off along with John C. Bennett.
326: That was before Joseph’s death?
Yes sir.
327: You remember that much?
Yes sir.
328: Do you know what the trouble was?
Well all I know about it was that he was a great admirer of John C. Bennetts.
329: What was the matter with William Law?
I don’t know what was the matter with him. I don’t know that there was anything the matter with him.
330: Was there any trouble between him and Joseph?
No sir, not that I know of.
331: You said you were the secretary and kept the private affairs of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
332: You were the secretary of Joseph Smith or the church which?
How is that?
333: You were the secretary of Joseph Smith or the church?
Joseph Smith.
334: Or the church, – which was it?
I say I was the secretary of Joseph Smith. I was one of his secretaries.
335: You are sure of that:
Yes sir.
336: And you kept his journals?
Yes sir.
337: Did you keep his letter books?
Yes sir.
338: Was Brigham Young after Joseph, President?
William who?
339: Brigham Young, was he the president after Joseph Smith?
I don’t think I knew William Young.
340: I did not say “William Young” I said Brigham Young
Oh Brigham Young?
341: Was he chosen president after Joseph Smith?
Not when Joseph was living he was not.
342: Where were you when he was chosen president?
He was never chosen president, – not to my knowledge. If he was ever chosen president I don’t know anything about it, but they said at winter quarters that he was chosen president at Kanesville at the time they held a conference there, but I was not there and I don’t know anything about it of my own knowledge, – that is only what I heard about it, and I don’t know that he was chosen president.
343: Was he, or was he not President of the Twelve at Nauvoo?
At what time?
344: At the time you were there in Nauvoo, or any part of the time you were there, and before the death of Joseph Smith?
Yes sir.
345: He was President of the Twelve at Nauvoo?
Yes sir.
346: When was he chosen President of the Twelve?
I was not there, and I don’t know when he was chosen President of the Twelve, for I was not there at the time.
347: Was not Brigham Young there at Nauvoo after the death of Joseph Smith accepted in the, – in some way accepted as the President of the church?
No sir.
348: He wasn’t?
No sir, he was not. Not at Nauvoo.
349: He was not, you say, and you are positive of that?
I am positive that he was not so chosen at Nauvoo bit if you want me to tell you about it I can tell you the whole story.
350: Well go ahead and tell it?
Brigham Young never was chosen until he was chosen there at Kanesville.
351: I believe you testified when you were on the stand here before that you were acquainted with the publication known as the “Times and Seasons”?
Yes sir, and I have got the Times and Seasons at my home.
352: Was that a church publication?
Was it published by the church do you mean?
353: Yes sir, – in other words as I put it, was it a church publication?
Yes sir, of course it was. Of course it was a church publication just the same as what the Herald is now.
354: Would you refresh your memory and read from page six hundred and thirty seven under the heading “special meetings”, – read the first paragraph in the second column?
355: Well read that?
Well what do you want to know by that? What do you want me to read that for?
356: Well read it?
On the 8th of August 1844, at a special meeting of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, convened at the stand in the city of Nauvoo, President Brigham Young called the audience to order, and arranged the several quorums according to their standing and the rules of the church. The meeting had been previously called as stated, to choose a guardian or trustee for said church.” Well what about it?
357: Well does not that refresh your recollection?
No sir.
358: It does not?
No sir. It was not necessary for me to read that, for I knew it as well as I do now without reading it.
359: Well are you not able to say now after reading that paragraph which I have called your attention to that Brigham Young on the 8th day of August 1844, was not the President?
No sir, he was not the President of the church.
360: You say notwithstanding that paragraph that he was not the President of the church?
I say at that time he was not elected president of the church.
361: Well I did not say anything about his being elected President of the church, but at that time was he not the acting President of the church?
No sir, he was not the acting President that I know of.
362: He was not the acting President, you say?
Yes sir, that is what I say.
363: Well is the paragraph which I have called your attention to, and which you have read, true or not true, is it true or false?
It is not true sir. It is not true, because it was never done according to what is said there.
364: What is not true?
He did not set the quorums in order.
365: I offer the paragraph here on page six hundred and thirty seven, under the head of “Special meetings” in evidence. It is found in exhibit “O” in the second column of the page I have stated, – I offer the whole of the article or section under that heading?
The part offered is in words and figures, as follows, – “Special Meeting”. “On the 8th of August 1844 at a special meeting of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints convened at the stand in the city of Nau-
voo, President Brigham Young called the audience to order, and arranged the several quorums according to their standing and the rules of the church. The meeting had been previously called, as stated, to choose a guardian or trustee for said church. Elder Phelps opened the meeting by prayer, and President Young then proceeded to speak, and gave his views of the present situation of the church, now that the prophet and patriarch were taken from our midst by the wickedness of our enemies. For the first time since he became a member of the church, a servant of God, a messenger to the nations in the nineteenth century; for the first time in the kingdom of God, the Twelve apostles of the Lamb, chosen by revelation in this last dispensation of the gospel for the winding up scene present themselves before the saints to stand in their lot according to appointment. While the prophet lived we all walked by “sight”, he is taken from us and we must now walk by “faith”. After he had explained matters so satisfactorily that every saint could see that Elijah’s mantle had truly fallen upon the Twelve, he asked the saints what they wanted. Do you want a guardian, a prophet, a spokesman, or what do you want? If you want any of these officers signify it be (by?) raising the right hand.” Not a hand was raised. He then gave the saints his views of what the Lord wanted. Here are the “Twelve” appointed by the finger of God, who hold the keys of the priesthood, and the authority to set in order and regulate the church in all the world. Here is Elder Amasa Lyman and Elder Sydney Rigdon; they were Counselors to the First Presidency, and they are counselors to the Twelve still; if they keep their places; but if either wish to act as spokesman for the prophet Joseph, he must go behind the veil where Joseph is. He continued his remarks for nearly an hour, opening by the Spirit of God, the eyes, ears and hearts of the saints to the subject before them, and to their duty and the glory of God. Elder Amasa Lyman followed and fully accorded with the views of Elder Young. I have been at the back of the prophet Joseph and I shall be at the back of the “Twelve”. There is no need of choosing a guardian or head, the apostles have the power as they had anciently, and this is the power that turns the key and will bear off the kingdom of God in all the world, triumphantly; and I will help them obtain that glory, that eye hath not seen, ear hat not heard, and the heart of man hath not conceived,. His remarks were continued in the full fruition of the spirit that whispers; union is strength and peace is joy. Elder Phelps spoke ext, and continued the same spirit and feeling, having known many of the elders for fourteen years, and had seen them take their lives in their hands, without purse or scrip, in summer and in winter, through good and through evil report, for the salvation of souls and for the benefit of Zion, without the hope of reward, save pleasing God and obeying his commandments, -had seen them harness for war when wicked men sought their lives and endeavored to destroy their wives and children; and at all time they were willing to act by counsel; they will do it now; this lake of faces does not seem so pleasant without indicating good; and the elders who have stood on the right and left of our departed prophet, knowing the power and authority of the priesthood will honor it. Elder Rigdon must know how he obtained his endowment, or what he has; for he has not received all, only a small part. Let him and the whole of Israel rejoice this day, for if they rear that temple and are faithful they shall all been endowed (men and women) as God will, till they 115 themselves and their progenitors, as well as secure their posterity. Fear not concerning a prophet; Joseph held the keys in this world and holds them in the world to come, and counsels for you now. I understand the revelations and know that in them all things are written concerning the Twelve. Elder P. P Pratt said that what had been said, was well said, and went into the merits of the subject with his usual animation. Says he, I know we can all live happy if we deal with honest men; I do not like the practice when any one is sick or in difficulty to run to a doctor or lawyer, run to the very worst men to be cured or helped out of a difficulty. Let me die a natural death and suffer wrong, rather than hire a doctor to kill me, or a lawyer to fleece me and leave me to the beggarly elements of the world. As to merchants, I say nothing of them. You know what I mean. Elder Young again resumed, -I do not ask this audience to take my counsel; act for yourselves; if Elder Rigdon is your choice manifest it; if the Twelve be the men to counsel you to finish the great work laid out by our departed prophet, say so, and do not break your covenant by murmuring hereafter. When the whole subject was properly explained and understood, and Counselor Rigdon refused to have his name voted for a spokesman or guardian, the question was put “all in favor of supporting the Twelve in their calling, (every quorum, man and woman), signify it by the uplifted hand.” and the vote was unanimous, no hand being raised in the negative. The next vote was that the Twelve should select and appoint two Bishops to act as trustees for the church, according to law. This vote was unanimous also. Another unanimous vote was passed to use every exertion to forward the building of the temple, and so strengthen the hands of the committee. The revelation relating to tithing was referred to, and the manifestation of every saint seemed to be, we will do as the Lord hath commanded; and the assembly was dismissed with the blessings of the Lord. (The following note to the above appears as a part of the communication or article above set forth.) The Twelve would invite the brethren abroad, in obedience to the commandments of the Lord, to gather at Nauvoo, with their means, to help build up the city, and complete the temple, which is now going forward faster than it has at any time since it commenced. Beware of the speculations about the prophet. Believe no tales on the subject; time will tell who are the friends of Joseph Smith, who laid down his life for his brethren. We have no new commandments, but beseech the brethren to honor and obey the old ones. For where-so-ever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together. More in the next. Brigham Young Pres. of the Twelve. Sep’t 2, 1844.
366: Was not Brigham Young, soon after the death of Joseph Smith, recognized as the leader of the church at Nauvoo?
As President?
367: As the leader I say?
He was not recognized at Nauvoo as the President of the church, -he was recognized as the President of the Twelve, -that was all.
368: Well now I will ask you again whether or not he was recognized as the leader of the church?
No sir.
369: He was not?
No sir, not any more than the rest of the Twelve.
370: He was not a leader any more than the rest of the twelve were, – is that what you say?
Nor sir, he was not in church matters.
371: Not in church matters?
No sir, in affairs of that kind it had to be the quorum. He did not do it himself, for it was not valid if he did it without the quorum.
372: Did he have any more functions than any others of the twelve?
No sir, only the function of presiding over the Twelve as its president. That is what I understood.
373: Then Mr. Whitehead what will you say to this question, – was he not the highest officer in the church at that time?
I don’t think he was in some things.
374: Who was higher than he?
He might have been in spiritual affairs, but not in temporal affairs.
375: Well was he the highest officer in the spiritual affairs of the church?
He was the highest in the Twelve, – he was not the President of the Twelve.
376: Was he not the highest officer in the church at that time?
I say he was the President of the Twelve, – that was the office he held.
377: Well was he not the highest officer in the church in spiritual affairs?
I don’t consider that he was any more superior than any of the rest of the Twelve in that matter.
378: As Presedent of the Twelve was he not the highest officer in the church in spiritual affairs connected with the Twelve, – with the church I should say?
Well all the difference I know of between him and any of the rest of the Twelve, was that he had to preside over their counsellings.
379: Could any other person preside when he was present?
Preside at a meeting of the Twelve, do you mean?
380: Yes sir?
No sir.
381: No one else could preside over the deliberations of the Twelve when he was present?
No sir, not if he was there.
382: Now then when the church was called together in greater numbers than the twelve as a body, he was entitled to preside?
Yes sir. Well no, that is not it either, for any one what was called could preside, for he was not obligated to do so. They could have called another by his consent, and another could in that way preside at the church meetings.
383: They could call another to preside you say?
Yes sir, by his consent, but it would have to be one of the twelve and not any one else.