UC-NRLF ^B 3DE T3b llli e4 ^W^IWWItfOT^ - . > • ^liwl »uu AnJ !••» LIBRARY OF Tin; University of California. Received \ QJ^,l./r/^. > '^9^ • Accession No. //LZj^..^. • CLiss No. TRUE SUCCESSION m CHURCH PRESIDENCY OP THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS. Being a reply to Elder B. H. Roberts on '•SUCCESSION IN THE PRESIDENCY OF THE CHURCH. BY ELDER HEMAN 0. SMITH, Church Historian. "While I have powers of body and mind; while water runs and grass grows; while virtue is lovely, and vice hateful; and while a Btone points out a sacred spot where a fragment of American liberty once was; I or my posterity will plead the cause of injured inno- cence." . . . — Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 395. LAMONI, iowa: PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF PUBLICATION OP THE REORGANIZED CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OP LATTER DAY SAINTS. 1898. ij/6671 ^C^ ^72 6?^(L. Copyrighted by the BOARD OP PUBLICATION of the Reor- ganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Publishers and Proprietors, in the year 1898, in the oflSce of the Librarian ©f Congress at Washington, D. C. HKKALD PUBLISHING HOUSB, LAMONI, IOWA. PREFACE. The only apology needed for the appearance of this work is, that we have been attacked, and it is both a privilege and a duty to respond.' Some have thought the church was too slow and should have replied long ago. But had we rushed into print when the work of Mr. Roberts first appeared, we would have done so unadvisedly. We did not know whether he was authorized to write or not; nor did we know whether the church he represented would indorse his positions; hence no one was appointed to reply; though it was not lost sight of, and several, of the elders upon their own responsibility were carefully collecting material; for use in such reply. Now that the representatives of the church in Utah, both in Europe and America, have made it their chief weapon of attack and defense, we think the opportune time has come, for they are thus pledged to its support. Further, we have the direct testimony of Mr. Roberts that the First Presidency in Utah indorsed hia work. The book was copyrighted in February, 1894. In the latter part of the year 1895 Mr. Roberts, together with Moses Thatcher, fell under the displeasure of church authorities for his political actions; while under the ban of disapproval he was interviewed, and the interview pub- lished in the Salt Lake Tribune for October 14, 1895. The following is an extract from the interview: — STATEMENT BY ROBERTS. CLAIMS THAT HE CONFRONTS A GRAVE CRISIS. The following authorized statement by B. H. Roberts, in the form of an interview, was given out at the Democratic State headquarters last .evening. Being asked for his views upon the present political situation^ Mr. Roberts said: — ^ PREFACE. "I have always regarded myself as properly respectful and attentive to church authority. In my labors in the church, whether in missionary or literary affairs. I have always cou- sulted with the presidency when communication was possible; and their wishes have been respectfully followed. All the manuscripts of tracts and books of which I am the author, that have been written in advocacy or defense of the Mormon faith, have been invariably submitted to their personal inspection or to the inspection of committees appointed by them." This, then, fixes the responsibility of an indorsement upon the Presidency; and in meeting the issues discussed by Mr. Roberts in "Succession in the Presidency of the Church," we are not simply meeting Mr. Roberts alone, but we are meeting the authorized positions of the church in Utah upon the issues involved. In addition to this Mr. Roberts is one of the seven Presi- dents of Seventy, a leading minister, a popular lecturer, and an author of no mean repute among his fellows, being the author of the "Life of John Taylor," "Outlines of Ecclesiastical History," "The Gospel," and other publi- ■cations. Having then located our contestants and estimated the strength of their position, we advance to the examination confident of the final triumph of the right wherever found; and send forth this little book with a humble prayer that the erring may learn wisdom and the darkened mind receive light. We wish here to gratefully acknowledge the assistance rendered us by valuable suggestions given us by several. With much confidence we submit the issues involved to the careful investigation of an indulgent, but discerning public. The Authob. CONTENTS. CHAPTER 1. Basic Prediction — Rigdon Slandered — Exonerated — A Fraud— Meeting of August 8 — Woodruff Against the Record — Resolution of August 8 5 CHAPTER 2. William Smith — Slandered by Roberts— Suspended From Office — Restored — Sustained — Ordained a Patriarch — Highly Commended — Roberts Errs Concerning Him — Preaches Lineal Priesthood — Brighamites Expel Him — Lucy Smith et al. Considered 1& CHAPTER 3. Wight and Miller — Wight's Character — Roberts' Blunder — Wight Goes to Wisconsin — His Record — His Followers — Galveston News' Tribute— Miller — His Reason for Lear- ing Former Associations— Hewett's Letter 21 CHAPTER 4. Strang— Challenges Taylor and Hyde— Their Reply — Rob- erts' Unmanly Attack 26 CHAPTER 5. History of Reorganization — Briggs' Priesthood — Twelve aft Nauvoo- Roberts' Sarcasm— Piercy on Smith Family — President Smith's Pledge— Roberts' Philosophy 2S CHAPTER 6. Wight's Testimony— Goes to Wisconsin— Roberts' Theory False- Smith and Wight Teach Lineal Priesthood — Strangite Resolution — "Young Joseph's" Blessings His. Statement — Revelation of 1841 — Joseph's Blessing — Whitehead's Testimony— Testimony of Emma Smith— G. J. Adams on Lineage — Carter's Testimony — Witnesses Not Impeached— Bishop Miller— Hyrum Smith's Ordina- tion—Law of Lineage— Joseph Smith on Descent— Cal- houn Letter — Call by Revelation — Reorganization Approved — Richards' Correspondence — Ordination of President Smith— Rights of Appointment 3C 4 CONTENTS. CHAPTER 7. Roberts' Discrepancies — Twelve Second in Authority — Temple not Completed — Church Rejected— Pratt's Reve- lation 67 CHAPTER 8. Kevs of Authority— Keys and Oracles— Pratt's Revelation — Oracles to the Twelve — William Marks— Roberts' Climax. 76 CHAPTER 9. The Twelve— Necessity for a Reorganization— Church Held Together — Building of Nauvoo, etc. — Driven to Rocky Mountains — Joseph's Prophecy — Pratt's Statement- Isaiah's Prophecy — The Exodus — Seventies — Baptism For the Dead— Temple Building— Persecution 85 CHAPTER 10. Penrose— Leading Spirits — Woodruff's Testimony — Disci- pline—Spencer Interview 101 CHAPTER 11. Brigham Young — His Career — Whereabouts of Authori- ties—Authorities not in Harmony — Twelve Sustained — Seasonable Notice Promised— Growth of Presiding Idea — Rebaptism — Reordination — Reorganization — Promise of Seasonable Notice Violated — Changes Made — Written Word Discarded — Adam-God — Vulgar Teaching — Con- cerning Debts— Expert Scoundrels — Blood Atonement — Polygamy 114 CHAPTER 12. Points Established — Relevant Question — Acknowledged People of God— Authority to Choose and Ordain — Teach- in-g of Joseph Smith's Successor— Conclusion 132 CHAPTER 13. Correspondence — Letters of Long— of Deseret News— of C. W. Penrose— of Clark -of Richards— Position of Rich- ards and Penrose — of Kooriranization — Presidency — Apostleship —Presidency of High Priesthood— Josephite Contention Sustained— Penrose Dilemma— Conclusion. . . 149 fXJNITEHSXTYJ Trile 8ilGGB88ion in Gliilrcli Presidencii. CHAPTER 1. Basic Prediction — Rigdon Slandered — Exonerated — A Fraud — Meeting op August 8. — Woodruff Against this Record — Resolution of August 8— Rigdon Acquiesces. Mr. Roberts introduces his treatise by quoting what purports to be language of Brigham Young used on August 8, 1844, as follows: — All that want to draw away a party from the Church after them, let them do it if they can, hut they will not prosper. He assumes that this language is prophetic, then pro- ceeds to shaw its fulfillment by citing the failure of the movements under Rigdon, William Smith, J. J. Strang, and others. In each of these cases he repeats this pur- ported prediction as a climax to his argument. As Mr. Roberts has given this purported statement so much prominence, we will give it a brief consideration. First, there is nothing peculiarly significant in the «tatement. It is but a sentiment which any person who had accepted the latter-day work would feel safe in -expressing, and one which was generally held and doubtless frequently expressed at the time, and one which would have received the unqualified indorsement of Rigdon, Strang, and every other claimant to the Presidency of the •church; a sentiment too which we most heartily agree to, for we most assuredly believe that no man or men will prosper in leading away a party from the church. But the questions were then and are now, Where was or is the church? Who represented or represents it? Instead of meeting these questions squarely and fairly, Mr. Roberts assumes the very point at issue by supposing that the 6 TRUE SUCCESSION IN party led by Brigham Young and his colleagues was and is the accepted church. This is illogical, and contrary to all rules of evidence, subjecting its author to an unenviable position as a controversialist. In the second place, if we concede that the statement referred, to was a prophetic one, the evidence of its cor- rectness is not complete so long as there are two flourish- ing organizations contending for recognition; and Mr. Roberts admits that he cannot point to a fulfillment of his pet prediction as applied to the Reorganization. He says: — Now that we draw to the close of our consideration of the claims of this "Reoriranized church," we cannot point to its destruction as we have done in the case of Sidney Rijrdon's church, William Smith's church, and James J. Strang's church; for the Reorganized church still exists. But its doom is written as distinctly ars that of the other false churches that we have seen crumble to pieces into shapeless heaps of ruin. It is only a question of time with regard to its failure. Mene,. Mbne, Tekel, is written upon its walls — God hath numbered thy kingdom — weighed in the balances— found wanting! — Suc- cession, by Roberts, page 99. Mr. Roberts forms his conclusion in advance of the evi- dence to support it, and then utters a prediction of his own upon the fulfillment of which depends the correctness of his basic prediction, a very unfortunate and unsafe thing to do. Were we, like he, to beg the question by assuming, in advance of the evidence, that the Reorganiza- tion is accepted of God, we could cite in confirmation the failure of Rigdon, Smith, and Strang, with as much con- sistency as does he. We could also bolster up our conclu- sion by predicting the downfall of the church in Utah with just as much flourish and with at least as much prospect of success. We hope, however, that if driven to such straits we will have the honesty to withdraw from the controversy. If this purported statement of Brigham Young's is a CHURCH PRESIDENCY. T true prediction, who can now tell whether it will be ful- filled in the destruction and dismemberment of the organi- zation of the church in Utah or that of the Reorganization? In the third place, the evidence that Brigham Young made this statement at the time and place claimed, is not very clear. Mr. Roberts quotes it from the Millennial Star, volume 25, page 216, a publication issued about 1863, nearly twenty years after the event. The account of the meeting published soon afterward, in Times and Seasons for September 2, 1844, does not contain these words or anything of like purport. Had such a sentiment been expressed and understood to have been prophetic in its character, it is but reasonable to suppose that some notice of it would have been included in the published account. (See Tillies and Seasons, Vol. 5, pp. 637, 638.) So much then for this so-called prediction which is brought forward with so great a flourish of trumpets to< form the basic thought of Mr. Roberts' great effort. Sum- marized, it amounts to this: (a) The statement if made is^ irrelevent and of no force, (b) It lacks evidence of com- plete fulfillment, (c) The evidence that such a statement was made is very questionable. If Mr. Roberts has not endeavored to make a mountain out of a molehill, who ever did? It was the custom then for these several factions ta prophesy against each other, and if there was either evi- dence or argument in it, we could quote more remarkable predictions from Rigdon and others against the Brigham- ites. We have no inclination to defend either the claims or the acts of Rigdon and some others referred to by Mr. Roberts; but in the interest of common justice, and in behalf of historic truth, we feel called upon to notice some of Mr. Roberts' blunders and misrepresentations. For the most of Mr. Roberts' assertions regarding Mr. Rigdon and what Joseph the Prophet said of him, he cites no authority, and for the remainder cites hearsay, or pub- S TRUE SUCCESSION IN lications issued many years afterward. He quotes largely from the "History of Joseph Smith" as contained in the Millennial Star, volume 25. How came these events, trans- piring after the death of Joseph Smith, to be made a part •of his history? Who wrote them as such, and by what authority? One of the most unkind things said of Mr. Rigdon by Mr. Roberts is the following: — Moreover, it was known that he was in sympathy and even ia comnnunication with some of the avowed enemies of Joseph, amonjET others with that arch traitor, John C. Bennett, who was plotting the overthrow of both Joseph and the church. — Rob- erts, page 2. That Mr. Rigdon was suspected of this is true, but that be was known to be guilty, is very doubtful. On the con- trary, he was exonerated. The supposed correspondence and conspiracy between him and Governor Carlin, John C. Bennett, and others, was fully investigated at the October conference of 1843; and at the conclusion of the examina- tion, as the published minutes of the conference have it: — President Joseph Smith arose and satisfactorily explained to the congregation the supposed treacherous correspondence with E.x-Governor Carlin, which wiiolly removed suspicion from Elder Sidney Rigdon, and from every other person. — J'imex and Seasons, Vol. 4, p. 330. That Mr. Rigdon's conduct in some respects was blam- able, we do not doubt; but how could Mr. Roberts assert that it was knoion that he was guilty of an offense of which the record says that suspicion was wholly removed from bim to the satisfaction of the assembled church? Yet Mr. Roberts in his 'Preface" explains the incentive that has prompted him in this work as follows: — My desire to preserve from error those not acquainted with the order of the priesthood of God. and the facts of church history in the great dispensation of the last days, has been the incentive which prompted me to write it. To misrepresent the facts of history is not the proper CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 9 way to preserve from error those who are ignorant on the subject; and to falsely heap odium upon a man who is not here to defend himself, no matter what his failinofs may have been, is detestable. But it has been the policy of Brigham Young and his fellows, since 1814, to vilify, slander, and abuse every one who refused to indorse their measures. These tendencies to misrepresent the facts of history and to heap opprobrium upon opponents are pain- fully apparent in the work of Mr. Eoberts now under consideration. We may have occasion to frequently invite attention to these tendencies, though we should not do so only in the interest of truth and justice. After other reflections upon the character of Mr. Rig- don, Mr. Roberts introduces the meeting of August 8, 1844, which was called by Mr. Rigdon, but which, according to the record, was largely under the dicta- tion of some members of the Quorum of Twelve with Brigham Young at their head. To the events of this meeting we wish to pay some attention, for it is important to know just what the church did in that critical emergency. One peculiar feature of the meeting as reported by eyewitnesses needs close attention from the fact that Mr. Roberts and others have relied upon it as strong evidence that God had chosen Brigham Young to lead the people. It is asserted that on that occasion Brigham Y^oung spoke with the voice of Joseph Smith and in personal appearance looked like him, which convinced the people that the mantle of Joseph had fallen upon him. Upon this point Mr. Roberts introduces three witnesses, as follows: — George Q. Cannon, who was present on that occasion, says: — If Joseph had risen fronn the dead and again spoken in their hearing, the effect could not have been more startling than it was to many present at that meeting; it was the voice of Joseph himself; and not only was it the voice of Joseph which was heard, but it seemed in the eyes of the people as if it were 10 TRUE SUCCESSION IN the very person of Joseph which stood before them. A more wonderful and miraculous event than was wrouofht that day in the presence of that congretration we never heard of. In the journal of Elder Wm. C. Staines, of that date, the fol- lowinof statement is recorded: Brifrham Young said — "I will tell you who your leaders or fTuardians will *be. The Twelve — I at their head!' This was with a voice like the voice of the prophet Joseph. I thought it was he, and so did thousands who heard it. This was very satisfactory to the people, and a vote was taken to sustain the Twelve in their office, which, with a few dissenting voices, was passed." President Wilford Woodruff, describing the event, says: When Brigham Young arose and commenced speaking, as has been said, if I had not seen him with my own eyes, there is no one that could have convinced me that it was not Joseph Smith; and anyone can testify to this who was acquainted with these two men. — Roberts, pp. 5-7. Upon this but little comment is needed. If the testi- mony of the witnesses be true, it furnishes no evidence that God had chosen Brigham Young. In the history of God's dealings with men there is not found evidence that he causes one to change his individuality for that of another, or to imitate another so as to deceive his people into the belief that it is the one imitated. . By the influ- ence of his Spirit he enables men to develop and more fully equips them for usefulness in his service, but never causes them to deceive the people by appearing to be what they are not. Only hypocrites are guilty of this species of fraud. To make God the author of it is to make him a party to a hypocritical transaction of which no honest man would be guilty. Had God chosen Brigham Young he would have presented Brigham Young before the people clothed with authority and power to lead his people, but he would not have fraudulently passed him off as Joseph Smith. That instance if true would brand the movement as a deceptive one. This kind of a trick was tried as early as the days of Moses. In a revelation given through Joseph Smith, in CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 11 June, 1S30, and now published in the Inspired Translation of the Scriptures, it is recorded: — And now, when Moses had said these words, Satan cried with a loud voice, and went upon the earth, and commanded, saying, I am the Only Begotten, worship me. — Par. 12. Paul gives us some light upon this sort of work. He says : — For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. — 2 Cor. 11:13-15. If the reader will carefully examine the above passages "he will not be at a loss to determine by what power it is probable that Brigham Young could so transform himself that "it seemed in the eyes of the people as if it were the very person of Joseph which stood before them;" especially so when nothing of this nature can be found in the deal- ings of God. Mr. Young himself may have been deceived, but whether he was ignorant or conscious of the part he was playing, we cannot be ignorant in regard to the authorship of this deceptive transformation policy. The counterpart of this transaction can be found in mod- ern spiritualism, where a medium or a spirit assumes a familiar form and voice. This clew may enable us to account for some of the dark and mysterious things con- nected with the people who accepted, as from God, the peculiar phenomenon exhibited at Nauvoo on August 8, 1844. It was an opportune time for the spirit of darkness to step in, and was improved to the sorrow and disap- pointment of many. Oh, that he who had the influence to lead had possessed the discernment and strength of Moses to have said, "Depart hence, Satan ! " Just what did transpire at that important meeting it is very hard to determine, for the accounts are quite conflict- 12 TRUE SUCCESSION IN ing. It is quite clear that the meeting was called by Elder Sidney Rigdon for the purpose of presenting his claims, but it appears that Brigham Young took the active over- sight of it, if he did not entirely monopolize it. By the account published at the time it does not appear that Elder Rigdon was permitted to address the meeting. Brigham Young "called the audience to order" and * 'ar- ranged the several quorums." Prayer was offered by Elder Phelps. Elder Young then spoke, followed by Elders Lyman, Phelps, and Pratt; then Elder Young closed and during his remarks presented certain motions. Elder Rigdon is not mentioned as a participant except in his refusal to have his name presented to the assembly when the voting was had. See Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, pp. 637, 638. Yet Mr. Roberts states:— The next day was the one appointed by Sidney Rigdon for the church to assemble and ciioose a "Guardian." The attendance was large, as intense interest had been awakened upon tlie subject to be considered. Sidney Rigdon addressed the assembly, setting forth his claim to the "Guardianship" of the church. He had full opportunity to present his case, and for an hour and a half spoke without interruption; but despite his reputation as an orator, he failed to convince the saints that he was sent of God. — Roberts, p. 5. After this discussion the published account states: "Counsellor Rigdon refused to have his name voted for as a spokesman or guardian." In harmony with this Mr. Roberts explains in a footnote on page 10, as follows: — The quorums had been arranged to vote separately and in their order, but when Elder Young put the question on accept- ing the Twelve to preside over the church, the question was put to all the quorums and the whole congregation at once. And since the vote to sustain the Twelve was unanimous, there was no need of putting the question on the acceptance of Sidney Rigdon either to the quorums or the people.— The facts in the text are quoted from the history of the prophet Joseph^ MUl. Star, Vol. XXV., p. 204. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. IS* Yet Mr. Roberts makes President Woodruff to contra- dict this by quoting him as follows: — Nearly all the quorum of the Twelve were on missions in the eastern States when the terrible tragedy at Carthage toolv place; and we did not hear of it for some time afterwards. We returned to Nauvoo. It has been repeated to you here tonight what was done in the conference in Nauvoo. I do not know whether there is anyone present here tonight but myself who was at that conference — there are but few living who were present on that occasion, Brigham stepped forth as a leader of Israel, as has been said here tonight by Brother Roberts, and Sidney Rigdon also tried to get the presidency; but when his name was put to a vote before the conference of the Latter-day Saints, and they were asked if they wanted him as their guar- dian, to guide them in the Celestial Kingdom, Brigham said: *'A11 who do, raise your right hand," and I did not see a hand raised in his favor in that congregation. — Roberts, p. 119. Now let us inquire what did that assembly vote for? It is important to know. The record as published in Times and Seasons gives it as follows: " 'All in favor of support- ing 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." No wonder it was unanimous. No Latter Day Saint would refuse to support them in their calling. Very likely Elder Rigdon voted for that. In doing so no one was committed to the subsequent policy of the Twelve. But Mr. Roberts, on the authority of the Millennial Star published nearly twenty years later, gives the resolution as follows: — "Do the Church want and is it their only desire to sustain the Twelve as the First Presidency of this people? If the Church want the Twelve to stand as the head, the First Presidency of the Church, and at the head of this king- dom in all the world, stand next to Joseph, walk up into their calling, and hold the keys of this kingdom — every man, every woman, every quorum is now put in order, and you are now the sole controllers of it — all that are in favor of this in all the con- gregation of the Saints, manifest it by holding up the right hand. (There was a universal vote.) If there are any of the contrary mind — every man and every woman who does not want the Twelve to preside, lift up your hands in like manner. U TRUE SUCCESSION IN ^o hands up.) This supersedes the other question, and trying it by quorums. — Roberts, pages 9, 10. The reader I think will concede that the account pub- lished at the time is the more likely to be correct, and hence the church was not at that time committed to sus- taining the Twelve as a First Presidency. If then Mr. Rigdon did as Mr. Roberts states he did in the following quotation, the reason is quite clear: — It may be interesting to the reader to know that Sidney Rig- don himself outwardly seemed to acquiesce in the decision of the church with regard to himself. The Sunday following the meeting above described he addressed the saints for a long time, "blessed them in the name of the Lord; telling them emphatically that he was with the Twelve. He wished to know the mind of the church in relation to his returning to Pittsburg, they said, "go in peace." — Roberts, page 12. And if Elder William Marks and others, who afterwards opposed the Twelve, acquiesced at the time, it can be easily- explained. But more of this resolution, its interpretation, and effects when we come to treat directly the claims of Brigham Young and his colleagues. We have followed Mr. Roberts in his comments regarding the movement under Rigdon, not because we have any sympathy with the claims of Elder Rigdon, but for the purpose of correcting certain misrepresentations because of the influence they might have upon the discussion of the question of Succes- sion, which is the leading issue between us. CHAPTER 2. William Smith— Slandered by Roberts—Suspended From Office — Restored — Sustained — Ordained a Patriarch — Highly Commended — Roberts Errs Concerning Him — Preaches Lineal Priesthood— Brighamitbs Expel Him — Lucy Smith et al. Considered. Mr. Roberts next introduces the work of William Smith, the brother of the prophet; and, true to the dispo- sition manifested by him throughout his treatise, com- mences with a slanderous statement, for which he cites no proof. It is as follows: — Following the attempt of Sidney Rigdon to become the "Guardian of the Church," we will consider the efforts of William Smith, brother to the prophet Joseph, to become its President. He was a member of the quorum of the Twelve at the aeath of the prophet, though for some time his conduct had been such as to bring him into disrepute among the Saints. He was of a turbulent, ungovernable disposition; a man of fierce passions and violent temper. When the saints were driven from Missouri, in 1838, and his brother Joseph cast into prison, such was his vindictiveness against the prophet that at a general conference of the church held near Quincy, Illinois, May 4th, 1839, he was suspended from fellowship; but was afterwards restored, mainly through the pleadings of that same brother against whom he railed with such bitterness of speech. — Roberts, p. 15. He who seeks thus to prejudice a case against an oppo- nent before the investigation begins, manifests an unbe- coming spirit of bitterness or a conscious weakness; and when he afterwards assumes the role of a witness, as Mr. Roberts does in relatincr a personal interview with William Smith, we must consider and treat him as a prejudiced witness. The minutes of the conference of May 4, 1839, have this entrv: — 16 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Resolved 9th: That Elders Orson Hyde and William Smith be allowed the privilefje of appearing personally before the next General Conference of the church, to plve an account of their conduct; and that in the meantime they botii be suspended from exercising the functions of their oflice. — Millennial Star^ Vol. 17, p. 204. So when Mr. Roberts asserts tbat William Smith was suspended from fellowsldp, he misstates the case, and when he assumes to give the cause for this action he goes outside the record. By what authority these statements are made, we are left to conjecture. In the History of Joseph Smith, under date of May 25, 1839, occurs the following: — This day I met the Twelve in council. The case of Brother William Smith came up for investigation and was disposed of. —Mill. Star, Vol. 17, p. 232. Not a word about Joseph Smith pleading for him; nor are we informed how the case was disposed of. He was no doubt either vindicated or forgiven, as we find in the October conference minutes of the same year, the fol- lowing: — Orson Hyde to stand in his former office, and William Smith to be continued in his standing. — Times and Seasons, Vol. 1, p. 30. What a fruitful imagination Mr. Roberts has! In the very next sentence after the one quoted above Mr. Roberts says: — Shortly after the martyrdom of his brothers, Joseph and Hyrum, William was ordained to the office of patriarch to the church, to succeed Hyrum Smith, who held that office at the time of his death. Rather an unfit man for Patriarch, if Mr. Roberts repre- sents him fairly. But to add to this absurdity, Mr. Roberts, on page 18, returns to the attack, and says: — William Smith, however, did not command much of a follow- ing in this first attempt to make himself a leader. His profligate life was too notorious in Nauvoo to make it possible for him to wield much influence even as a schismatic. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 17 Is this the character of men that Mr. Young and his associates placed in responsible positions? It was they who ordained William Smith a patriarch. At or near the time of this ordination, when John Taylor, of the Twelve, was ''Editor and Proprietor," the Times and Seasons had this to say editorially of William Smith : — Father Smith, the first Patriarch, and Hyrum, his successor, conferred many blessings upon the saints that made their hearts glad. But they, in the wisdom of God, have been called away, and William, the son and brother, succeeds them. How many, now will say, I wish I had my patriarchal blessing? This has been the lamentation of many since the death of Joseph and Hyrum. William is the last of the family, and truly inherits the blood and spirit of his father's house, as well as priesthood and the patriarchal office from his father and brother, legally, and by hereditary descent. — Times and Seasons^ Vol. 6, p. 905. Is this the way that disreputable and profligate charac- ters are recommended by the church which Mr. Roberts represents? In assuming to trace the career of William Smith, Mr. Roberts claims that after becoming estranged from the Twelve he set up claims to the Presidency in his own right, then became associated with James J. Strang, and — After his failure in Nauvoo, and in Wisconsin in connection with Mr. Strang, we next hear of William Smith in the winter and spring of 1850, visiting those who had been members of the church in Illinois and Kentucky, teaching "lineal priest- hood as applied to the Presidency of the church." That is,, he taught that his brother Joseph's eldest son had a right by virtue of lineage to succeed to the Presidency of the church; but also taught in connection with this that it was his right as the only surviving brother of the former President, uncle and natural guardian of the "seed" of Joseph the prophet, to stand, in the interim, as president pr'o tern of the church. — Roberts, p. 23. The inference conveyed in this language is that William Smith did not teach "lineal priesthood as applied to the Presidency of the church" until the winter of 1850. But 18 TRUE SUCCESSION IN to make it clearer that Mr. Roberts does so affirm we quote a positive assertion found on page 65: — Not until 1850 did he begin to proclaim the right of "young Joseph" to be the President of the church; and then not by £*ny virtue of appointment from his father, but by right of lineage; and with this movement on his part originates the claims of Mr. Smith to the Presidency. That this statement is false appears from the following extract from a letter written from St. Louis, Missouri, November 22, 1845, by James Kay, and published in the Millennial Star for May 1, 1846:— Doubtless you will have heard of William Smith's apostasy. He is endeavoring to "make a raise" in this city. After he left Nauvoo he went to Galena, when he published a "proclama- tion" to the church, calling upon th«»m to renounce the Twelve as an unauthorized, tyrannical, abominable, bloodthirsty set of scoundrels. I suppose you have his pamphlet. I did think to send one the day he landed here, but felt inclined to hear and see his course a little while. Reports were daily coming from east to west of William's unmanly conduct; sorry I was to hear them, the}' seemed so well authenticated. He contends the church is disorganized, having no head; that the Twelve are not, nor ever were, ordained to be head of the church; that Joseph's priesthood was to be conferred on his posterity to all future generations, and that young Joseph is the only legal suc- cessor to the presidency of this church, etc. G. J. Adams is William's right hand man, and comes out as little Joseph's spokesman; they intend holding a conference here this week and organizing the church on the old original plan, according to the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, Book of Mormon, and New Testament. Discussions are to take place between the lligdonites and Josephiteson the claims of each to the "Mor- mon Throne." Two high priests have been disfellowshiped, one seventy, and a number of other officers and members from this branch I suppose will join the Smith party. — Vol. 7, p. 134. Here then is William Smith preaching lineal priesthood and the right of ''young Joseph" to the Presidency, as eaily at least as the next month after action was taken against him by that faction of the church remaining at Nauvoo. It was on the 6th of October, 1845, that the conference failed to sustain William Smith as one of the Twelve, and CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 19^ as Patriarch {Times and Seasons, Vol. 6, pp. 1008, 1009), and he was soon after expelled from their fellowship. What then becomes of Mr. Roberts' statement just preced- ing the one last above quoted, which is as follows? Had any idea prevailed at Nauvoo that "young Joseph" was to succeed to the Presidency of the church, this man, his uncle, would have known it; and would have strengthened his own claims at that time to the right of leadership, by proclaim- ing himself, as he did afterwards, in 1850, the natural guardian of the one who had been anointed and ordained to succeed to the office of President. But this he did not do. On the con- trary, he claimed the place for himself by virtue of being the brother of the prophet. When he failed to secure the position of leadership for himself, he followed the leadership of James J. Strang instead of supporting the claims of "young Joseph." Certainly he would have known it; he did know it, and immediately proclaimed it. Nothing but ignorance of his- tory, or a willful desire to deceive, would lead a man to blunder as Mr. Roberts has blundered in the above. In either case, is he the proper man to "preserve from error those not acquainted with . . . the facts of church history"? We do not appear as an apologist for Elder William Smith. We neither approve nor deny much that is said of him by Mr. Roberts and his associates; but enough has been said to show that neither he nor anyone else could consistently be condemned by the inaccurate evidence and false statements of Mr. Roberts. In regard to Mr. Roberts' labored effort to convict Lucy Smith, the mother of the prophet, and others, of indorsing the claims of William Smith, we have but little to say. Mr. Roberts relies solely upon extracts from the private journal of John Taylor to sustain his allegation. We have not access to Mr. Taylor's journal, so cannot give this tes- timony a thorough examination; but after a careful examination of Mr. Roberts' work we cannot accept as conclusive his presentation of the evidence. 20 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Again, it seems strange that if this is true no evidence is brought, except from this one private source. And again, if we admit it all to be true, what is there in it? Suppose that Lucy Smith et al. did indorse the claims of Elder William Smith, it does not prove that they had heard no other claims. Besides, as we have shown, William Smith's position then (June, 1845,) or soon after, was that of lineal priesthood. Mr. Eoberts could have spared himself the mortification of ''quoting" "this good and noble woman," tor he has accomplished nothing by it. . CHAPTER 3. Wight and Millt=:r— Wight's Character — Roberts' Blunder — Wight Goes to Wisconsin — His Record — His Followers — Galveston News' Tkibute — Miller— His Reason for Leaving Former Associations — Hewett's Letter. In his third chapter Mr. Roberts introduces Lyman Wight and George Miller, as follows: — It can scarcely be said that either Lyman Wight or Bishop George Miller sought to lead the church; but they were guilty of insubordination to the constituted authorities and lead [led] »way parties with them, and illustrate the truth of President Younsr's prediction about the failure of such persons, hence we consider their course. — Roberts, p. 26. Here Mr. Roberts makes his characteristic mistake of assuming the point at issue by concluding that the authori- ties whom Elder Wight and Bishop Miller opposed were properly in authority. With the same reckless assumption he continues: — Lyman Wight was a strong, bold man; fixed in his friend- ship for the prophet Joseph, and true to him under many try- ing circumstances; but withal rather difficult to control, and after the death of Joseph soon manifested a disposition of in- subordination to authority. — Ibid. What caused this ''strong, bold man," this man * 'diffi- cult to control," to be fixed in his friendship and true to the prophet Joseph? Such characters are not controlled by fear or easily moved by influences. There is but one solution; viz.: Lyman Wight fully and sincerely indorsed the doctrine preached and the policy pursued by Joseph Smith. If then Mr. Roberts' estimate of the man is cor- rect, it follows that if these so-called "constituted authori- ties" had been preaching the doctrine and following th,e 28 TRUE SUCCESSION IN policy which he had so ardently espoused, Lyraan Wight would have been fixed in his friendship and true to them. Mr. Roberts continues: — As far back as February, 1844, he had expressed a desire to go to Texas, and after the death of the prophet seemed deter- mined that the church should be removed there. For some time a number of persons had worked under his and Bishop George Miller's direction in the pineries of Wisconsin, getting out lumber for the Temple. In the latter part of August, 1844, President Young desired him to return to the pineries and con- tinue his labors; but he refused and expressed a determination to carry out his own views, and be the controller of his own conduct regardless of the counsel of the presiding quorum. He therefore went to Texas instead of to Wisconsin, taking a small company of saints with him and settling in Texas, not far from the present site of Austin.— Roberts, p. 2G, So far as the issues between us are concerned, it does not make a particle of difference whether Lyman Wight went to Texas or to Wisconsin; but to show the utter unre- liability of this champion of "the order of the priesthood of God and facts of church history," we will quote briefly from the journal of Lyman Wight, now before us. It is true that he and Bishop G-eorge Miller had been directing a company in getting out lumber in the pineries in Wis- consin, but he returned to Nauvoo about April 20, 1844, and at the time of the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith he was with others of the Twelve in the Eastern States. He again returned to Nauvoo, arriving August 6, 1844. In his journal under date of March 17, 1845, is this entry: — From the 6th day of August, 1814. until the 2Sth, I was mak- ing preparation to start on the mission appointed unto me previous to my going to the city of Washington. Accordingly, on the 28th of August, I left Nauvoo accompanied by one hun- dred and sixty-four persons on board the steamer General Brooke, ati, iTHIVEHSITy *? CHURCH PRESIDENCY. V>^ 35 tion of power, in violation of the law of God; and consequently we disclaim all connection and fellowship with them. — Th& Messenger, Vol. 2, p. 9. What a wonderful acquisition this man Roberts will make to the United States Congress, if he succeeds in get- ting there. He can inform his illustrious colleagues that this government is a stream formed by the confluence of several corrupt streams which flow from all the despotic and priest-ridden monarchies of Europe. And we are called upon to reply to such profound philosophy. Lest such heights make us dizzy, we will just come down and simply inform Mr. Roberts that neither now nor at any time in the past has the Reorganization been composed of Strangites and William Smithites. Though some who were once associated with them have united with us, this is also true as regards members coming from the Brigham- ites and from every other society in the country, while many have come to us from the world. CHAPTER 6. Wight's Testimony— Goes to Wisconsin— Roberts' Theobt False— Smith and Wight Teach Lineal Priesthood — Strangite Resolution — "Young Joseph's" Blessings — His Statement — Revelation op 1841 — Joseph's Blessing — Whitehead's Testimony— Testimony of Emma Smith— G. J. Adams on Lineage — Carter's Testimony — Witnesses Not Impeached— Bishop Miller— Hyrum Smith's Ordina- tion — Law op Lineage — Joseph Smith on Descent — Cal- houn Letter — Call by Revelation — Reorganization Approved — Richards' Correspondence — Ordination op President Smith — Rights op Appointment. Mr. Roberts begins his criticism in this chapter by quoting the testimony of Lyman Wight as published in some publications of the Reorganized Church, as follows: — In the private journal of Lyman Wight this is found: **Sunday, December 8th, 1850, bore testimony that Joseph Smith appointed those of his own posterity to be his succes- sor." And in a letter he wrote in July, 1855, from Medina river, Texas, to the Northern Islander, a Strangite paper, Brother Wight said: Now Mr. Editor, if you had been present when Joseph called on me shoi'tly after we came out of jail, [Liberty jail, Missouri. — Ed.] to lay hands with him on the head of a youth, and heard him cry aloud, "you are my successor when I depart." and heard the blessings poured on his head, — I say had you heard all this, and seen the tears streaming from his «yes— you would not have been led [into following Strang] by blind fanaticism, or a zeal without knowledge. — Roberts, p. 50. Upon this Mr. Roberts comments as follows: — Of this testimony it is to be said, first on the entry in Mr. Wight's journal, that it is too general in its character to be of much service in supporting the claims of "young Joseph." We are not certain that he refers to him at all. Then if Lyman Wight knew in 1850 that Joseph the prophet had blessed his son Joseph to be his succt^ssor, as prophet and president of the church, Mr. Wight knew it in 1844; and is it DOt strange that he did not speak of it and advocate it when CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 37 the question of a successor was warmly discussed in Nauvoo, during the autumn of 1844? Why is it that we have nothing from him on the subject earlier than 1850? And this silence on the part of Mr. Wight is the more significant when it is remembered that he was a bold, fearless man. It cannot be said in truth, that Brigham Young's influence was so masterly as to awe him into silence. As a matter of fact he violently opposed Brigham Young in some of his measures, and at last rebelled against him; but nothing is said by him until 1850, about the appointment of any of the prophet's posterity to suc- ceed to the presidency of the church.— Ibid. pp. 50, 51. It would be difficult for anyone to make more blunders in the same space than Mr. Eoberts has made in the above comment. If he is so obtuse after all that has been pub- lished as to fail to understand who is referred to in Elder Wight's journal, he might read the following from a manu- script of Elder Wight's now in our possession, dated December, 1851, and published in Church History, Vol. 2, p. 791:— The fifties assembled should have called on all the authori- ties of the church down to the lay-members from all the face of the earth, as much as was convenient, and after having taken sweet counsel together, in prayer and supplication before God, acknowledged our sins and transgressions which had caused our head to be taken from our midst; and then have called on younjr Joseph, and held him up before the congregation of Israel to take his father's place in the flesh. Elder Wight was not at Nauvoo in 1844, as we have seen, after the death of Joseph Smith, except from August 6 to August 28. Certainly Elder Wight knew as much of this blessing in 1844 as he did in 1850; and if, as Mr. Roberts asserts, he "violently opposed Brigham Young in some of his measures," may not this have been one of the points of disagreement? If not, what did they disagree about? But Mr. Roberts says, and repeats it, that Lyman Wight said nothing on the subject of Joseph's posterity succeed- ing him until 1850. Again Mr. Roberts is wrong. In the Gospel Herald^ Strang's organ, published at Voree, Wis- S8 TRUE SUCCESSION IN consin, in its issue for August 31, 1848, is the following comment: — Lyman Wi^ht seems to cherish the idea that is ignorantly held out by some others, that Joseph, the prophet's son, will yet come up and take his father's original place in the church as the prophet to the church; whereas there is not one single word in all the book of Doctrine and Covenants to warrant the idea. — Prophetic Controversy, No. 2, p. 17. Mr. Roberts has a theory that the claims of Joseph Smith to the Presidency originated with the movement of William Smith in 1850 (see p. 18), and seems determined to make everything bend to the support of that theory; hence he asserts in positive terms, both of William Smith and Lj^man Wight, that they did not teach lineal priesthood as applied to the Presidency until 1850. We have exploded this theory by showing that William Smith is on record on that subject as early as November, 1845; and we have now shown that Lyman Wight was criticised as early as August, 1848, for teaching that Joseph Smith's posterity would succeed him; and he must have been teaching this theory some time prior to this date, for news did not travel rapidly in those days from the frontiers of Texas to Wisconsin. We present the fact that these two members of the Quo- rum of the Twelve preached this so soon after their differ- ence with the quorum, as strong presumptive evidence that this was one of the points upon which the difference arose. It must be remembered that neither William Smith nor Lyman Wight at that time had control of a press by which to preserve on record their views, and we are dependent upon statements of their opponents. The Times and Smsouft, controlled by the Twelve and published in Nauvoo, Illinois, carefully avoids stating what the issues were. It leaks out, however, through the MiUennial Star, pub- lished in England, in the case of William Smith, and CHURCH PRESIDENCY. dl^ through the Gospel Herald, published in Wisconsin, in the^ case of Lyman Wight, that at least one of their conten- tions was that the posterity of Joseph Smith should suc- ceed to the Presidency. Here then are two of the Quorum; of the Twelve opposing the usurpations of their quorum from the beginning. Nor were they alone in this. The above quotation states: — Lyman Wight seems to cherish the idea that is ignorantly held out by some others, etc. We are not told who those some others were nor how many there were of them, but it is evident that the feeling that "young Joseph" was appointed to some special posi- tion was quite strong, even among Elder Strang's follow- ers, notwithstanding the adverse comment above quoted ^ for at their General Conference held in Voree, Wisconsin, April, 1849, the following resolution was presented and passed unanimously: — That we give our prayers daily for Joseph, the son of Joseph, that he may be raised up of God to fill the station to which he has been called by i^rophecy. — Gospel Rerald, Vol. 4, p. 16. These evidences leave Mr. Roberts in a very unenviable position as an exponent of "the facts of church history;" and his theory that "the claims of Mr. Smith to the Presi- dency" originated with the movement of 1850 is pitiably at fault. Will Mr. Roberts, like an honest man, abandon that theory, and confess his error? He next seeks to impeach the testimony of Lyman Wight by referring to a statement that Lyman Wight was said to have taught that "young Joseph" was blessed by his father while in Liberty jail, Missouri, and comparing that with the statement quoted above that he blessed him shortly after he came out of jail. This he. claims is a dis- crepancy in time and place. It is only necessary in this con- nection to say that the evidence shows that Joseph Smith, 40 TRUE SUCCESSION IN the Prophet, blessed his son Joseph both in Liberty jail and ufter he came out, and Lyman Wight was with him both in jail and after his escape and arrival in Illinois; hence both statements may have been correct. As evidence that two blessings were given, or rather the same blessing pronounced at two different times and places, corresponding with the statements of Elder Wight, read the following from the pen of President Smith, pub- lished in October, 1868: — In Liberty jail the promise and blessinj? of a life of usefulness to tiie cause of truth was pronounced upon our head, by lips tainted by dungeon damps, and by the Spirit confirmed through attesting witnesses. This blessing has by some been called an ordination, from the usual predilection to confound names and terms. The blessing which marked Moses as the deliverer from Egyptian bondage, was not that which Jethro pronounced upon his head. Subsequent to our baptism in 1843, upon two occasions was the same blessing confirmed by Joseph Smith, once in the council room in the brick store on the banks of the Mississippi, of which we have not a doubt there are witnesses who would confirm the present testimony; once, in the last interview Joseph Smith held with his family before he left Nauvoo to his death. A public attestation of the same blessing was made from the stand in the grove in Nauvoo, some time prior to the murder in Carthage. — True Latt&r Day Saints' Herald, Vol. 14, p. 105. In the light of these facts these quibbles of Mr. Roberts -amount to contemptible pettifoggery. After making another unsupported, slanderous statement, ^Ir. Roberts seeks to throw discredit upon the testimony published in the Northern Islander, in 1855, by afifirraing that this is not .-— Yours of October 12, 1806, is at hand, stating the .approximate numerical strength of the church at the death of CO TRUE SUCCESSION IN Joseph and Hyrum Smith to have been "about 26,000 to 27,000 souls." I am surprised at the number being given so small by you. How do you explain the statements of Joseph Smith on this point? In a historical sketch written by him and published by I. Daniel Rupp in 1844 he writes: "There are no correct data by which the exact number of members composing this now extensive, and still extending. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints can be known. Should it be supposed at 150,000 it might still be short of the truth." — History of Religious Denominations, p. 409. In his reply to Henry Clay, May 13, 1844, he writes: "Why, Great God! to transport 200,000 people through a vast prairie; over the Rocky Mountains, to Oregon, a distance of nearly two thousand miles, would cost more than four millions/*' — Times and JSeasons, Vol. 5, p. 547. These two statements would closely agree if we include in the latter statement dependents who were not members, but there is a very wide difference between your estimate and his. I do not quote these statements by way of argument against your figures, but to get your explanation of the difference. Upon what basis did you make your estimate? Have you the record of names kept at the time? I want to get at the truth of the matter for the sake of historical accuracy. I would like to ask another favor of you; namely: to inform me irhe)i, where, and hy whomwere Hrigham Young, John Taylor, and Wilford Woodruff ordained Presidents of the High Priest- hood, or Presidents of the church, if so ordained? Or if it is the position of your people that they needed no other ordination than that to the Apostleship, will you please so state. I am engaged in writing history and do not wish to misrepre- sent you. Respectfully, Hkman C. Smith. Awaiting until November 19, and receivin<^ no reply to our inquiries, we wrote Mr. Richards as follows: — Lamoni, Iowa, Nov. 19, 1896. P. D. Richards, Dear Sir:— On October 17, I wrote you in reply to yours of October 12. I am very anxious to receive answer to inquiries made. If you have not received it please let me know and I will send you a copy. I am, respectfully, Heman C. Smith. Still receiving no reply, we awaited until December 16, CHURCH PRESIDENCY. U when we mailed him a copy of our letter of October 17,- together with the following note, registering them : — Lamoni, Iowa, Dec. 16, 1896. F. D. Richards, Dear Sir: — On October 17 I wrote you in answer to yours of October 13, and made some further inquiries. Waiting until November 19, and receiving no reply I wrote inquiring if you received it. Still I have no reply. I now inclose a copy of my letter of October 17, as you may not have received the original. Will you please give it your early attention, as I am anxious to get the information sought. I inclose stamp for reply. In bonds, Heman C. Smith. In due course of mail we received the "Registry Return Receipt," signed "F. D. Richards, per John Jaques;" but up to date, November 15, 1898, no answer has been re- ceived. When two of their own representatives, J. H. Stout and U. Gr. Miller, made the same inquiry they were just as unsuccessful, as the following will show: — "'Will you please answer the following through the News: Who ordained President Brigham Young to the office of Presi- dent of the Church, and also the date of the organization? The Reorganized ministers are making the statement that he never was ordained, and that the people never made the claim that he was. No doubt it will be of use to others of the elders a.s^ well as ourselves.' "For the information of those who send the inquiry, we will state that the event referred to is carefully recorded in church history, and has been published frequently. President Brig- ham Young was installed as the President of the Church, in the quorum of the First Presidency, by the Council of the Apostles, on December 5, 1847. Not a ceremony necessary to the perform- ance of that solemn duty was omitted — everything was done in perfect order, and by the united voice of the Twelve. President Young had been President of the Church in his position asPres - dent of the presidingquorum, the Twelve Apostles, for more than three years previous to the date given, or ever since the martyr- dom of the Prophet Joseph. When, on the date mentioned. President Young had been duly installed as the chief in the First Presidency, he selected Heber C. Kimball and Willard Richards^ as first and second counselors respectively, and they were also- «2 TRUE SUCCESSION IN duly set apart, being sustained by the unanimous vote of the Twelve. In their case, as with President Young, no ceremony was omitted."— Daily Deseret News, October 5, 1896. Comment is useless; but we still insist upon answers to these inquiries, and until they are received we shall main- tain that the gentlemen named, to whom we now add the name of Mr. Snow, were not at any time ordained to the office of President of the church; and hence according to Mr. Roberts' position stated above, were not properly con- stituted Presidents of the church. Again, Brigham Young admits by the strongest kind of inference that he was not ordained to the office of Presi- dent of the church. He says: — Who ordained me to be First President of this Church on earth? I answer, it is the choice of this people, and that is sufficient. — Millennial Star, Vol. 16, p. 442. But Mr. Roberts says it is not sufficient, but that he should be ordained. In this Mr. Roberts is right; but how can he sustain Mr. Young who is wrong? With President Smith the case was different. He was ordained by what he considered proper authority; a record of that ordination has been made and published, and is open for investigation. We are prepared to defend the authority by which the ordination was performed, when legitimately questioned, but in this connection we pass it by for the reason that Mr. Roberts' objection to the apos- tolic authority exorcised upon that occasion is based upon his own affirmation. Hear him: — Now, I aftirm tliat among all those seven men who were "called" to form the majority of the quorum of the twelve, in the "Reorganization" not one of them held the apostleship; that they could not give what they did not possesss; that there- fore neitlior the seven men called to be apostles, in April, 1853, received tlie apost I'ship, nor any whom they subsequently .ordained.— Robt Its, p. 77. The only answer that this deserves is a counter affirma- CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 63 tion; but we may consider the question of authority more fully in another part of our investigation. Mr. Roberts makes a labored effort to show that what- ever authority may have been possessed by Zenos H. Ourley and William Marks prior to the death of Joseph Smith, they lost by indorsing the claims of J. J. Strang and others. But this is only an assumption. We have the same right to assume that all who followed Brigham Young thereby lost their authority. Proceeding upon the basis of his affirmation that those "Claiming apostolic authority in the Reorganization did not possess it, Mr. Roberts seeks to show a contrast between this organization and the one effected in 1830 by endeavor- ing to show that Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and others acted in the last-named organization by virtue of apostolic authority. Any position, no matter how sound, could apparently be overthrown if the objector is allowed his own affirmation as a basis from which to argue; but it takes a great amount of assurance and impudence for a man to offer his own assertion as basic evidence. The next thing in Mr. Roberts' argument which we deem necessary to notice in this connection is the following: — Josephites lay much stress upon the following passage in one of the revelations: I say unto you that ye have received a commandment for a law unto my church through him whom I have appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations from my hand. And this ye shall know assuredly, that there is norie other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me. But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him, for if it be taken from him, he shall not have power, except to appoint another in his stead; and this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations and command- ments; and this I give unto you that you may not be deceived, that you may know that they are not of me. For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me, shall come in at the gate and be ordained, as I have told you before, to teach those 64 TRUE SUCCESSION IN revelations which you have received, and shall receive through him whom I have appointed. Josephilps insist that this revelation provides that the suc- cessor of the prophet Joseph must be appointed by him. — Rob- erts, pp. 82, 83. This is quite a fair statement for Mr. Roberts to make, yet a more careful man would have stated our position more accurately by saying, that we insist that this revela- tion recognizes the authority of the prophet Joseph to appoint his successor, and that if he did so appoint, the appointment is valid. After relating some of the circumstances under which the above revelation was given, none of which would in anywise change the import of the language, or modify its meaning, Mr. Roberts proceeds to give his understanding of this passage, in the following language r — The information thus griven officially to the church was cal- culated to preserve the saints from following unauthorized "law-givers." Through it they learned that Joseph, if he remained faithful, would be the law-giver to Israel; if he trans- gressed he should retain sufficient of the power of revelation to designate whom the Lord would have to succeed him; and in that or any other event the man who becomes President must come in at the gate and be ordained as described in one of the laws of the church previously given. There was surely no need after this that any should be deceived. But to argue from what is set down in this revelation that the only possible way for a successor "in any event," to be appointed to the church ■was through Joseph Smith the prophet, is clearlj' an error; for the only provision made in this revelation for him to appoint his successor is in the event of his own transgression; and I affirm that Joseph Smith was faithful to God and the church up to the day of his death. — Roberts, p. 84. We cannot avoid being amused at Mr. Roberts' propen- sity for settling a question with his characteristic "7 affirm.'' It reminds us of a comment made by one of his church associates, but political opponents, to the effect that Mr. Roberts never appeared before the public without saying by his manner, "7 am. B. IT. Roberts/* However, our chief objection is to the following: — CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 65 The only provision made in this revelation for him to appoint his successor is in the event of his own transgression. We do not so comprehend the language. The words, "Verily, verily I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him," admit of no modifications or exceptions. The words following: ''for if it be taken from him he shall not have power, except to appoint another in his stead," etc., simply con- vey the impression that this right, vested in him by virtue of his office, he would retain, even in case of transgression,- to avoid confusion and uncertainty. To take the position, as Mr. Roberts does, that Joseph Smith was not authorized to appoint his successor except in the event of his trans- gression, is to make the authority to appoint contingent upon transgression. We can readily see the possibility and even advisability, for this specific purpose, of a man retaining a part of his authority, already bestowed, after transgression; but the idea that God would bestow authority not before held, upon a transgressor, which would be denied him if faithful, is absurd. We have long been taught that God bestows authority, honor, and power as a reward for faithfulness; but it remained for this illustrious guardian of the "order of the priesthood of God, and the facts of church history,'' to inform us that God reserves certain authority for the transgressor alone. What to us seems very peculiar is that notwithstanding Mr. Roberts' claim that Joseph Smith had no authority tO' appoint his successor except in the event of his transgres- sion, and notwithstanding he affirms that Joseph did prove faithful, yet he asserts, on the authority of Brigham Young, that Joseph did appoint his brother Hyrum to suc- ceed him. (See Roberts' book, page 66.) Certainly God would provide for succession and the per- 66 TRUE SUCCESSION IN petuity of his work in case of Joseph's death, as much so as in case of his transgression. We are impressed to close this chapter with these words ©f Mr. Roberts, which we commend: — Can it be that God, with whom all things are as present, had not foreseen this fate which overtook his servants Joseph and HjTum, and failed to provide for such an emergency? O, charge not the Lord with such lack of wisdom, or his churoh with such imperfection in its organization!— Roberts, p. 85. CHAPTER 7. Roberts' Discrepancies— Twelve Second in Authority- Temple NOT Completed — Church Rejected — Pratt^s Revelation. Though what was done in the case of Sidney Rigdon at Nauvoo is not of special importance to this discussion, we wish briefly to note the discrepancy in Mr. Roberts' own account, and also his clash with his own witnesses. On page 88 of his book Mr. Roberts states of Mr, Rigdon: — He soucrht to be appointed Guardian of the church, but was unanimously rejected by the assembled quorums of priesthood and the saints at Nauvoo. This agrees with the statement of Elder Woodruff (see p. 13), but unfortunately it conflicts with Mr. Roberts' own statement that no vote was taken on Rigdon's claims. (See p. 12.) This is Roberts versus Roberts. At one time he agrees with the record as published in Times and Sea- sons (see p. 12), and at the other time with Wilford Wood- ruff. It will not do; no man can agree with the record and with Woodruff too. In regard to the vote on the sustaining of the Twelve, he is in just as bad as a muddle. He states that the vote was unanimous (see p. 12), and quotes the Millennial Star to the same effect (see pp. 13, 14); but he had previously quoted from the journal of William C. Staines, that the "vote was taken to sustain the Twelve in their office, which witk a few dissenting vaices, was passed. (See p. 10.) Do not forget, reader, that this man Roberts is a zealous defender of the ^ [facts of church history." Mr. Roberts enters into a long dissertation to show that 68 TRUE SUCCESSION IN the Twelve were next in authority after the First Presi- dency, and hence should preside in their absence, and that the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith did not disorganize the church. We agree that the Twelve are next in au- thority to the First Presidency. We have no objection to their presiding at any proper time and place., providing they do so in their own office and calling. We object not to their doing, but to their manner of doing, and to what they did, as will appear before the close of this investiga- tion. Nor do we claim that the church was disorganized by the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith. The church, we claim, was rejected because of its own acts of trans- gression, and its failure to comply with the commands of God. But Mr. Roberts in speaking of the church asserts: — There is nothing in all that God has revealed to indicate that he ever contemplated its disorganization; but on the contrary, there is every encouragement to believe that it will go on from grace to grace, rrom faith to faith, from one victory to another until, like the little stone of Daniel's vision, it shall become a great mountain and fill the whole earth. — Roberts, p. 89. Mr. Roberts may possibly make some play upon the word "contemplated," but the careful reader cannot fail to see that God warned the saints that there was dan- ger of the church being rejected by him if they did not per- form the work appointed. In a revelation given January 19, 1841, this warning was given in specific and plain lan- guage, as follows: — And again, verily I say unto you. Let all my saints come from afar; and send ye swjft messengers, yea, chosen messen- gers, and say unto them. Come ye, with all your gold, and your silver, and your precious stones, and with all your antiquities; and with all who have knowledge of antiquities, that will come may come, and bring the box tree, and the fir tree, and the pine tree, together with all the precious trees of the earth; and with iron, with copper, and with brass, and with zinc, and with all your precious things of the earth, and build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein; CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 69 for there is not a place found on earth that he may come and restore again that which was lost unto you, or, which he hath taken away, even the fullness of the priesthood; for a bap- tismal font there is not upon the earth; that they, my saints, may be baptized for those who are dead; for this ordinance belongeth to my house, and cannot be acceptable to me, only in the days of your poverty, wherein ye are not able to build a house unto me. But I command you, all ye my saints, to build a house unto me; and I grant unto you a sufficient time to build a house unto me, and during this time your baptisms shall be acceptable unto me. But, behold, at the end of this appointment, your baptisms for your dead shall not be acceptable unto me; and if you do not these things at the end of the appointment, ye shall be rejected as a church with your dead, saith the Lord your God. — b. C. 107: 10, 11. There was then a possibility of the church being rejected, and the conditions under which it would be rejected are plainly set forth. None can misunderstand this. It forcibly teaches that a sufficient time would be granted to build a temple at Nauvoo, and that if it was not built at the end of that time the church would be rejected. The pertinent inquiry then is, Was the temple built? On page 102 Mr. Roberts says: — The Temple was completed. But Mr. Penrose admits that it was not completed, and argues that a completion was not necessary. He says: — Now it is a matter of history that notwithstanding the oppo- sition of the enemies of the Church, the murder of the Prophet and Patriarch, the threatenings and plots and ragings of mobo- crats, and the scantiness of means for the great work before them, the Saints went to with their might and built that house according to the commandment of the Lord and the pattern revealed to Joseph Smith, which with all the keys and au- thority and power of the Holy Priesthood he had given to the Twelve, and that it was so far completed before the exodus from that city that it was dedicated to the Lord, and baptisms for the dead were performed in the sacred font, and washings, anointings, endowments and other ordinances were solemnized therein, both for the living and for the dead. But, it is objected by the "Reorganizers" that the Temple was not fully "completed," and l^righam Young is quoted as saying after his arrival in Utah, that the Saints would attempt 70 TRUE SUCCESSION IN to build a Temple, and that "This has been attempted several times, but we have never yet had the privilege of completing and enjoying one." Our very technical and disputatious oppo- nents are never tired of repeating in this connection the words "complete" and "completed." But a careful examination of the word of the Lord fails to discover those words or anything equivalent to them. The Lord told his people to build a house to him; they did build and use it for the purposes he designed. They were not permitted to remain and enjoy it. There were^ probably, some additions which would have been made to "complete" the edifice in the full sense of the term, if the builders had remained to enjoy it. . . . It is surprising that sane people, however biased and preju- diced, could entertain the notion that the just and merciful Father and the tender and loving Christ would reject the peo- ple who had toiled so faithfully to obey the commandment given them to build a Temple, because, before they could per- fectly finish the structure after building it, in consequence of the inroad made upon them by their enemies they were com- pelled to forsake all their possessions for the Gospel's sake! — Penrose, pp. C, 7, 8. The evidence shows that Mr. Penrose is right, and Mr. Roberts wrong, so far as the facts are concerned regard- ing the completion of the temple. On June 2(3, 1897, President Joseph Smith made a state- ment on this subject from which we quote the following: — I knew of the work being done on the temple at that place from the time it began until the building was burned in 1848 It was not finished. The basement was fitted for occupation^ and the baptismal font was ready for use. The auditorium on the first floor was completed sufficiently to be seated and occu- pied for assembly purposes. The stairway on the south side was completed for use. The auditorium on second floor, the stairway on north side, nor any other portion of the building except those above-named were completed; though the small rooms above the second floor auditorium were used by Presid(MJt Young and the resident church authorities for various purposes. — Church History, Vol. 2, p. 503. Patriarch A. H. Smith also made a statement on July 2, 1897, a part of which is as follows: — "The offices in the corner to the left of main entrance on the ground floor were finished, but not furnished. The auditorium or main meeting room was temporarily finished; the seats and pulpit were only temporary. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 71 "The upper auditorium; the phistering was not done, the floor was only the rough boards, intended only for the lining, was laid, and from this floor upward the stairs, except in the tower, or circular main stairs, were also temporary; the upper floor which was to have been divided into numerous rooms was laid, and partitioned off with cotton factory cloth, and used for some purposes before the saints were driven away. . . . **To my knowledge the temple never was finished, and those who have been led to believe it was, have been deceived. I make this statement freely for the benefit of the present and future generations." — Church History, Vol. 2, pp. 564, 565. Elder Brigham Young is reported to have used the fol- lowing language in St. George Temple, January 1, 1877: — Joseph located the site for the Temple Block in Jackson County, Missouri, and pointed out the southeast corner of the temple in the year 1831; also laid the corner stone for a temple in Far West, Caldwell County, Missouri. These temples were not built. We built one in Nauvoo. I could pick out several before me now that were there when it was built, and know just how much was finished and what was done. It is true we left brethren there with instructions to finish it, and they got it nearly completed before it was burned; but the saints did not enjoy it. Now we have a temple which will all be finished in a few days, and of which there is enough completed to com- mence work therein, which has not been done since the days of Adam, that we have any knowledge of. — Journal of Discourses,. Vol. 18, p. 304. These testimonies are sufficient to show that Mr. Roberts^ was in error about the temple at Nauvoo being completed. According to the first two statements it lacked very much of being complete; and though Mr. Young is not definite as to just what was done, he expresses the thought as late as January, 1877, that from the days of Adam until then there had not been a temple sufficiently finished to com- mence work in. However, Mr. Penrose raises the point that the word "complete" or its equivalent is not found in the revelation, and argues that if they built the house they had complied with the requirements whether they finished it or not. We give Mr. Penrose credit for having discovered this ingen- ious method of defense. It certainly was never thought of 72 TRUE SUCCESSION IN in early times, by the people to whom the revelation was given. The leading men of the church understood it otherwise and were somewhat exercised over the urgent need of com- pleting the temple speedily. In December, 1841, not quite a year after the date of this revelation, an epistle was pub- lished signed by Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, William Smith, Lyman Wight, Wilford Woodruff, John Taylor, George A. Smith, and Willard Richards, which begins with these words: — The building of the Temple of the Lord, in the city of Nau- 'voo, is occupying the first place in the exertions and prayers of many of the saints at the present time, knowing as they do, that, if this building is not completed, speedily, ''we shall he rejected as a church with our dead,'' for the Lord our God hath rspoken it. — IHmes and Seasons, Vol. 3, p (525, On October 1, 1842, when Joseph Smith was editor, the Times and Seasons published an editorial under the caption •of ^''The Temple' which commences with these words: — If there is any subject in which the saints of the Most High are interested more than another, it is in the completion of that edifice, etc. — Times and Seasons, Vol. 3, p. 937. In the same article occurs the following: — The word of the Lord is build my house, and until that com- mand is fulfilled we stand responsible to the great Jehovah for the fulfillment of it, and if not done in due time we may have to share the same fate that we have heretofore done in Missouri. — Times and Seasons, Vol. 3, p. 939. These statements serve to show how this revelation was understood by Joseph Smith and the Twelve. We present them as clear and reliable proof that, 1. The idea of church rejection did not originate with the Reorganization. 2. The authorities of the church at the time were con- scious that they were required to complete the temple, and understood the dread consequences of a failure. The temple not being completed^ the church stood rejected. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 73 and neither the false statement of Mr. Roberts nor the specious pleading of Mr. Penrose will avail to cover this serious result from the research of the honest investigator. Mr. Penrose, however, falls back upon that part of the revelation of 1841 which says: — Verily, verily I say unto you, that when I give a command- ment to any of the sons of men, to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might, and with all they have, to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them, and hinder them perform- ing that work; b6hold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings; and the iniquity and transgression of my holy laws and commandments, I will visit upon the heads of those who hindered my work, unto the third and fourth generation, so long as they repent not, and hate me, saith the Lord God. Therefore, for this cause have I accepted the offerings of those whom I commanded to bnild up a city and a house unto my name, in Jackson County, Missouri, and were hindered by their enemies, saith the Lord your God; and I will answer judgment, wrath and indignation, wailing and anguish, and gnashing of teeth, upon their heads, unto the third and fourth generation, so lonsf as they repent not, and hate me, saith the Lord your God.— D. C. 107: 15. This, it will be seen, has a special application to the work which was to have been done in Jackson County, Missouri. It may also have a general application, and we believe it does; but it will be observed that a release from obligations is based upon their going "with all their mi'ghf^ and ceasing not ^'their diligence.''' That the saints at Nauvoo failed to do this may not generally be known; but that they cannot avail themselves of the provision made, for release from obligations enjoined, is evident from the fol- lowing words in the revelation itself: — I grant unto you a sufficient time to build a house unto me. If the Lord, according to this promise, did grant unto them sufficient time, and they failed to accomplish the work within that time, then it is evident that they did not use due diligence, and hence must accept the consequences 74 TRUE SUCCESSION IN of rejection, and of the same fate they shared in Missouri. This latter consequence is too terribly true to be denied, and happy is he who will accept the first-named conse- quence and take proper steps to restore himself to the favor of God. William Smith and Lyman Wight, two of the signers of the above letter, recognized the consequences; viz., of dis- organization, which they, in 1841, were apprehensive of. As proof in the case of William Smith we cite the letter of James Kay, written in November, 1845. (See p. 18.) In 1851, Lyman Wight wrote: — "The church mostly went from there [Kirtland, Ohio] to Missouri, where they commenced another house from which they were driven to the State of Illinois, where we were com- mandea to build a house or temple to the Most Hiph God. We were to have a sufficient time to build that house, during which time our baptisms for our dead should be acceptable in the river. If we did not build within this time we were to be rejected as a church, we and our dead together. Both the tem- ple and baptizing went very leisurely, till the temple was some- where in building the second story, when Bro. Joseph from the stand announced the alarming declaration that baptism for our dead was no longer acceptable in the river. As much to say the time for building the temple had passed by, and both we and our dead were rejected together. . . . "The church now stands rejected together with their dead. The church being rejected now stands alienated from her God in every sense of the word."— Church History, Vol. 2, p. 790. What but blind ambition to rule prevented others of the signers from recognizing the consequence so apparent? Again, Parley P. Pratt, though not one of the signers, recognized that the church had been disorganized and that a reorganization was necessary. Elder Pratt relates that as he was returning to Nauvoo after the death of Joseph and Hyrum, while "weighed down as it were unto death," he cried unto the Lord for direction, asking these two questions: — Shall I tell them to fly to the wilderness and deserts? Or, shall I tell them to stay at home and take care of themselves, and continue to build the temple? CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 75 The answer was as follows: — "Lift up your head and rejoice; for behold! it is well with my servants Joseph and Hyrum. My servant Joseph still holds the keys of my kingdom in this dispensation, and he shall stand in due time on the earth, in the flesh, and fulfill that to which he is appointed. Go and say unto my people in Nauvoo, that they shall continue to pursue their daily duties and take care of themselves, and make no movement in church government to reorganize or alter anything until the return of the remainder of the quorum of the Twelve. But exhort them that they con- tinue to build the House of the Lord which I have commanded them to build in Nauvoo." — Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt, p. 37L This recognizes the necessity of a reorganization^ which •carries with it the recognition of a disorganization. We regret to notice that Mr. Roberts in quoting the above revelation omits the prefix "re" and makes it to read '^orga?iize.'' (See his book, p. 94.) It will be observed that Elder Pratt claims this to be from God. If so, God recognized the necessity of a Reor- ganization. Further, the answer to the above questions is clear that the people were to remain in Nauvoo and con-, tinue to build the temple, instead of flying to the ''wilder- ness and deserts." It is not necessary in this connection to discuss whether the Twelve had authority to go into Nauvoo and regulate or not. We agree that their mission was in all the world and that no part of the world was exempt from their juris- diction; but there was no part of the world where they might become a law unto themselves. Wherever they might be they were required to act in harmony with the law of God and in accordance with the duty of their calling, or their acts would not be valid. The issue between us depends upon lohat they did^ not upon where they did it. OTHITERSinr CHAPTER 8. Keys op Authority— Keys and Oracles — Pratt's Revelation — Oracles to the Twelve — William Marks — Roberts' Climax. Mr. Roberts opens his eighth chapter as follows: — Let us now proceed to the proof that Joseph Smith, the prophet, did not take the keys of authority with him from the church, when he fell a martyr to the truth, but that said keys of authority remained with the church, more especially with the quorum of the Twelve. On March 8th, 181^3, the Lord said to Joseph Smith: Verily, I say unto you, the keys of this kinirdom shall never be taken from you, while thou art in the world, neither in the world to come; nevertheless, through you shall the oracles be given unto another; yea, even to the church! Joseph and Hyrum, then, did not take with them the "oracles" of God necessary to make the church efficient Iq accomplishing^ the work that God designed it to perform. Thoucrh the keys given to the prophet were never to betaken from him, either in this world or that which is to come — though for ever he is to stand as the President of the great dis- pensation of the fullness of limes — yet the keys of authority and power committed to his hands may be given to another, "even to the cliurch," not to his posterity, mark you. This revelation makes it easy to believe that there was inspi- ration in the declaration of Brigham Young, uiiered when he heard for the first time of the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum. He was at Peterboro, N. H., when the sad intelligence reached him: — The first thing that I thought of was whether Joseph had taken the keys of the kingdom with him from the earth. Brother Orson Pratt sat on my left, we were both leaning back in our chairs. Bringing my hand down on my knee, I said, tJce key H of the kingdom are right here with the church. — Roberts, pp. 93, 1)4. Why Mr. Roberts should be anxious to prove the nega- tive of that which we have not affirmed, we do not know; but we have not affirmed that Joseph took the keys of authority with him from the church. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. TT Mr. Roberts' explanation of the above quotation is not vetT ('lear, but he evidently confounds the words "keys" and "oracles," making them to have the same meaning. This is evidently erroneous. We give the definitions of the two words as defined by Webster: — Key:- 1. An instrument by means of which the bolt of a lock is shot or drawn; usually, a removable metal instrument fitted to the mechanism of a particular lock and operated by turning in its place. 2. An instrument which is turned like a key in fastening or adjusting any mechanism; as, a watch key; a bed key, etc. 3. That part of an instrument or machine which serves as the means of operating it; as, a telegraph key; the keys of a pianoforte, or of a typewriter. 4. A position or condition which affords entrance, control, or possession, etc.; as, the key of a line of defense; the key of a country; the key of a political situation. Hence, that which serves to unlock, open, discover, or solve something unknown or difficult; as, the key to a riddle; the key to a problem. Those who are accustomed to reason have got the true key of books. Locke, Who keeps the keys of all the creeds. Tennyson. 5. That part of a mechanism which serves to lock up, make fast, or adjust to position. Power of th<' kej'S {Eccl.), the authority claimed by the min- istry in some Christian churches to administer the discipline of the church, and to grant or withhold its privileges; — so called from the declaration of Christ. "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Matt. xvi. 19. Oracle: — 1. The answer of a god, or some person reputed to be a god, to an inquiry respecting some affair or future event, as the suc- cess of an enterprise or battle. Whatso'er she saith, for oracles must stand. Drayton. 2. Hence: The deity who was supposed to give the answer^ also, the place where it was given. The oracles are dumb; No voice or hideous hum Runs through the arched roof in words deceiving. Milton. 3. The communications, revelations, or messages delivered by God to the prophets; also, the entire sacred Scriptures — usually in the plural. 78 TRUE SUCCESSION IN The first principles of the oracles of God. Ileh. v. 12. 4. {Jewish Antiq.) The sanctuary, or Most Holy place in the iemple; also, the temple itself. 1 Kings vi. 19. Siloa's brook, that flow'd Fast by the oracle of God, Milton. 5. One who communicates a divine command; an angel; a prophet. God hath now sent his living oraefo Into the world to teach his final will. Milton. 6. Any person reputed uncommonly wise; one whose deci- sions are regarded as of great authority; as, a literary oracle. ''Oracles oi mode.'' Tennyson. The country rectors . . . thought him an oracle on points of learning. Macaulay. 7. A wise sentence or decision of great authority. A careful inspection will convince the reader that no amount of straining will under any circumstances give them an equivalent meaning. A key is an instrument by which a person unlocks, while an oracle is that which is obtained by the unlocking; or in some cases may be applied to the person who uses the key. The above pas- sage being figurative, the "keys" evidently represent the authority, while the ''oracles" mean the revelations of •God received by him who holds the keys, and is to be understood in the same sense as the following: — I give unto you my servant Joseph, to be a presiding elder over all my church, to be a translator, a revelator, a seer, and prophet. I give unto him for counselors my servant Sidney lllgdon and my servant William Law, that these may consti- tute a quorum and first presidency, to receive the oracles for the whole church. — Doc. and Cov. 107:39. The evident meaning, then, of the passage in question is ihat Joseph held the authority to receive revelation and that through him the revelations thus received were to be given to the church. However, if we grant that the word "oracles" in this passage is to be applied to the persons who deliver the revelations of God to the people, then it follows from the language, ^Hhrough you shall the oraclm be CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 7d given to another; yea, even unto the church,^'' that Joseph Smith was to appoint his successor and through him his successor was to be presented to the church, thus sustain- ing our contention that Joseph Smith was to appoint his successor. Further, if we were to admit Mr. Roberts' claim, illog- ical and untenable as it is, that ''oracles" and "keys" are synonymous, and that the word * 'oracles" in this revela- tion refers to the keys of authority delivered to the Twelve, still the issue between us is not settled; for that part of the paragraph which Mr. Roberts does not quote administers a solemn warning unto those who "receive the oracles of God." It reads as follows: — And all they who receive the oracles of God, let them beware how they hold them, lest they are accounted as a light thing, and are brought under condemnation thereby; and stumble and fall, when the storms descend, and the winds blow, and the rains descend, and beat upon their house. — Doc. and Cov. 87:2. Then, whatever the "oracles" may be, God's approval of those receiving them depends upon how they hold them. So that in any event, and upon the basis of any interpreta- tion, the issue still rests upon what was done, and how it was done. We propose to hold these gentlemen to this issue and to demand that they answer for their acts. Mr. Roberts next introduces the revelation of P. P. Pratt, which we have noticed on page 75; but there is nothing in it to help his case. As we have shown, there are two points in it that are against the people he repre- sents; viz.: the necessity of reorganization, and the dis- couragement plainly given to fleeing into the wilderness and desert. The only comfort he can possibly get out of it is that the Twelve are recognized, and the reorganiza- tion was to be postponed until they returned. This we do not object to. We think they should have been respected and their proper authority recognized, and that it would have been decidedly improper to take any steps towards a 80 TRUE SUCCESSION IN reorganization before their return; but this does not carry with it the approval of what they did after their return. After some immaterial wanderings Mr. Roberts ap- proaches the point as follows: — It now remains for me to prove that "the prophet Joseph did give the "oracles to another" — and that they remained with the cliurch. On the 7th of Aujrust, 1844, at a meeting of the Twelve Apos- tles, high council of the Nauvoo stake, and high priests, held in the Seventies' Hall, in a speech following one made by STd- ney Rigdon, lirigham Young, speaking of the Twelve, said: Joseph conferred upon our heads all the keys and power* belonging to the apostleship which he himself held before he was taken away, and no man or set of men can get between Joseph and the Twelve in this world or the world to come. How often has Joseph said to the Twelve, "I have laid the foundation and you must build thereon, for upon your shoul- ders the kingdom rests." Upon this statement of Brighara Young, quoted from the doubtful authority of Millennial Star, volume 25, and supposedly supported by the testimony of others, Mr. Roberts bases his case that Joseph Smith conferred all the keys held by himself upon the Twelve. If such an occur- rence ever transpired it is impossible to determine by the testimony of the witnesses just what Joseph did say on the occasion. Evidently they do not remember, as no two of them give the same words, and where any one of them speaks twice he fails to reproduce the same language. That the reader may compare them we reproduce such of them as we have at hand. We have one above from Brigham Young; here is another: — Joseph told the Twelve, the year before he died, "there is not one key or power to be bestowed on this church to lead the people into the celestial gate but I have given you, showed you, and talked it over to you; the kingdom is set up, and you have the perfect pattern, and you can go and build up the kingdom^ and go in at the celestial gate, taking your train with you." — Millennial Star, Vol. 10, p. 115. Parley P. Pratt renders it as follows: — CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 81 "I know not why; but for some reason I am constrained to hasten my preparations, and to confer upon the Twelve all the ordinances, keys, covenants, endowments, and sealintj ordi- nances of the priesthood, and so set before them a pattern ia all thintrs pertainintr to the sanctuary and the endowment therein." — Millennial Star, Vol. 5, p. 151. Orson Hyde's version is as follows: — Brother Joseph said some time before he was murdered, "If I am taken away, upon you, the Twelve, will rest the responsi- bility of leadintr this people, and do not be bluffed off by any man. Go forward in the path of your duty thoujrh you walk into death. If you will be bold and maintain your j^round the great God will sustain you." — Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 650. Wilford Woodruff has spoken of this several times, but not usinof the same language twice. Here are some of his statements: — Or has the Prophet Joseph found Elder Rigdon in his coun- cils when he organized the quorum of the Twelve, a few months before his death, to prepare them for the endowment? And when they received their endowment, and actually received the keys of the kingdom of God, and oracles of God, keys of revelation, and the pattern of heavenly things; and thus addressing the Twelve, exclaimed, "Upon your shoulders the kingdom rests, and you must round up your shoulders, and bear it; for I have had to do it until now. But now the respon- sibility rests upon you. It mattereth not what becomes of me." — Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, p. 098. This was in 1844, but the language was not strong enough to answer the purpose in 1892, so Mr. Woodruff gives it as follows: — I remember the last speech that he ever gave us before his death. It was before we started upon our mission to the East. He stood upon his feet some three hours. The room was filled as with consuming fire, his face was as clear as amber, and he was clothed upon by the power of God. He laid before us our duty. He laid before us the fullness of this great work of God; and in his remarks to us he said: "I have had sealed upon my head every key, every power, every principle of life and salvation that God has ever given to ajay man whoever lived upon the face of the earth. And these principles and this Priesthood and power belong to this great and last dispensation which the God of Heaven has set His hand to establish in the earth." "Now," said he addressing the Twelve, "I have sealed upon 83 TRUE SUCCESSION IN your heads every key, every power, and every principle which the Lord has sealed upon my head." Continuing, he said, **I have lived so long — up to the present tinne — I have been in the midst of this people, and in the great work and labor of redemp- tion. I have desired to live to see this Temple [at Nauvool built. But 1 shall never live to see it completed; but you will. . . . [If he said this the prophecy failed. Not one of the then Twelve lived to see it completed. — H. C. S.] After addressing us in this manner he said: "I tell you the burden of this kingdom now rests upon your shoulders; you have got to bear it off in all the world, and if you don't do it you will be damned,"— Roberts, pp. 118, 119. In April, 1898, Mr. Woodruff is reported as quoting Joseph Smith, as follows: — You Apostles of the Lamb of God have been chosen to carry out the purposes of the Lord upon the earth. Now, I have received, as the Prc»phet, Seer and Revelator, standing at the head of this dispensation, every key, every ordinance, every principle and every Priesthood that belongs to the last dispensa- tion and fulness of times. And I have sealed all these things upon your heads. Now, you Apostles, if you do not rise up and bear off this kingom, as I have given it to you, you will be damned.— Penrose, p. 23. Examine these several statements carefully, and one thing will be very evident; viz., that we are not sure that we have the words of Joseph Smith, for the language is not given twice alike. If we have his words, tell us in which statement they are, that we may consider it. Another point we notice; that is, that the further we get from the time spoken of the stronger is the language used. This looks suspicious, manifesting as it does a disposition upon the part of the witnesses to exaggerate, which grew upon them with time. Brigham Young first speaks of that which was bestowed being the keys of the ^^apostle- i^hip.'' Later he mentions it as the keys to lead into the celestial gate. Elder Pratt says nothing of keys or leadership. Elder Hyde is a little more modest than Brigham; he does not say a word about keys, but simply that the responsibility to lead was upon them. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 83 In 1844 Elder Woodruff speaks freely of keys in bis pre- lude, but does not quote Joseph as using the word, but simply that the responsibility of the kingdom rests upon the shoulders of the Twelve. None of these testimonies is inconsistent with our. posi- tin>T Rxit when this growing tendency to exaggerate manifested itself in 1892, how was it? Then it was made to appear that Joseph bestowed upon the Twelve every key, power, and principle which he (Joseph) had held. Yet ttiic! is too indefinite for the purpose, in 1898, and hence it is stated that every key, ordinance, principle, and priesthood belonging to the last dispensation, and which Joseph Smith held as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, was bestowed upon the Twelve. This story has not lost any- thing; but if any man can tell what Joseph Smith said upon that occasion, let him come forward with it and we will give it respectful consideration. In the meantime we will concede the probability that Joseph Smith told the Twelve that the responsibility of the work would rest upon them, and that by the legitimate exercise of the authority vested in them the people could be led into the celestial gates; but if so it would not justify them in assuming to act outside the duty of their calling as defined in the law. Further, if in addition to the duty of the Twelve, as denned in the law, Joseph bestowed upon them as a quorum all the priesthood, power, and authority of the First Presi- dency, what need had they for a First Presidency? And what advantage was gained to the church by the forming of a First Presidency in 1847, and upon three different occasions since? Mr. Roberts then introduces a statement from William Marks to the effect that he had been convinced that ''the Twelve were the proper persons to lead the church." Sup- j)ose he did so state. He may have been mistaken* S4 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Again, his indorsement of their being the proper ones was not an indorsement of their subsequent acts as leaders. We do not affirm that Elder William Marks never erred; according to the prediction made of him b}' Joseph Smith, published by the Utah people themselves, the enemy was seemingly to gain some advantage over him, but he was finally to overcome because the hand of the Lord would be on his behalf. Here is the passage: — I would just say to brother Marks, that I saw in a vision while on the road, that whereas he was closely pursued by an innumerable concourse of enemies, and as they pressed upon him hard, as if they were about to devour him, and had seem- ingly obtained some defjree of advantage over him, but about this time a chariot of fire came, and near the place, even the Angel of the Lord put forth his hand unto brother Marks, and said unto him, "Thou art my son, come here," and immediately he was caught up in the chariot, and rode away triumphantly out of their midst. And again the Lord said, I will raise thee up for a blessing unto many people. Now the particulars of this whole matter cannot be written at this time, but the vision was evidently given to me that I might know that the hand of the Lord would be on his behalf. — Millennial Star, Vol. 16, p. 13L Will our opponents explain from their standpoint in what way God raised up William Marks to become "a blessing unto many people"? Mr. Roberts exclaims as a climax: — Since the church has never been disorganized, any organiza- tion claiminsr to be the "Reorganized church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" is a counterfeit, and writes fraud in the very title of it. — Roberts, p. UJ). To this we simply reply by a counter assertion, for which we have laid the foundation, and say: Since the church has been disorganized, any Latter Day Saint organization not "claiming to be the 'Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' is a counterfeit, and writes fraud in the very title of it." CHAPTER 9. The Twelve — Necessity for a Reorganization — Church Held Together — Building op Nauvoo, etc. — Driven to Rocky Mountains— Joseph's Prophecy — Pratt's Statement — Isaiah's Prophecy — The Exodus — Seventies — Baptism For the Dead — Temple Building — Persecution. Mr. Roberts opens his ninth chapter with the following declaration: — There is yet another line of evidence to be adduced in support of the »freat truth that the church has never been disorgranized in tliis dispensation, and therefore has never stood in need of a "reorjranization." That evidence is based upon the favor and blessinor of God which has followed the church of Christ led by the Twelve Apostles from Nauvoo, and their suc- cessors in the leadership of the church. — Roberts, p. 100. This opens the real issue, and most cheerfully do we meet it. By way of preliminary, however, we suggest that Mr. Roberts is unfortunate in having to represent a people on this issue who have conceded the necessity of a reorganiza- tion. This we have already shown from the purported revelation of Parley P. Pratt. (See p. 75.) In addition to that we present a statement from a Gen- eral Epistle of the Quorum of Twelve, written at Winter Quarters, Omaha Nation, December 23, 1847, and signed by Brigham Young, President, and Willard Richards, Clerk, as follows: — Since the murder of President Joseph Smith, many false prophets and false teachers have arisen, and tried to deceive many, during: which time we have mostly tarried with the body of the Church, or been seekinj? a new location, leavin CHAPTER 12. Points Established — Relevant Question — Acknowledged People of God — Authority to Choose and Ordain — Teach- ing OF Joseph Smith's Successor— Conclusion. In the foregoing pages we have established the following points: — 1. That the blessing of Joseph Smith the Prophet be- longs to his posterity, according to the law of lineage. 2. That this blessing includes the right to the keys of the kingdom. 3. That these keys belong always to the Presidency of the High Priesthood; hence the posterity of Joseph should preside over the high priesthood. 4. That Joseph, the eldest son of Joseph the Seer, was blessed, set apart, and appointed by his father to succeed him. 5. That the authority to appoint his successor was vested in Joseph Smith by virtue of the position he held. The only relevant question remaining to be solved is this: Did Joseph Smith, the son of the Prophet, pursue the proper course in proceeding to occupy in the sacred office to which he had been called and appointed? 1. Were the people with whom he identified himself the acknowledged people of God? 2. Did they have authority to choose and ordain him? 3. Has his subsequent teaching given evidence that he is the true successor of Joseph Smith his father? On the first question. Were the people with whom he identi- fied himself the acknowledged people of Godf We present as evidence that when he the anointed and appointed of God went humbly to the Lord, he was directed to the "saints CHURCH PRESIDENCY. . 133 reorganizing at Zarahemla and other places." (See p. 57.) We invite attention also to the position occupied by that people; viz.: They recognized the true situation — that the church had been rejected, and that a reorganization was essential; they took a position in harmony with the law and the promises of God in regard to succession, as we have clearly shown in these pages. Further, they adhered to the law of God as found in the written loord, and were not led into abominable and immoral practices by the delusive theory that God had bestowed upon men "keys that the written word never spoke of.". The following is a part of their declaration as adopted by the June conference of 1852: — Resolved, that as the ofRce of First President of the Church grows out of the authority of the Presiding High Priest in the high priesthood, no person can legally lay claim to the office of First President of the Church, without a previous ordination to the Presidency of the High Priesthood. Resolved, that we recognize the validity of all legal ordina- tions in this church, and will fellowship all such as have thua been ordained, while acting within the purview of such authority. Resolved, that we believe that the Church of Christ, organ- ized on the 6th day of April, a. d. 1830, exists as on that day wherever six or more saints are organized according to the pat- tern in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. Resolved, that the whole law of the Church of Jesus Christ is contained in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Book of Doctrine and Covenants. — The Messenger, Vol. 2, p. 9. This last resolution harmonizes with the law which says: — Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your <3od, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest blessings; ye that hear me: and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have profeSvSed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings. Hearken, O ye elders of my church whom I have called: behold, I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall assemble j'ourselves together to agree upon my word, and by the prayer of your faith ye shall receive my law, that ye may know how to govern my church, and have all things right before me. And I will be your Ruler when I come; and, behold, I come 184 . TRUE SUCCESSION IN quick!}': and ye shall see that my law is kept. He that receiv- eth my law and doeth it the same is my disciple; and he that saith he receiveth it and doetli it not, the same is not my disci- ple, and shall be cast out from amon^r you; for it is not meet that the things which belong to the children of the kingdom, should be given to them that are not worthy, or to dogs, or the pearls to be cast before swine. . . . These words are given unto you, and they are pure before me; wherefore, beware how you hold them, for they are to be answered upon your souls in the day of judgment. Even so. Amen.— D. C. 41: 1, 2, 3. Section 42 indicates that they had assembled together and that the promised law by which they were "to govern my church and have all things right before me [God]," was to be given them. A part of that law reads as follows: — And again, the elders, priests, and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fullness of the gospel; and they shall observe the covenants and church arti- cles to do them, and these shall be their teachings, as they shall be directed b}' the Spirit; and the Spirit shall be given unto you by the prayer of faith, and if ye receive not the Spirit ye shall not teach. And all this ye shall observe to do as I have commanded concerning your teaching, until the fullness of my scriptures are given. And as ye shall lift up your voices by the Comforter, ye shall speak and prophesy as seemeth me good; for, behold, the Comforter knoweth all things, and beareth rec- ord of the Father and of the Son.— D. C. 42:5. To this the Reorganization committed itself. The Utah people were induced by their leaders to adopt strange and questionable things not taught by Joseph nor found in the written word, under the delusive impression that their boasted keyholders were unlocking the treasure-house and banding out celestial gems. Again, the instruction given to Jason W. Briggs on November 18, 1851, which was one of the influences leading to the Reorganization, was in harmony with the foregoing. The following is an extract therefrom: — Therefore, let the Elders whom I have ordained by the hand CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 135- of my servant Joseph, or by the hand of those ordained by him, resist not this authority, nor faint in the discharge of duty, which is to preach my gospel as revealed in the record of the Jews, and the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Doctrine and and Covenants; and cry repentance and remission of sins through obedience to the gospel, and I will sustain them, and give them my Spirit; and in mine own due time will I call upon the seed of Joseph Smith, and will bring one forth, and he shall be mighty and strong, and he shall preside over the high priesthood of my church; and then shall the quorums assemble, and the pure in heart shall gather, and Zion shall be reinhab- ited, as I said unto my servant Joseph Smith; — after many days shall all these things be accomplished, saith the Spirit. — The Messenger, Vol. 2, p. 1. This leads us to something else. The reinhabiting of Zion and the words of the Lord to Joseph Smith in connec- tion therewith are referred to — "After many days shall all these things be accomplished." Where in the revelations to Joseph Smith do we find this sentiment? In a revela- tion given December, 1833. It is important. We quote as follows: — And now, I will show unto you a parable that you may know my will concerning the redemption of Zion. A certain noble- man had a spot of land, very choice; and he said unto his serv- ants, Go ye into my vineyard, even upon this very choice piece of land, and plant twelve olive trees; and set watchmen round about them and build a tower, that one may overlook the land round about, to be a watchman upon the tower; that mine olive trees may not be broken down, when the enemy shall come to spoil and take unto themselves the fruit of my vineyard. Now the servants of the nobleman went and did as their lord commanded them; and planted the olive trees, and built a hedge round about, and set watchmen, and began to build a tower. And while they were yet laying the foundation thereof, they began to say among themselves. And what need hath my lord of this tower? and consulted for a long time, say- ing among themselves, What need hath my lord of this tower, seeing this is a time of peace? Might not this money be given to the exchangers? for there is no need of these things! And while they were at variance one with another they became very slothful, and they hearkened not unto the commandments of their lord, and the enemy came by night and broke down the hedge, and the servants of the nobleman arose, and were- affrighted, and fled; and the enemy destroyed their works and broke down the olive trees. 136 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Now, behold, the nobleman, the lord of the vineyard, called upon his servants, and said unto them, Why! what is the cause of this great evil? ought ye not to have done even as I com- manded you? and after ye had planted the vineyard, and built the hedge round about, and set watchmen upon the walls thereof, built the tower also, and set a watchman upon the tower, and watched for my vineyard, and not have fallen asleep, lest the enemy should come upon you? and, behold, the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was yet afar off, and then you could have made ready and kept the enemy from breaking down the hedge thereof, and saved my vineyard from the hands of the destroyer. And the lord of the vineyard said unto one of his servants, Go and gather together the residue of my servants; and take all the strength of mine house, which are my warriors, my young men, and they that are of middle age also, among all mj' servants, who are the strength of mine house, save those only whom 1 have appointed to tarry; and go ye straightway unto the land of my vineyard, and redeem my vineyard, for it is mine, I have bought it with money. Therefore, get ye straightway unto my land; break down the walls of mine enemies, throw down their tower, and scatter their watchmen; and inasmuch as they gather together against you, avenge me of mine enemies; that by and by I may come with the residue of mine house and possess the land. And the servant said unto his lord. When shall these things be? And he said unto his servant, When I will: go ye straight- way: and do all things whatsoever I have commanded 3'ou; and this shall be my seal and blessing upon you; a faithful and wise steward in the midst of mine house; a ruler in my kingdom. And his servant went straightway, and did all things whatso- ever his lord commanded him, and after many days all things were fulfilled.— Doc. and Gov. 98: 6-^. Without occupying space to discuss all the minor points in the above parable we invite attention to the following leading points: — 1. The subject of the parable is the redemption of Zion. 2. The servants of the nobleman (the people of God) were to be directed to occupy a choice piece of land. 3. They were to do as they were commanded. 4. While they were yet laying the foundation they were to get at variance one with another and become slothful. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 137 5. As a result of this unfaithfulness their enemies were to come upon them and destroy their works. 6. They were to become affrighted and flee. 7. The nobleman (God) was to remonstrate with them for their unfaithfulness and to hold them responsible for allowing his vineyard to be destroyed. 8. Then he was to call upon one of his servants to gather together the residue of his servants (not the body which had fled). 9. This servant at the head of this residue was to go straightway into the vineyard and redeem it, break down the walls of the enemy, throw down their tower, scatter their watchmen, etc. 10. This servant was to inquire when these things should be, but was simply to be told, "When I will.''' 11. He was told that if he performed his part he should be a faithful and wise steward and a ruler in the kingdom. 12. He was to do whatsoever he was commanded and after many days all things (concerning the redemption of Zion) were to be fulfilled. The revelation to Elder Briggs connects this latter point with the work of the Reorganization. We are aware that it has been understood that this reve- lation of December, 1833, applied to the work of "Zion's Camp" which went up the next year to Missouri to relieve their brethren. That the participants in that movement should hope and expect to fulfill it, is quite natural; and that it may in a sense have had reference to that move- ment, we admit. But it did not have a complete fulfill- ment then. The Camp of Zion was not composed of the residue left after the church fled from Jackson County, in 1833. Zion's Camp did not scatter the enemy, but were themselves disbanded ere they reached the land whence their brethren had been driven. However, there came a time, as has been made apparent in the preceding pages, 138 TRUE SUCCESSION IN when the church became slothful and failed to do the work commanded within the time appointed; when their enemies came upon them and they became affrighted and fled, not simply to another part of the choice vineyard, as in the case of former moves, but entirely outside of the appointed Zion. Since the body has fled, one of God's servants has been sent to gather together the "residue," or remnants left behind; and they have gone straightway into the waste places of Zion and are redeeming them; are breaking down the wall, throwing down the tower, and scattering the watchmen of the enemy; not by use of carnal weapons, but by fearlessly defending the faith against opposition; by consistent honorable lives, and square dealing; and by adhering to ^Hhe code of good morals,'' taught in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants, and to which President Smith pledged himself on that memora- ble April day of 1860. This has disarmed the enemy, and the Reorganization is realizing, in a measure, the fulfillment of the promise that the church should find * 'favor and grace" in the eyes of the people. (See pp. 99, 100.) Mark it well, this servant who was to be sent to lead this movement was not only to be "a faithful and wise steward" in the midst of God's house, but he was to be "a ruler in my [God's] kingdom." In this connection observe the fitness of the following words of this servant of God as he called upon Latter Day Israel to renew their allegiance: — In the name of the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, I now call upon all the scattered saints, upon all the broad earth, to arise and shake otf the sleep that hath bound them these many years, tai rJi>f>'nns irhich CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 147 you have received, and shall receive,'' etc. Then the revela- tions that were to be received after this one must agree with those that had been received before, or the successor of Joseph Smith could not teach both. The church was warned to "receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations, or commandments; and this I give unto you, that you may not be deceived, that you may know they are not of me.'' If any reliance can be placed in this language, then can we know that the revela- tion introduced in August, 1852, was not of God, and that the teachings of those who then came before the church with revelations and commandments were not to be received. The son of the Prophet should not be blamed for rejecting the doctrine of plurality of wives, for one of the conditions of his appointment was that he was to teach the former and the latter revelations. He could not accept polygamy and still teach: "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave unto her and none else," etc. (D. C. 42: 7); "There shall not any man among you have save it be one wife: and concubines he shall have none," etc. (Book of Mormon, Jacob 2: 6.) Others may feel at liberty to believe and advocate that Ood has abrogated this law and commanded a departure from it, but the successor of Joseph Smith cannot. Upon him the obligation is laid "to teach those revelations which you have received, [before the one contained in Doctrine and Covenants section 43] and shall receive." The son of the Prophet took the only course open to him, as h^s father's successor, in rejecting that which was opposed to the former commandments. Not only is this true regarding polygamy, but on all points of doctrine and church government he has appealed for authority to the revefations of God, in harmony with the commandment which says: "And these shall be their teachings, as they shall be directed by the Spirit." (D. C. 42: 5.) 148 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Then his teaching has given evidence that he is the true successor of Joseph Smith, his father. Our task is done. This treatise is not an exhaustive one, for much more might be said upon the several points treated upon. We have been especially moderate in quot- ing the abominable teachings of the Utah authorities, hav- ing chosen but few of the many passages so shocking to the moral sense of honest people, and relating none of the many reports (some of which are well authenticated) of their practicing as they taught. Upon this as upon other points we have only used what we considered sufficient material to meet the issue. The investigation has con- vinced us more thoroughly than before that the Utah Church is a rejected church, and that the Reorganization stands upon an impregnable rock of defense. Humbly we send forth our conclusions, and our reasons therefor, praying that they may prove encouraging and confirming to the faithful, and warning and convincing to the erring. Though we expect to give an account for our teaching as well as our conduct at the bar of God, we do not hesitate to present to the reader the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as the Church of Jesus Christ, and Joseph Smith the son of the Martyr as its Prophet and President. CHAPTER 13. Correspondence—Letters op Long— op Deseret News— op C. W. Penrose— OP Clark— OP Richards — Position op Rich- ards AND Penrose — op Reorganization — Presidency — Apostleship— Presidency op High Priesthood— Josephite Contention Sustained— Penrose Dilemma— Conclusion. Since concluding the foregoing chapters the following <3orrespondence has come into our possession, and as ques- tions are answered therein which we had vainly attempted to have answered before, we will present it. We give the 'Correspondence in full thai these men and their ijiethods may be presented to the reader in their own words. It appears that Mr. Long was under the impression that Mr. Penrose was Editor of the Deseret News, and so ad- dressed him. The News answered the first two communi- •cations without the knowledge of Mr. Penrose. The last letter Mr. Penrose received and answered in person. This will account for the misunderstanding. Mr. Richards is the official Historian of the Utah Church, and Mr. Penrose is connected with the same department, hence their state- ments on historical points will doubtless be considered official. ^ The letters read as follows: — HiGDON, Ala., Nov. 19, 1897. To the Editor Deseret Evening News, Salt Lake City', Utah; Dear Sir: — I write you as an investigator, seeking to know the truth. I am a member of the Baptist Church, but I am interested in what is called by your people and others, the lat- ter-day work. I have kept and cared for elders of the church under the presidency of Wilford Woodruff, commonly called "Brig-ham- Ites." I have also kept and cared for elders (or an elder) of the •church under the presidency of Joseph Smith, of Lamoni, 150 * TRUE SUCCESSION IN Iowa, commonly called "Josephites" or the "ReorganizetJ Church." These elders do not agree as to the calling and ordination of Brigham Young as President of the Church after the death of Joseph Smith in 1844. The Josephite elders claim that he never was properly ordained; only elected as President of the Church. Will you please tell me if this is true or not? If he was ordained, please state by what authority and who officiated, that I may be able to answer the "Josephites" if it be a false claim. By answering the above and giving me any other information you may feel led to give, you will greatly oblige. Yours respectfully, J. O. Long. Office of Deseret Netcs Publishing Company. Salt Lake City, Utah, Dec. 6, 1897. J. O. Long, Esq., Higdon, Ala.; Dear Sir: — The Mormon Elders have frequently to meet the misrepresentations made by the Josephite Elders, and in order to meet this matter fully without entering into private discus- sions, Elder B. H. Roberts has written a book called the "Suc- cession in the Presidency," in which he sets forth all the particulars in relation to the succession of President Brigham Young to President Joseph Smith, and we think he has covered the ground very successfully and has left nothing whatever for our opponents, the Josephites, to base their claims on. We for- ward you to-day a copy of the book, the price of which is 30 cents, and we trust you will kindly remit the amount to us by return mail. Yours truly, Deseret News Publishing Co. Evans, Manager. Higdon, Ala., Jan. 26, 1898. Mr. C. W. Penrose, Editor Deseret News, Salt Lake City, Utah. Dear Sir: — In reply to yours of December 6, 1897: — After examining the book "Succession in the Presidency,"^ with some care, I yet find no answer to the question in my former letter of inquiry to you; viz.: "Was Brigham Young properly ordained as President of the Church after Joseph Smith's death, and if so, when and by whom?" which you will please answer if you have the data at hand. As before-stated I am not a "Brighamite" or "Josephite," but a Baptist; but I am interested in this question, hence my importunity. Enclosed is 30cts. to pay for book and also self-addressed,^ stumped envelope for your reply to me. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 151 Trusting my importunity will not weary your patience, and hoping to have an early reply, I am, Yours respectfully, J. O. Long. "The only answer to this letter was a postal card ac- knowledging the receipt of the 30 cts." OflSce of Deseret News Publishing Company. Salt Lakb City, Utah, Feb. 7, 1898. J. O. Long, Higdon, Ala. We have received your favor of Jan. 26, 1898, containing ^^jf dollars, and the amount of the remittance has been placed to your credit on account. Thanking you for past favors, and soliciting your kind pat- ronage, in the future, we remain, Yours truly, Deseret News Publishing Co., Per Neslen. Higdon, Ala., May 12, 1898. Mb. C. W. Penrose, Ed. Deseret News, Salt Lake City. Dear Sir: — On November 19, 1897, I wrote you asking for information as to who ordained Brigham Young as President of the Latter Day Saint or Mormon Church. M}^ reasons for writing you, as then stated were: I had been a friend to both the elders of your church and those of the Reorganized Church; had lodged and fed them both: had heard them talk; and as an honest man, wanted to know if the claim made by the "Josephites;" viz.: that Brigham Young was never ordained at all, as President of the Church, was true: and asked you the question, "If he was ordained, where and by whom was it done?" Your answer to my letter was a charge of misrepresentation by you against the "Josephites" and you also sent a work entitled by Elder B. H. Roberts, which you thought "covered all the grounds." The book I carefully read and found no answer to my ques- tion, and wrote you again on the 26th of January, 1898, so informing you, and repeated my question in the following form: "Was Brisrham Young properly ordained as President of the Church after Joseph Smith's death, and if so, when and by whom?" To this letter you was pleased to make no reply, or at least I received none, although I sent you self-addressed stamped en- velope. I write again, hoping you will reply, and, if you do not, I shall be forced to believe the charge of misrepresentation, so 152 TRUE SUCCESSION IN far as this point is concerned, should not be lodged against the- "Josephites." As before-stated, I am a Baptist, but I want to know the truth in all things, and as for this point, I thought one letter from you would settle it; but so far you have evaded the matter, and I must say that the impression you have made on me by this evasion is not for the best for your side, as it leads to the conclusion that the claim of the Josephites is true. May I hear from you soon, please? Respectfully, J. O. Long. Historian's Office, 60 E. South Temple Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, May 18, 1898. J. O. Long, Esq., Higdon, Ala. Dear Sir: — I have this moment received over your signature- a very imperative and peremptory letter. My first impulse was to treat it as insulting letters should be treated, but on reading it carefully I regard it as the result of some mistakes on your part, and lest it might be a fact that you are honestly seeking for information, I reply to it without ill-feeling. I am not aware that I have ever received a communication from you before. I am not the editor of the Deseret News. I have not sent to you a work entitled "Succession," nor have I received from you any "self-addressed," stamped envelope; nor have I, as you so bluntly charge, "evaded" any matter which you claim to have presented. And further, I am not aware that I am under any obligation to answer letters addressed to me in the spirit of the communication now before me. So much for that. Now my dear sir, to your question: "Was Brigham Young properly ordained as President of the Church after Joseph Smith's death, and if so, when and by whom?" In asking that question you are evidently under a misappre- hension as to the ordrr of Priesthood and Presidency in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That arises, doubtless, from an idea that has been entertained by persons in the "Reorganized" Church as to the meaning of the revelation given March 28, 18.3."), Section 107; 21, 22. D. and C. "Of necessity there are Presidents or Presiding offices grow- ing out of, or appointed of or from among those who are- ordained to the several offices in these two Priesthoods." "Of the Melchisedek Priesthood, three Presiding High- Priests chosen by the body, appointed and ordained to that office, and upheld by the confidence, faith and prayer of the- Church, form a quorum of the Presidency of the Church." Brigham Young at the death of Joseph was the PresidtMit of the Twelve Apostles, so designated by revelation. Apostles are Presiding High Priests, appointed and ordained to that office. He having been so appointed and ordained was in due time- CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 153 chosen by the body and upheld by the confidence, faith and prayer of the Church, and with two counselors, each of whom was also a Presiding High Priest, having been appointed and ordained to that office, thus became the First Presidency, according to the revelation. No man is ordained President of the Church. He is ordained to that Priesthood which qualifies him for the position of Presi- dent when chosen and sustained by the Church. The question might be asked, when was Joseph the Prophet ordained Presi- dent of the Church? He was ordained an Apostle and thus being a Presiding High Priest was accepted by the Church and sustained in that capacity. , Priesthood is conferred by ordination; Presidency is another thing. It does not come by ordination, using that term in the same sense as in reference to conferring Priesthood, nor does it come by lineage. It is by choice and appointment and the common consent of the Church; but the person so chosen must have been ordained to the proper Priesthood to be qualified for the position. The word "ordained," however, is sometimes used in another sense, as anything that God appoints or orders or ordains, but in the revelation referred to signifies evidently just what I have stated. If I have not made this sufficiently plain, I shall be willing to respond to any courteous inquiry. Respectfully yours, etc., C. W. Penrose. EuLA P. O., Jackson Co., Ala., Feb. 26, 1898. Me. F. D. Richards, Dear Sir: — You will excuse me for writing to you; I want to ask you a question. Your elders that are doing preaching here or have been doing preaching here seem to be nice men, and we have another kind of preachers that come here; they call them Josephites. They say Brigham Young never was ordained to be President of the Church, therefore your elders haven't got any right to preach nor baptize. Now, if you will answer my questions you will oblige. Was Brigham Young ordained to be President of the Church? If so, who ordained him — when was he ordained and who did it? I am asking these questions for information. You will please write and give me the information I so much want. I belong to no church. There don't seem to be much difference between your elders and the Josephites in the way they believe, only the President of the Church. I hope to hear from you soon and have an answer to my ques- tion. Respectfully, Jehu B. Clark. BuLA P. O., Jackson County, Alabama. 154 TRUE SUCCESSION IN Salt Lake City, Utah, March 7, 1898. Jehu B. Clark, Eula, Alabama. My Dear 8ir: — There are no dissenting branches of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is an organization calling itself "The Reorganized Church," but it is in no sense a branch of this Church. It is composed of persons who follow Joseph Smith, son of the deceased Prophet, and who claim that when the latter died, having been martyred for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, the Church thereby became disorganized; a palpable absurdity. The Church founded, under God, by Joseph Smith the Prophet has continued without interruption to the present time, with the Apostleship, doctrines, ordinances, gifts and powers as estab- lished and revealed from the Lord. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no one has ever been ordained to be President of the Church. In the beginning the Lord sent Peter, James and John, and they ordained Joseph Smith an Apostle and he was instructed how to organize and build up the Church in this dispensation. When the Prophet and Apostle Joseph Smith was taken from us, Brigham Young, being President of the Twelve Apostles, it devolved upon him to preside over the Church, as the Apostle is the highest office known in the Church of Christ. So also, when the Prophet and Apostle Brigham Young died, John Tay- lor, being President of the Twelve Apostles, it devolved upon him. In the same manner, when he departed, Wilford Wood- ruff, being President of the Twelve Apostles, the Presidency devolved upon him. Neither Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor nor Wilford Woodruff were ordained Presidents of the Church. It is not according to the order of the Church to ordain Presidents of the Church, for there is no such order of the Priesthood known in the Church. When the Savior departed, the Presiding Apostle Peter took charge, as it was his right of office, and James and John were his counselors, and that is how they seemed to be pillars in the Church, the same as it is now in the true Church. Offices in the Church are con- ferred by ordination, but offices of position to honor and labor are conferred by calling or appointment, and not by ordina- tion. May the clear light of truth enable you to understand the things of God, and preserve you from being deceived by any other than the true doctrine of Christ. Success to you in your prayerful search for the way of the Lord. Yours in the Truth, F. D. Richards. We are heartily glad that these men have at last taken a position on this point, and we thank Messrs. Long and CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 155 Clark for having kindly furnished us this important material. It will be seen that both Mr. Richards and Mr. Penrose take the position that Presidents are not ordained as such, but chosen from those previously holding office by virtue of which they are eligible to the position chosen, and that they then occupy without further ordination. They apply this rule to the President of the Church, and Mr. Richards affirms that, "In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, no one has ever been ordained to be President of the Church." The Reorganization has taken the position (see p. 133) stated in the following: — Resolved, that as the office of First President of the Church grows out of the authority of the Presiding High Priest in the- high priesthood, no person can legally lay claim to the office of First President of the Church, without a previous ordination to the Presidency of the High Priesthood, So the issue is squarely before us, and we are pleased to meet it. It will not be necessary for us to enter into an exegesis of the law, which would admit of a difference of opinion. We will simply give a few universally acknowledged his- torical facts which will clearly show that our learned oppo- nents are wrong. On February 15, 1836, at Kirtland,^ Ohio, Presidents were chosen to the High Priests, Elders, Priests, Teachers, and Deacons quorums, and each of them duly set apart by ordination. The record is as follows: — After one hour's adjournment of the Council, Elder Don Carlos Smith was'nominated and seconded to be ordained to the High Priesthood, also to officiate as President, to preside over that body in Kirtland. The vote of the respective quorums was called in their order, and passed through the whole house by their unanimous voice. Elder Alva Beeman was chosen in the same manner, to pre- side over the Elders in Kirtland. William Cowdery was nominated and seconded to officiate as 156 TRUE SUCCESSION IN President over the Priests of the Aaronic Priesthood in Kirt- land. The vote of the Assembly was called, beginning at the Bish- op's Council, and passing through the several authorities, until it came to the Presidency of the High Council in Kirtland, and received their sanction, having been carried unanimously, in all the departments below. Oliver Olney was unanimously elected to preside over the Teachers in Kirtland. Ira Bond was unanimously chosen to preside over the Dea- cons in Kirtland. Elders Don Carlos Smith and Alva Beeman were ordained to the ottices to which they had been elected, under the hands of Presidents Joseph Smith, Junior, S. Rigdon, and H. Smith, with many blessings. Bishop Whitney, of Kirtland, then proceeded to ordain Wil- liam Cowdery, Oliver Olney, and Ira Bond, and pronounced many blessings upon them according to their offices and stand- ing.— ifzWewma^ Star, Vol. 15, pp. 593-594. At Nauvoo, Illinois, in 1841, George Miller was chosen to succeed Don C. Smith as President of the High Priests •Quorum, and of this he says: — And at the fall conference after the death of Don Carlos Smith, I was called and set apart as President of the Quorum of High Priests, with my counselors Noah Packard and Amasa Lyman.— Church History, Vol. 2, p. 793. In Millennial Star, Vol. 16, p. 342, we find the following: ' 'Stephen Chase was ordained President of the Elders Quorum in Far West." This was on October 6, 1838. Again, on March 1, 1835, "Joseph Young and Sylvester Smith were ordained Presidents of the Seventies." {Millen- nial Star, Vol. 15, p. 230.) These are but few of the many instances that we could cite to show that in the days of Joseph the Martyr Presi- dents were set apart by ordination, hence Mr. Penrose is wrong when in speaking of Presidency he says: "It does not come by ordination," etc. Not only were Presidents ordained in the church in the days of the Martyr, but the Utah Church has adopted the practice. Andrew Jensen in his "Historical Record," Vol. CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 157 5, pp. 82, 83, speaks of the ordination of Presidents of Sev- enties as follows; Jedediah M. Grant, in 1844; Horace S. Eldredge, October, 1854; Jacob Gates, October, 1862; Wil- liani W. Taylor, 1879; Abraham H. Cannon, October 9, 1882; Seymour B. Young, October 16, 1882; Daniel Fjel- sted, April 28, 1884; and John Morgan, October 7, 1884. Pages could be filled with instances of ordinations to Presidency, but surely these are sufficient. By the above we learn that when the quorums were first set in order under Joseph Smith the Seer, that Presidents were set apart by ordination in the quorums of Seventy, High Priests, Elders, Priests, Teachers and Deacons. Even if ordinations to Presidency were unnecessary in the apostolic quorums of First Presidency and Twelve Apos- tles, our opponents are too extravagant in laying down the rule that Presidency "does not come by ordination.'' They should have admitted the rule and claimed an excep- tion. Having disposed of their interpretation of the rule, it might be more in keeping with order to rest here and await the filing of their claim of exception; but as this is our closing argument, we will meet their position by show- ing that it is neither the rule nor the exception. Mr. Richards makes the direct claim (to which Mr. Pen- rose by inference agrees) that, "In the beginning the Lord sent Peter, James, and John and they ordained Joseph Smith an Apostle, and he was instructed how to organize and build up the church in this dispensation." They then argue that by virtue of the apostleship then conferred, (not later than September, 1830, D. C. 26: 3,) he was President of the Church. Both of these gentlemen, either ignorantly or dishonestly ignore the fact that not- withstanding Joseph Smith had been an apostle since 1830, he did, on January 25, 1832, receive an additional ordina- tion, at Amherst, Ohio, to the office of President of the 158 TRUE SUCCESSION IN High Priesthood, (see this book, p. 143,) and that on April 26^ 1832, he was received by the church in Missouri in that capacity. It is only necessary here to cite the language of the law to show that this was tantamount to an ordination as President of the Church: — And again, the duty of the president of the office of the high priesthood is to preside over the whole church, and to be like unto Moses. Behold, here is wisdom, yea, to be a seer, a reve- lator, a translator, and a prophet; having all the gifts of God which he bestows upon the head of the church. — Doc. and Gov. 104: 42. The assertion, then, of Mr. Richards, that "Neither Joseph Smith, Brio^ham Young, John Taylor, nor Wilford Woodruff, were ordained Presidents of the Church," in so far as it refers to Joseph Smith, is false. The position of the Reorganization as set forth in the above resolution is in harmony with both law and precedent. The ordination of Joseph, the son of the Martyr, to the office of President of the High Priesthood, was exactly in harmony with the ordination of his illustrious father whom he succeeds. Strange that the Utah authorities question the validity of this ordination, and yet defend the claims of Brigham Young and his successors in office, while they concede that they nor either of them had an ordination of any kind to the office of President of the Church; and Mr. Richards goes so far as to say, "It is not according to the order of the church to ordain Presidents of the church, for there is no such order of the Priesthood known in the church." This is unquestionably true as regards that church repre- sented by Mr. Richards. But this office is provided for in the law given to the church organized by Joseph Smith and others in 1830. The Prophet and his colleagues were in practice in harmony with that law; and the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as the lawful CHURCH PRESIDENCY. 15» continuation of the church organized in 1830 accepts that law and practically carries it into effect. If, as Mr. Richards states, Brigham Young was not ordained President of the Church, then the contention of the "Josephites," as set forth in Mr. Long's letter, is sus- tained, and the charge of misrepresentation made by the Deseret News should be retracted. These men are in des- perate straits and their struggles excite in us a mingled feeling of pity and contempt. The floundering of Mr. Pen- rose is especially pitiable. After quoting the law and seeking to construe it to mean what it does not say, he plunges into a self-contradictory tangle from which he can never disengage himself. He says: "Apostles are Presid- ing High Priests, appointed and ordained to that office." Again, he says of Joseph Smith: "ZTe was ordained an Apostle and thus being a Presiding High Priest ivas accepted by the church and sustained in that capacity." After thus affirming that Joseph Smith was a Presiding High Priest by virtue of an ordination, he immediately flops and says Presidency "does not come by ordination." The truth is that these men realize that neither Messrs. Young, Taylor, Woodruff, nor Snow ever had an ordination to the office of President of the High Priesthood; which office, according to law, entitles a man to the right to preside over the whole church (and virtually such ordination makes him the President); and hence they conclude that Presidency "does not come by ordination;" and yet they must find some plausible excuse for Young et al. assumiiag to preside, and so they say they were ordained Presiding High Priests. The only consistent way out of this dilemma is to resolve that. Whereas, Joseph Smith, though an apostle, was ordained to the office of President of the High Priesthood; there- fore, Brigham Young et al, though apostles, had no right to assume to preside over the whole church without such ordination. 160 TRUE SUCCESSION IN When these gentlemen can establish their position that an apostle can preside over the church by virtue of his ordination as a Presiding High Priest, and at the same time sustain their contention that Presidency "does not come by ordination," we would be pleased to hear from them again. We sincerely thank Mr. Richards for his frank acknowl- edgement that the Reorganization "is in no sense a branch of this [their] Church;" and congratulate Messrs. Long and Clark on their success in drawing out of these men a statement of their position where others have failed. Again, we conclude by presenting to the reader, with renewed confidence, the Reorganized Church as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Its Presi- dent is of the lineage pointed out in the revelations of God as entitled to that position. He was appointed of God through his father according to the direction given in the revelations. He was called of God by revelation according to the law which says: — The president, of the church, who is also the president of the council, is appointed by revelation, and acknowledored, in his administration, by the voice of the church. — D. C. 99: C. He was regularly ordained to the office of President of the High Priesthood, as was his father before him, by vir- tue of which he is entitled "to preside over the whole church, and to be like unto Moses." Not one of these requisites can be claimed by Lorenzo Snow, nor his prede- cessors. Elders Woodruff, Taylor, and Young. We exhort and admonish Latter Day Israel everywhere to hear and heed the inspired message of this servant of God that was addressed to them so many years ago (see pp. 138, 139), and remember that "he that heareth him that is sent, heareth the Lord who sent him." INDEX. Account of meeting, 7. Adam-God, theory of, taught, 123, 134, 145. Adams, G. J., connected with Wm. Smith, 18; elation of, 47; on succession, 47, 48. Additional correspondence, 149. Amboy Conference, complaint filed against, 121. Answers insisted upon, 62. Apostasy to take place, 90. Apostleship, senior of, to pre- side, 28. Apostolic authority, of Reorgani- zation, 62 ; renewal of, 141. Approval of church necessary, 31. Arizona, colonies formed in, 93. Authority, prepared for defense of, 62; command of God suflB- cient, 143. Baldwin. Caleb, not on record,40. Baptism, for the dead, 95; legal and sufficient, 118. Beeman, Alva, ordination of, 155, 156. Bennett, J. C, conspiracy of, 8. Benson, E. T., dispatched to meet companies, 116; present at re- organization, 119; received into Twelve, 121. Biography of Anson Call, 88. Bishop, law of lineage appertain- ing to, 50. Blessing of Joseph Smith, 41, 43- 48, 132. Blood atonement taught by Young and Grant, 126-128, 145. Bond, Ira, ordination of, 156. Briggs, J. W., priesthood of, 28; revelation to, 134; instruction to, 134, 137. Butterfield, Josiah, cut off the church, 122. Calhoun, J. C, letter to, 55, 56. Call, Anson, biography of, 88. Cannon, Abram, position of, 53 j ordination of, 157. Cannon, G. Q., testimony of 9;^ sermon of, 129. Carlin, Gov., conspiracy of, 8. Carter, J. H., testimony of. 48. Challenge, acceptance of, 57. Christ, concerning birth of, 124. Church, where is it— who repre- sents it, 5; satisfied with Rig- don, 8; approval of necessary, 31; disorganization of, 68; re- jection of, 68, 69 ; held together, 87; numerical strength of, 59, 87 ; to be driven West, 88, 91 ;. remove to Rocky Mountains, 88-91. Clark, J. B., letter of, 153. Clawson, H. B., statement of, 129. Code of good morals, Joseph Smith pledged to, 32, 33; Reor- ganization adheres to, 138. Colorado, colonies formed in, 93. Committees to select Twelve, 141, 142. Conference of October, 1843, 8 ; at Amboy, 121. Conspiracy of Carlin, et al., 8. Correspondence, of Carlin, et al., 8; between Smith and Rich- ards, 59-61. Counterfeit, Reorganized Church a, 84. Cowdery, Oliver, apostolic au- thority of, 63 ; to select Twelve —ordains them, 141. Cowdery, William, ordination of, 155, 156. Credit attaches to Prophet, 90. Criminal record, glory of, 99. Dealings of God, history of, 10. Debts, Young's teaching concern- ing, 124, 125. Derry, Charles, testimony of, 48, 162 INDEX. Deseret News, evasive answers of, 61, 62; statement of, 129; letters of, 150, 151 ; should re- tract, 159. Edict not enforced without con- sent, 31. Eldredge, H. 8., ordination of, 157. Endowments for the dead. 95. Expelled without trial, 122. Family chosen of God rejected, 131. First Presidency, what need have they for, 83. Fjelsted, Daniel, ordination of, 157. Oates, Jacob, ordination of, 157. Gaulter, H. B., testimony of, 48. Gaulter, Louis, testimony of, 48. Gospel Herald attacks Lyman Wight, 37-39. Grant, J. M., on blood atone- ment, 127; ordination of. 157. Grant, H. J., position of, 53. Gurley, Z. H., Sen., revelation to, 34 ; authority of, 63. Harris, Martin, added to commit- tee—ordains, 141. Hewett, Richard, letter of, to J. J. Strang, 24, 25. High Council, changes made in, 122 ; Marks President of, 142. History, added to — misrepre- sented, 8; of God's dealings, 10. Holy Scriptures, preservation of, 139; property of Reorganiza- tion, 140. Hyde, Orson, suspended from of- fice—restored, 16 ; challenged by Strang— reply of, 26, 27 ; quotes rule to test revelations. 31; statement of, 81, 82; in the East, 114; position of on rebap- tism, 117, 118. Idaho, colonies formed in, 93. Improvement Associations, es- tablishing of, 93. Independence Temple, buUding of, 97. Inspired Translation, on order of priesthood, 55. Isaiah, prophecy of, 92. Issue, rests upon what done and how done. 79; the real, 85; clearly defined, 155. Jaxiues, John, signs for Richards, 61. Jensen, Andrew, statement of, 97 ; Historical Record of, 156. "Josephite" contention sus- tained, 159. Kay, James, letter of, 18. Key doctrine, legitimate results of, 145. Keys, belong to Presidency, 44, 134; not taken by Joseph, 76; definition of, 77, 78 ; interpreta- tion of, 78; bestowed on the Twelve, 80-83. Kimball, H. C, in the East, 114; rebaptized— reordained, 116; at- tends council — chosen coun- selor, 119. Kirtland Temple, building of, 97; title in Reorganization, 98. Leading spirits, Penrose's asser- tion concerning. 101. Letter. Kay to Millennial Star, 18 ; Miller and Hewett to Strang, 24, 25; Strang to Taylor and Hyde, 26; Hyde and Taylor to Strang, 27 : Wight to Northern Islander, 36 ; Smith to Richards, 59-61; Richards to Smith. 59; Smith to Stubbart, 104-111 ; Luff to Parker, lU-113; Long to Pen- rose, 149-151; Deseret News to Long, 150, 151 ; Penrose to Long, 152; Clark to Richards, 153; Richards to Clark, 154. Liars, Young's claims concerning, 125. Lineal priesthood, 17-20, 38, 44, 45, 50-56; practiced by Utah Church, 53. Log^n, temple of, 95, 96, 98. INDEX. 163 Long, J. O., letters of, 149-151. Luflf, Joseph, letter of concern- ing interview, 111-113. Lyman, Amasa, addresses meet- ing, 12 ; rebaptism and reordi- nation of, 116; present at reorganization, 119; offered position, 121. Lyman, F. M., position of, 53. Manifesto issued by Woodruff, 180, 181. Manti, temple of, 95. 96, 98. Marks, William, attitude of, 14; authority of, 68; indorses Twelve, 88, 84 ; enemy to gain advantage over, 84; a blessing to many, 84; removed from position. 122; appeals to writ- ten word, 122; President of High Council— assists in ordi- nation, 142. McRae, Alexander, not on record — silence of. 40. Meeting, account of, 7; of August 8, 1844, 9. Miller, George, introduced by Jtoberts, 21 ; letter of, to Strang, 24; reason of, for disagreement, 25; testimony of. 48, 49; action of, explained, 49. 50; relegated to second place, 121 ; ordination of, 156. Miller, U. G., inquiry of, 61. Milliken, Arthur, testimony of, 48. Mills. D. S., testimony of. 48. Moore, A. B., testimony of. 48. Morgan, John, ordiaation of, 157. Moses, revelation to. 10. Mountain, definition of, 92. Nauvoo, building of, 88. 91. Nauvoo House, Smith family to have place in, 42. 43, 45 ; resting place, 42; building of, 41, 88. Nauvoo Temple, building of, 88, 97. Notice, promise of, 115 ; not given, 120. Officers, to be approved by church, 81; return of antici- pated, 114. Olney, Oliver, ordination of, 156. Opponents, extravagance of, 157. Oracles, given to the church, 76, 78-80; definition of, 77-79. Ordination, necessity for, 58, 62; for the dead. 95; apostles and high priests officiate at, 143. Page, J. E., at Pittsburg, 114; disapproved of, 121. Parker, R. J., letter to, 111-113. Patriarch, William Smith or- dained. 16; law of lineage ap- pertaining to, 50, 52; mentioned by Young. 86. Pattern, organize according to original. 86. Penitentiary, ex-convicts from. 99. Penrose, C. W., echoes Roberts, 45; on completion of temple, 69-71; on release from obliga- tions, ?3; on temple building, 96; reply to. 101; assumes with- out proof, 101; on order and discipline. 108; connected with historical department, 149; let- ter of, 152; position of, 155; tangle of. 159. People unprepared for events,114. Persecution. Roberts' claim con- cerning. 98, 99. Phelps, Elder, addresses meet- ing, 12; moves to accept Twelve, 116. Piercy, Frederick, trip of, 30. Pledge of Joseph Smith, 31-33. Plural marriage, first indorse- ment of. 128. Polygamy, action of Reorganiza- tioa concerning, 100; introduc- tion of. 128; doomed, 130, 145; successor cannot accept, 147. Pratt. Orson, in the East, 114; rebaptism and reordination of, 116; present at reorganization, 119. Pratt, P. P., addresses meeting, 12; on disorganization, 74; on reorganization, 74; revelation to, 75, 79. 85. 91 ; statement of, 80, 82, 91; in New York-re- turns to Nauvoo, 114; in Salt Lake Valley, 120 Prediction not fulfilled, 7. President of high priesthood, or- dination to, l43. Priesthood, source of, 144, 145. 164 INDEX. Presidency, keys of kingdom be- long to, 44, 45; in Joseph's pos- terity, 44, 45. Presidents, ordination of, 155-158. Priesthood of apostles, 28. Prophetic character of predic- tion, 7. Quorums, to approve revelations, 31 ; set in order, 157. Rebaptism, of Twelve, 116, 117; enjoined, 117, 118; necessity for. 117, 118. Relief Societies, establishing of, 93 Reordination. 116, 118. 119. Reorganization still exists. 6; ab- sorbs Wight's following, 23; history of, 28 ; stream of— reso- lution of, 34 ; not composed of Strangites and Smithites, 35; approved, 57, 58; apostolic au- thority of, 62, 63 ; necessity for, 74, 75, 79, 85.86 ; a counterfeit. 84 ; action of, 100; leading spirits of, 101, 102; opposed to po- lygamy, 129; position of, 133, 134; acknowledged of God, 132- 140; redeeming waste places, 138; authority in, 140-146; po- sition of, 155 ; president of, 160. Residue, gathering of, 136-138. Resolution of Strangites, 39. Revelation, to Moses, 10; to be approved by quorums, 31 ; to Z. H. Gurley, 84; to F. G. WU- liams, 44; to Joseph Smith, 57; Joseph Smith to receive, 78; to P. P. Pratt, 75, 79 ; danger in, 146. Richards, F. D., publishes Illus- trated Route, 30 ; letters of, 59, 154; estimate of, 87; position of, 155; assertion of false, 158; acknowledgment of, 160. Richards, S. W., arranges with Piercy, 30. Richards, Willard, at Nauvoo, 114; rebaptism and reordina- tion of, 116. Rigdon, Sidney, failure of, 5 ; slan- dered — suspected— blamable — exonerated, 8; meeting called by, 12; refuses to have name presented, 12; acquiesces, 14 ; in Pennsylvania— returns to Nau- voo. 114; appoints meeting — claims not presented, 115; dis- posed of— expelled, 121. Roberts, B. H., his introduction, 5; gives prominence to predic- tion. 5 ; assumes point at issue,5 ; unenviable controversialist, 6; admits prediction is not fulfilled, 6 ; forms conclusion without evi- dence, 6; quotes doubtful au- thority, 7; blunders, 7; cites hearsay, 7; unkind — his incen- tive. 8; misrepresents, 8; tenden- cies of, 9 ; introduces meeting of August 8, 9; against the record, 12; introduces work of Wm. Smith— personal interview, 15; misstatement of. 16; errs on Wm. Smith, 17, 18; reckless as- sumption of, 21; errs on Lyman Wight, 22-24; strictures of on Bishop Miller, 24, 25; unmanly attack of, 27; sarcastic state- ment of, 29; sneers of, 30; unenviable position of, 39; pet- tifoggery of. 40; fatal conces- sion of, 56, 57; affirmation of, 62, 64 ; seeks to make contrast, 63; against Woodruff and Staines, 67; on completion of temple, 69, 70 ; claim of, 79 ; con- founds keys with oracles, 77; unfortunate, 85; distorts lan- guage, 86; specifications of, 86; on Governor Wells, 103. Rocky Mountains, prediction con- cerning, 88-91 ; people led to, 93. Rule established by Joseph Smithy 31. Satan, transformation of. 11. Salt Lake, temple of, 95-98. Salt Lake Valley, strange events in, 116. Science favors lineal priesthood, 52. Sealings for the dead, 95. Seventies, selection of, 94; pro- vision for, 93. 94 ; presidents of ignored. 94; nine extra quorums — Brigham's nominees. 122; presidents of ordained, 156, 157. INDEX. 165 Smith, A. H., on completion of temple, 70 ; discourse of, 86. Smith, Don C., ordination of, 155, 156. Smith, Emma, testimony of, 46, 47; Holy Scriptures in hands of, 139. Smith family, commendation of, 30 ; their place, 53. Smith, G. A., in Michigan, 114; rebaptism and reordination of, 116; present at reorganization, 119. Smith, Heman C, letters of, 59-61. Smith. Hyrum, successorship of, 50, 65. Smith, J. F., position of, 53. Smith, J. H., position of, 53. Smith, John, presents the Twelve, 116. Smith, John, position of, 53. Smith, Joseph, (first President,) history of added to, 8 ; explana- tion of, 8; attends council of Twelve, 16; rule established by, 31 ; words of to be received, 33 ; blessing of, 41, 42, 43, 44; and family to have place in Nauvoo House, 42; posterity of, to be plants of renown, 42, 43; to hold presidency, 44, 45; on priesthood, 53-55 ; apostolic authority of, 63; his right to appoint successor, 63-65. 79, 160; on completion of temple, 72 ; authority to receive revela- tions, 78; language of, 80, 82, 83 ; prophecy concerning Rocky Mountains, 88-91 ; writes to his wife, 90, 91 ; warning to church, 73, 91 ; things written into his- tory of, 94 ; not responsible for departure, 95; ordained Presi- dent, 143, 157, 158. Smith, Joseph, (second Presi- dent,) received by Wight's fol- lowers, 23; enterprises of, 29; and family, reputation of, 30; his speech of acceptance — pledge of, 31 ; power by which dictated, 32: acquainted with associates, 32; blessings of, 39, 40, 45-48, 132 ; statement of, 40 ; Kjalling of, 41 ; appointed by his father, 45-49 ; testimony of, 46 ; revelation to — autobiography of, 57; ordination of, 62; on completion of temple, 70 ; inter- viewed by Spencer, et al., 103- 113; proceedings of, 132; his call to scattered saints, 138, 139; ordination of, 142, 146 ; teaching of, 146-148 ; Prophet and Presi- dent, 148; ordained President, 158 ; requisites of, 160. Smith, Lucy, Roberts' attempt to convict, 19; testimony of, 48. Smith, Sylvester, ordination of, 156. Smith, William, failure of, 5 ; his work introduced, 15 ; suspended from office — restored, 16; or- dained Patriarch, 16 ; commen- dation of, 17 ; on lineal priest- hood, 17, 18, 20, 38; action against, 18, 19 ; on disorganiza- tion, 18, 74; in the East, 114; disapproval of, 121. Snider, John, removed from building committee, 122. Snow, Lorenzo, ordination of, 59, 62 ; not ordained, 143. Spencer, S. G , interview with, 103-113 ; statements of conflict, 104 ; seeks to find conflict, 113. Spirit enables men to develop, 10. Staines, W. C, testimony of, 10; against Roberts, 67. Stakes of Zion, establishing of, 93. Statement, not significant, 5 ; evi- dence of not complete, 6; of Brigham Young, 80, 83 ; of Or- son Hyde, 81, 82; of Wilford Woodruff, 81-83 ; of P. P. Pratt, 80-82. St. George, temple of, 95, 96, 98. Stout, J. H., inquiry of, 61. Strang, J. J., failure of, 5; work of — courage of, 26; ch allonges Taylor and Hyde, 26, 27; un- manly attack on, 27. Stubbart, J. M., letter to, 104. Successor, how appointed, 63, 64; to be appointed by Joseph, 63- 65, 79; teaching of, 146. 147; conditions of appointment, 147. Sunday schools, establishing of, 93. 106 INDEX. Suspended without trial, 122. Taylor, John, editor and proprie- tor, 17 ; private journal of, 19 ; challenged by Strang— reply of, 26, 27; ordination of. 59-62. 154, 158; in Nauvoo, 114; editor, 115; in Salt Lake Valley, 120; not ordained, 143. Taylor, J. W., position of, 53. Taylor. W. W., ordination of, 157. Teasdale, George, on marriage question, 130. Temple, completion of, 69-72; building of, 69; of Logan, 95, 96, 98; of Manti, 95, 96, 98; of St. George, 71, 95, 96, 98; of Salt Lake, 95-97; command- ment concerning building, 96, 97; at Kirtland, 97, 98; at Inde- pendence, 97; at Nauvoo, 97; attempt to build without reve- lation, 97. Testimony of G. Q. Cannon, 9 ; of W. C. Staines, 10; of W. Wood- ruflf, 10; of Lyman Wight, 36, 37. Transformation, Satan author of, 11; counterpart of, 11. Tullidge quotes Woodruff, 116. Twelve, dictation of. 9 ; sustaining the, 13, 115, 116; seven of, chosen, 28; senior of, to pre- side, 28; at Nauvoo, 29; next to First Presidency, 68; on com- pletion of temple. 72 ; authority and mission of, 75; recognition of, 79 : keys bestowed upon, 76, 79-83; indorsed by Marks, 83, 84; general epistle of , 85 ; build Nauvoo, etc., 88; failed to build, 88; turn towards West, 88; seventies increased by, 93, 94; in Nauvoo, 114; rebaptism and reordination of, 116; coun- cil of, 119; selection of, 141, 142; authority of, 141. Unlawful cohabitation, action of Reorganization concerning, 100. Utah authorities, abominable teaching of, 148. Utah, colonies formed in, 93. Wells, Governor, on Roberts, 103. Whitehead, James, testimony of^ 46-48. Whitmer, David, to select Twelve — ordains them, 141. Whitney, N. K., placed over Mil- ler, 121. Wight, Lyman, introduced by Roberts — true to Joseph Smith, 21 ; directs in pinery — visits Nauvoo— goes East — returns to Nauvoo and Wisconsin, 22; fol- lowing of— death of, 23; pos- terity of, 23; Galveston News' mention of, 24; testimony of, 36, 37; on lineal priesthood, 38, 39 ; attacked by Gospel Herald, 37, 38; Roberts' attempted im- peachment of, 39 ; on disorgani- zation, 74; in the East, 114; not with the Twelve, 119, 120; dis- approved of, 121; removed from building committee. 122. Wilderness, church not to flee to, 74, 75, 79. 91. Williams, F. G., revelation to, 44. Wisconsin, Wight and Miller in, 22, 23. WoodruflF, A. O., position of, 53. WoodruflP, Wilford, testimony of, 10, 13; against the record, 13; ordination of, 59-62, 154, 158; against Roberts and record, 67; statement of, 81-83; report of, 87; testimony of, 102; in the East, 114; Tullidge quotes, 116; rebaptism and reordination of^ 116; present at reorganization, 119; issues manifesto, 130, 131; not ordained. H3. Wyoming, colonies formed in, 93. Young, Brigbam, Jr., position of, 53. Young, Brigham. Sen., language of, 5; policy of. 9: assumes ap- pearance of Smith, 9; fraudu- lent attitude of, 10; assumes control of meeting, 12; speaks — presents motion. 12; boastful spirit of, 33; ambition of him- self and successors, 58; ordina- tion of, 59-62, 154, 158; admis- sion of, 62; on completion «>f temple, 71 ; statements of, 80 ; signs general epistle, 85 ; on re- INDEX. 167 organizing church, 85; on tem- ple building, 97, 98 ; movements of— in the east, 114; assumes control, 115; rebaptized, 116; counsels rebaptism, 118 ; chosen President, 119; votes for him- self, 120; removes men from ofQce, 121; repudiates written word, 122 ; on Joseph Smith and keys, 123; on Adam-God and birth of Christ, 124; on debts, 124, 125; liars, thieves, etc., 125; blood atonement, 126. 127; re- sponsible for polygamy, 128; interview of, 129; prophesies concerning polygamy, 129, 130; proved a false prophet, 131 ; not ordained, 143. Young, Joseph, ordination of, 156. Young, S. B., ordination of, 157. Zarahemla, reorganization at, 57r 132, 133. Zion, redemption of, 135, 136. Zion's Camp, work of, 137. OF THB TTNIVERSITT THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY OVERDUE. JUN 1 I AY 23 1967 94 25Nov58AB IN STACKS N0V131958uL2 2 67'bA REC'D LD BLl 6*65 -3PM NOV 1 8 1958 L » 20hb'blDA REC'D LD FEB 71961 U LD 21-50m-l.'3 • ^- l^ Ait. . ^"^ -^BX ^TnML UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY vM mmiiximui. ■.■'■I'X :«iB: