Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/bookofmormonontrOOhaworich 
 
'""""IS 
 
 I"' 
 
 fi'S 
 
 §(. 
 
 ^? 
 
 > 
 i» 
 
 Cwo Senuorj Secture^ 
 
 By Evangelist WALTER J. HA WORTH. 
 
 DESPISE NOT PR0PHP:CYINCS; PROVE ALL THINGS 
 HOLD FAST THAT WHICH IS GOOD." 
 
 \m^: 
 
 Jhe gook o| JVcormon 
 on Jrial 
 
 StSri5ri5^'i5tss*5'/StS( 
 
 ^^' 
 
 -tSj^ 
 
 Published by the Wallsend Branch of the Reorganized 
 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 
 in aid of the Wallsend Chapel 
 Building Fund 
 
 f5 
 
 HuTTON Printing and Paper < .mpany, Lambton,?ind Wallsend 
 
 
 
 \>Jj^lJJ^Uj^UI^V^I^i^ ;j^ 
 
j^eclure \ 
 
 Delivered Febkuarv 11th, 1900, at H:»milt> W. .;, X S \\ 
 
 FOR some time an individual styling himself an " Evan- 
 gelist " has been going around this district, giving 
 free readings from a Book written against the Church 
 by Elder D. H. Bays of the " Campbellites." 
 
 This person has persistently bored many of the Church 
 members and those interested in our work by reading (in their 
 own homes) from this book, sometimes two and three hours at a 
 time. When challenged to debate ths issue between us, he de- 
 clined evidently preferring the under-hand method of getting in 
 his work, without giving us a fair chance of presenting the other 
 side of the question. 
 
 Having secured a copy of Mr. Bays' book we shall 
 endeavour to present as fully as possible, in two lectures, the 
 other side of the question. 
 
 The author of the book we have referred to charges the 
 Book of Mormon with " fraud,"' " imposition." Very well, we 
 will put it upon its trial on those charges. This audience shall 
 be the jury, and we shall endeavour to faithfully place the evidence 
 0/ both' sides fairly before you. All thai we ask is that for the 
 present you lay aside all bias, and refrain from judging " accord 
 ing to thejappearance," but when both sides are before you "Judge 
 righteous judgment." (John 7 : 24.) 
 
 Here -is a plain statement of the case taken from Mr. 
 Bays' book, p. 26. 
 
 " That the whole Mormon superstructure is founded on 
 "■ the Book of Mormon, no one will perhaps attempt to deny. 
 ** If that hook is true then the authority of the Mormon Church is 
 '' established beyojid the possibility of reasonable doubt. But if it 
 " is false then Mormonism may justly be branded ae». the most 
 " stupendous fraud o<^ the ages, and its advocates are left without 
 " even the shadow of truth upon which to base their claim to 
 " divine authority " 
 
Though we deny that the Church of Jesus Christ, which 
 we represent, is founded upon the Book of Mormon, we accept 
 the challenge thrown out in the qufUation we have just read. We 
 will give Mr. Bays a fair chance (by reading argument from his 
 book) to prove that the Book of Mormon is 2^ fraud. We shall 
 endeavour to rebut his evidence, and also to bring evidence that 
 the Book of Mormon ?> true. If we find that it is false we will 
 brand it as " the most stupendous fraud of the ages," but 
 remember the conditions are, if we find that it is true, the 
 authority of what liberal (?) men like Mr. B. designate *' the 
 Mormon Church," but which is in reality the Re-oiganized 
 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, " is established 
 " beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt.'' 
 
 We will call as witnesses against the book the most 
 important of the allegations made agaii)>l it in Mr. B.'s work. 
 But we will first listen to the plea of not guilty frr m its eloquent 
 pages. On the title page its mission is set forth as the convincing 
 of Jew and Gentile that " Jesus is ihe Christ." That this is a 
 genuine plea of " not guilty " will be seen by reading John \\-2, 
 ** Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the 
 '^ flesh IS OF God." 
 
 We will now begin to call up the v\itnesses for the prose- 
 cution. Shall we call as the first witness the allegation which is 
 the oldest ? The one with which orthodox Christianity has been 
 fighting the Book of Mormon for the last 70 years } 
 
 Shall we call up someone to testify that the Book of 
 Mormon was plagiarised from the stolen manuscript of the 
 " Spaulding Romance .?" No ! For Mr. B. acknowledges as truth 
 that which our ministers have said of the "Spaulding theory" 
 for nearly seventy years — that it is not true. 
 
 For the past fifteen years our Elders have been telling the 
 people of Au.^itralia that the " Manuscript Story " written by 
 Spaulding has been found, and for a long time has been on 
 exhibit in the library of Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. U.S A., 
 and that it bears no resemblance to the Book of Mormon. 
 
 Now, we have these facts conceded in a book written 
 against the Church. We quote from Mr. B.'s book p. 24-25. 
 
 "The long lost Spaulding siory has at last been unearthed, 
 "and is now on deposit in the library of the Oberlin College, 
 " Oberlin, Ohio, and may be examined by anyone who will take 
 •* the pains to call on President Fairchild of that institution." 
 
 'Tn a letter to Joseph Smith, of Lamoni, Iowa, dated at 
 "Honolulu, Sandwich Islands. March 28, 1885. Mr. L. L. Rice 
 "' in whose possession tlu original Spaulding story had rested for 
 "forty-four years, from 1839 to 1885, says: — "There is no 
 " identity of names, of persons, or places, and there is no 
 
 "similarity of style between them I should as soon 
 
 " think the Book of Revelations was written by the author of 
 
t 
 
 "'bon Qiiixotte' as that the writer of the manuscript was the 
 " author of the Book of Mormon." *• The writer has examined a 
 " certified copy of this remari^abie document, and to say he was 
 "surprised is to express it moderately. Instead of exhibiting? the 
 " qualities of a scholarly mind, as we had been led to believe it 
 '•would do, quite to the contrary, it bears every mark of ignorance 
 "and illiteracy, and is evidently the product of a mind far below 
 "the average, even in theor<iinary affairs of life. A twelve-year 
 " old boy in any of our common schools can tell a better story, 
 " and couch it in far better English. The Spalding story is a 
 ^^ failure. Do not rely upon it - it will let you down." 
 
 Yes, friends, Mr. Ba>s savs the " Spaulding Story ' theory 
 is A FAILURE. 
 
 For nearly seventy years it his been the mighty (?) 
 weapon with which the world has been fighting the Book of 
 Mormon, h\x\. failure is written upon the effort 
 
 The story is false — a fraud — a LIE. 
 
 Satan is the father of lies— Me must have invented this 
 one I We are often told that " the Book of Mormon is of the 
 Devil." 
 
 Just imagine the old fellow creating a weapon with which 
 to fight his own work. Satan versus Satan ! His Satanic 
 Majesty is not the fool some would make him appear to be. He 
 would hardlv lie about his own work, but he does lie about the 
 work of God. 
 
 Since the " Spaulding lie " has failed to " down " the 
 Book of Mormon, those who are engaged in another attempt to 
 do so, declare : — "We have something better." 
 
 On page 25, after admitting that the whole theory con- 
 necting Sydney Rigdon wiih the coming forth of the Book of 
 Mormon is a lie. He says : — All Mormon history and biography 
 " agree in connecting Oliver Cowdery, a man the equal of Sydney 
 " Rigdon in point of scholastic attainments, and personal polish, 
 "directly with Joseph Smith in every stage of the development of 
 "Mormonism." 
 
 Any reader of the church history will at once notice that 
 this statement is not true in every respect. The writer of those 
 words knew as well as I do that Oliver Cowdery was not associated 
 with Joseph Smith until a long time after vvork had begun on the 
 book. Martin Harris was Joseph's only assistant for some time. 
 The work was well under way when Joseph formed the acquaint- 
 ance of Oliver Cowdery, Some hundred pages of manuscript 
 had been stolen before this acquaintanceship was formed, and it 
 must therefore be quite plain that Oliver was not " associated 
 with Joseph in every stage of the development of * Mormonism.' " 
 If the Book of Mormon is a fraud it will be clear to every 
 reasonable mind that Oliver Cowdery was pot a part^ to the 
 
It is true that after the acquaintance was formed between 
 these two men ihey were prominently associated in the work of 
 the church. What of it ? Does it necessarily follow that since 
 " association " between them can be proven that it must have heeji 
 *' illicit association ?" We think not. We firmly believe that 
 persons can be associated in a good work without practising 
 fraud, and withouc seeking to impose on the credulous of 
 mortality. The facts related concerning the association of Oliver 
 with Joseph count for nothing, unless " illicit association " is 
 I'ROVED. Nowhere in his book does Mr, B, make a direct 
 attempt to prove " illicit association." He evidently prefers to 
 "beg the question' in the paragraph we have quoted, and to 
 make tiiis assumption the premise upon which to build the mass 
 of false reasoning and sophistry of which his book is composed. 
 
 We fail to see why he desires to associate a man of 
 learning and refinenient with Joseph Smith in what he believes to 
 be " the so-called translation of the Book of Mormon," when 
 another prominent minister of his own church (Clark Braden) is 
 consiaj)tly engaged in pointing out what he claims to be '• hundreds 
 of grammatical errors, and ignoramus* use of words." Are such 
 things necessarily the work of learning and refinement.? 
 
 Realizing that one piece of direct evidence is of more 
 value than a whole book full of conjectures, and doubtful 
 reasoning, we submit for your consideration the following from 
 the lips of Emma Smith, the wife of the Prophet. It is in the 
 form of lour questions asked by her son. and her answers to 
 them :— 
 
 Question : " Mother, what is your l)clief about the authenti- 
 *' city or origin of the Book of Mormon .^" 
 
 Answer: "My belief is that the Book of Mormon is of 
 " divine authenticity — I have not the slightest doubt of it. I am 
 " satisfied that no man could have dictated the manuscripts unless 
 '* he was inspired ; for when acting a-- his scribe, your father 
 "would dictate to me nour after hour, and when returning after 
 " meals, or after interruptions, he would at once be^in where he 
 " liad left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any 
 *' ])art of it read to him. This was a usual thing for him to do. 
 "}t would have been improbable that a learned man can do this, 
 "and for one so ignorant and unlearned as he was, it was simply 
 " impossible." 
 
 QuK.STioN : " Could not father have dictated the Bopk of 
 "Mormon to )ou, Oliver Cowdery, and the others who wrote for 
 '*h:m, after having lirst written it; or having first read it out of 
 •* some book ?" 
 
s 
 
 Answer: "Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate 
 " jv coherent anci well-worded letter, let alone (lictatin«( a book 
 'like tlie H.)ok of Mornun. And tlioiigh I was an active parti- 
 •* cipant in the scenes that transpired, it is marvellous to me, 'a 
 " marvel and a wonder,' a< much as to anyone else." 
 
 QuESTjov : **Hi<I he not a book or manuscript from 
 which he read, or dictated to you ?" 
 
 Answer ; ' He had neither manuscript nor book to read 
 " from." 
 
 Question : " Could he not have had, and you not known 
 'Ml?" 
 
 Answer ; " If he had had anything of the kind he could 
 •• not have concealed it from me." 
 
 On page 362 iMr, B. vouches for the honour and intej^rity 
 of the witness whose evidence we have just read, as follows :— ' 
 
 "Mrs, Smith was a lady of more than ordinary mental 
 "endowments, and possessed a reputation for honour and 
 •' iiiiegriiy that won the respect and esteem of those who knew 
 " lier best." 
 
 We can therefore rely upon the evidence which she has 
 given as being the tiulh. 
 
 Her evidence is indeed a nail driven in a sure place. Yes, 
 it is the last nail in the coffin of Mr. B.'s theory that " Oliver 
 Cowdery furnished the l)rdins for the bringing forth of the Book 
 of Mormon, She wiote for Joseph ! He had no manuscript or 
 book from which to read ! lie could not have had any without 
 her knowledge ! VVhen returnine to work after interruptions or 
 alter meals he would begin right away at translating, ivithout 
 seeing the inanusciij)t or having; any portion of it read to him I 
 Wonderful | Ves, s ) wonderful, that this woman who was an 
 acti -e participant in the work acknowledged that it was as great a 
 *• marvel and a w.miler " to her as it has been to others. Could 
 there be a more complete and more satisfactory refutation of the 
 theory which M^ B. takes upon which to build his subsequent 
 reasoning? We think it so saiisfactorv, that we now leave it with 
 the jury before us to decide upon which side the merits He. 
 
 Between j). 112 and 131 Mr. B. presents what he considers 
 strong circumstantial evidence a<jainst the divinity of the Book of 
 Mormon. He charges Joseph Smith with taking the true founda- 
 tion out of ihe church, and substituting the Book of Mormon in 
 its stead. 
 
 On i>. 113 he quotes Joseph Smith : " Upon this rock I 
 " will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 " against it," " What rock ?" " Revelation'' 
 
On p 114 he also quotes from a tract written by Elder T. 
 W. Smith, in which the position is taken that Revelation is the 
 rock, upon which the foundations of the church were laid. The 
 foundations being Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself 
 being the chief cornerstone — the chief foundation. (Eph. II : 20 n 
 
 You will therefore readily see that the Latter Day Saint 
 idea of the manner in which Christ built His church, is strictly 
 in keeping with the plan of building which Jesus taught, viz., 
 *' Wherefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth 
 "them, I would liken him unto a wise man, which built his house 
 " upon a rock ; and the rains descended, and the floods came, 
 *' and the winds blew, and beat upon that house ; and it fell not : 
 for it was founded [had its foundations laid] •* upon a rock." 
 (Matthew vii : 24-25). Jesus here says that a wise builder would 
 lay his foundations upon a rock, 
 
 Paul says that He (Jesus) was a wise Master builder. 
 Latter Day Saints believe that he pract'sed what he preached, and 
 laid the foundations of his church upon a rock. After acknow- 
 ledging that what we have just said is the position taken by the 
 church, he syllogistically presents his proposition as follows : — 
 I — " Revelation is the foundation of the church " 
 2 — " The Book of Mormon is a revelation." 
 3 — " Therefore the Book of Mormon is the foundation of 
 
 " the church." 
 One does not need to be a profound logician in order to 
 see " that this sllyogism, is sadly out of joint," In the first place 
 the position taken by our church is not fairly stated in the first 
 term, viz, ; ''Revelation is i\\Q foundation of the church." 
 
 Mr. B. knows full well — and in previous pages admitted 
 that we believe the Apostles and Prophets are the foundatioti of 
 the church, Jesus being the Head of the Corner, or chief 
 foundation stone. Besides he also admitted in previous pages 
 that we believed *' Revelation " to be " The Rock " upon which 
 those foundations were laid. Then why did he state our position 
 so unfairly } We have already said that his book is made up of 
 false-reasoning and sophistry. I am sure that we cannot find a 
 better name than the latter for such an unfair staiement of an 
 opponent's position. Again the word " Revelation " in the first 
 term is not capable of the same meaning, as the corresponding 
 word in the second leim. According to tlie standard English 
 and American dictionaries the word *' Revelation " is capable of 
 ai least two meanings. i. The act of revealing. 2. Something 
 revealed. Now in the first term — ** Revelation is the foundation 
 of the Church " — the word revelation means "■ the act of reveal- 
 ing'' or the princijile by which Gods will is made known to 
 man. In the second term — ** The Book of Mormon is a revela- 
 tion " — the meaning of the word |s ''something revealed^' 
 
One of the main rules in logic is that no conclusion can 
 be drawn from an ambiguous term. We have shown that the 
 word '* revelation " is an ainbii;uous term, and that it is unfairly 
 used in the first and ."econd terms of Mr. B.'s syllogism. There- 
 fore his conclusion having been reached in an unfair and 
 illogical way — is false. 
 
 Someone else might as consistently reason thus : — 
 
 Revelation is the foundation of the Church, 
 
 The Bible is a Revelation. 
 
 Therefore the Bible is the foundati n of the Church. 
 We will now devote a few momenis to showing that 
 *' Revelation " was '* The Rock " upon which the Church was 
 built. 
 
 " Upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of 
 " Hell shall not prevail against it." (Matt. i6: 18.) 
 
 Jesus here ann'^unced that he was goinsf to practice what 
 he preached He had preached that a foolish man would build 
 his house upon the sand — A wise man — upon a rock. Now he 
 was going to clear away the debris until he found a rock ; and 
 upon that rock he would build his Church — his spiritual house. 
 No doubt many of you have seen the builders at work. They 
 dig down until they find something solid. 
 
 They then lay the foundations, beginning at one corner 
 and exercising great care that the first stone is placed exactly in 
 position. Then they begin to set the other stones, but the 
 relative position of every StOne is governed by the stone at the 
 head of the corner — the first one laid. So it was with the 
 spiritual house which Christ built, A rock so solid that the gates 
 of Hell could not prevail against it was first selected. Upon that 
 rock a spiritual house was built in which every member was liketied 
 to a stone, as you will see by reading i Peter n : 4-5. 
 
 •* To whom coming as unto a living stone, disallowed 
 " indeed of men, but chosen of God and precious, ye also as 
 " lively stones are built up a spiritual house, an Holy Priesthood, 
 " to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus 
 •' Christ." 
 
 The structure was built upon excellent foundations, ** Now 
 
 " therefore ye are of the household of God ; 
 
 •' and are built upon the foundations of Apostles and Prophets, 
 " Jesus Christ Himself being the Chief Corner Stone." (Eph. 
 11: 19-20. 
 
 You see, friends, the spiritual house was built just as I 
 explained a while ago. First a solid substance — a rock — was 
 selected. Then the work of building commenced. The wise 
 master-builder first set at the head of the corner, as the Chief 
 Corner Stone, that living stone which is " elect," '' precious," and 
 beautiful to behold, even Jesus Christ the righteous. We know 
 of no other (living) stone that could have been placed in this 
 
position. Jesus alone is worthy to stan.l at the head of the corner. 
 He is "the fairest among ten thousand. '" We must '' j-^7/^;v " 
 our lives by His peerless example, hence it were filling that He 
 should be the first stone laid — the sione by which every other 
 stone in the building must be " squared." 
 
 He was placed in position — then the work went on. The 
 rest of the foundation stones were laid — Apostles and Prophets; 
 and as each convert decided to "' square " his life by the peerless 
 stone at the " head of the corner," another " lively stone " was 
 added to the magnificent buildins:, which will be completed 
 ** when he shall gather together in one, the whole family, both in 
 heaven and earth." (Eph, i : lo ; in: 15.) 
 
 What is the rock upon which the structure was built ? 
 Mr. B. says it is Christ. In order to arrive at such a conclusion 
 he " tortures" Eph. 11 : 19-20, into meaning (?) that Christ is the 
 foundation of God's building (p. 125). That passage clearly 
 shows that while Christ was the chief foundation stone, the 
 Apostles and Prophets were also stones in the foundation. " The 
 Rock," as we have already shown, is the solid substance upon 
 which the foundations were laid. Mr, B. assumes that the 
 " Rock " and the foundations are the same thing. If this were 
 true Christ could not be the " Rock " for he was only ofie of the 
 foundation stones. He must share the distinction with the 
 Apostles and Prophets. Is it right to make a part stand for the 
 whole 1 No amount of wriggling or twisting can construe that 
 passage to mean that Christ is the sole foundation of the Church. 
 So unless our friend is willing to accept the Apostles and Prophets 
 as the major part of the foundation, he must forever sink his 
 claim that the "Rock" and the "foundation" are the same 
 thing. Again he uses i Cor.. 3-1 1, to show (.?) that Christ is the 
 "Rock." "Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid 
 " which is Jesus Christ," We do not think that any reasonable 
 person can calmly read the context of this quotation and then say 
 that it refers to Jesus Christ as the foundation of the Church 
 It clearly refers to the foundaiian which Christ hb.s laid, in His 
 peerless example, upon which you and I must build works (not 
 churches) which will be subjected to the test of fire in the great 
 day of reckonirg to come. Christ said " I will build My Church," 
 but the structures m ntioned in i Cor., 3, are to be built by man. 
 Other quotations arc given, but as none of them refer to church 
 building we pass them by, and will consider his exegesis on Matt. 
 XIII : 13-18, 
 
 " He asked his disciples,, saying, whom do men say that I, the Son 
 " of Man am V And they said some say Thou art John the Baptist ; some 
 " Elias ; and others Jeremias; and one of the Prophets," He saith unto 
 " them, "but whom say ye that I am ?" And Simon Peter answered and 
 " iaid, " Thou tha Christ, the Son of the Living God'" 
 
Before we proceed with what remains of this quotation 
 permit us to say that his whnle cxe^^esis may be summed up in 
 the following argument : — "Jesus was the absorbing iOj»ic ol ilie 
 "conversation leading up to this remarkable declaration." There- 
 fore Jesus is the '• Rock." 
 
 Now we agree that up to the point where this declaration 
 was made — " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God " — 
 Jesus WHS tiie subject of the conversation. Hut Peter put the 
 matter beyond question, and ended *the conversation on that 
 subject by emphatically declaring " Thou art the Christ, the Son 
 of the living God." No need to carry the conversation any 
 further on that subject. lesus was the Christ — that ended il. 
 What a grand thing it was for Peter to be able to make such a 
 declaraiion. He knew that Jesus was the Christ — the Son of 
 God — the Saviour of the world — the only begotten of the father. 
 He was no imposter — His claims were true. He had indeed been 
 viiractilously conceived ! Does Mr. Bays know this .•' No ! lor 
 he doe6 not believe that Jesus was miraculously ccnceived. 
 
 Then, why all this inconsistent rant about Jesus beiiu' ihe 
 " Rock .'" We deem it the height of iticonsistency to rant about 
 *• the living stone" — "Ihe Head of the corner" — "'Ihe Chief 
 Corner Stone," — " elect," — " precious," etc., etc., and ai the 
 same time conceal the fact that he disbelieves in the miraculous 
 conception of the one to whom these terms are applied. When 
 taxed with his disbelief in this claim of jesus in a d^^bate in 1890 
 he "excu-ed '' himself by saying that he was in good compinv. 
 " Many gr;od men iiold the same views." We know that in; :uy 
 hold such view;-,, but we doubt that the conpany is good. 
 They were tau'^ht by the Spiritualists, were also b-dieved and 
 taught by Brigham Young; are also believed in by the 
 Mahommedans — the Buddhists, Confuscians, all pagans, and 
 — like a drop in the bucket— by the believers in "the hi>;her 
 (.?) criticism." 
 
 When Peter said " Thou art the Christ," the subject was 
 instantly chanyed, for Jesn< iMen began to talk of the manner in 
 which Peter had obtained die knowledge. It had been " revealed'' 
 to him — by ^lod. " Bless d art thou. Sim >n Barjona; for flesh 
 "and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which 
 "is in Heaven, and I sty unto thee that tt.ou art Peter, and upon 
 " this rock I will build my church ; and the gates of Hell shall 
 " not prevail against it," 
 
 It must be clear co every reasonable mind that the topic of 
 the conversation in the two verses we hive just quoted was 
 revelation -the power by which J^eter received the knowledge. 
 It isliighly essential that all should receive the same knowledge 
 as Peter received. Revelation is the only means by whic^ that 
 knowledge can come; for " No mi 1 can say th.it Jesus is the 
 Christ, but by the Holy Ghost, (i Cor., iz: 3). If the Church 
 
lo 
 
 is governed by God it is only by revelation that he can communi- 
 cate his will. Without it the Church is directed by man. 
 Revelation is indeed an impregnable rock — the gates of Hell 
 cannot prevail against it. Both the Bible and the Book of 
 Mormon are made up of many Revelations, but neither of them 
 is the "Rock." 
 
 The Principle of Fevelation is the " Rock " — not that 
 which is revealed, I am certain that this audience will agree 
 with me when I say that Mr. B. has signally failed to establish 
 this charge. 
 
 The next allegation which we will notice is that Joseph 
 Smith was the author of the Polygamic *' Revelation," adopted by 
 the Utah Mormons in 1852. ''If he was the author of that 
 * Revelation ' no reliance can be placed in any other one that 
 came through him." By a parity of reasoning we might assert 
 that God never did communicate with King Saul, because in 
 after years he went to the witch of Endor for a revelation. We 
 might assert it, but assertion alone would never make it so. But 
 we think we have sufficient evidence at hand to convince any 
 reasonable being that Joseph Smith was not the author of that 
 "revelation." 
 
 The so-called revelation on polygamy, said to have been 
 given in 1843, ^^s not produced until 1852. On page 356 Mr. 
 B. asks : — 
 
 "Who was the author of this immoral, degrading document? 
 ." Was it Brigham Young, as the Re organized Church has tried to 
 " maintain ? — ^or was it Joseph Smith, as all other branches of ♦he 
 " Mormon Church has ever declared it to be ?" 
 
 He continues ■ "Take the utterances of Brigham Young as we 
 " find them in the f out nal of Discourses, published in Salt Lake City, and 
 "other Mormon publications, and compare them with this revelation of 
 " 1843,. and you will discover at a glance that Brigham Young could not 
 " have been its author ; the language, the style and composition are not 
 " his, Hut on the other hand compare this production with any ot the 
 " acknowledged ' revelations ' of the Prophet, especially that of 1841 (see 
 " Doc. and Cov., page 301) and you will at once see that the language, 
 " the dictation, the style, are unmistakably peculiar to Joseph Smith. 
 " The style is his, the language is his. and the conception is his," 
 
 And SO this self-constituted judge rambles on, never 
 dreaming oi/raud now. The I3ook of Mormon must be a fraud, 
 but this " revelation " never, it must be what it claims to be — it 
 suits his present purpose too well for him to even dream oi fraud 
 We see nothing very conclusive in the likeness which he alleges 
 exists between the production under discussion, and the genuine 
 revelations of the Prophet. 
 
11 
 
 Does he really think that Brigham Young, or anyone 
 else would write in their own style when signing the name of 
 Joseph Smith to a document ? Do those who forge bank checiues 
 ever write another man's name in their own style ? Would a fori^^ed 
 cheque ever be cashed if it was not a lUver imitalion ? What 
 Mr. B. has pointed out along these lines proves absolutely 
 nothing. 
 
 A " copy " of 'he " Revelation " on polygamy was presented 
 to the Utah Church in August. 1852, and on' that occasron 
 Brigham Young demonstrated that he was practicing/raW. He 
 said *' Though that doctrine has not been practiced by the Elders 
 this people have believed in it for years." Now it is a notorious 
 fact that Brigham and others practiced polygamy for years before 
 he made that statement. Is this not an evidence of " fraud V 
 
 Again, their excuse for presentmg a *' copy " instead of 
 the "original" was that Joseph's wife had burned the original. 
 Emma Smith during her life constantly denied the truih of this 
 statement. Another evidence of fraud. Remember, Mrs. 
 Smith comes to us recommended by Mr, Bays as an •* upright 
 intelligent woman, with a reputation for honor and integrity 
 which won for her the respect and esteem of those who knew 
 her best." 
 
 Shall we tell " honor and integrity " to stand down while 
 we believe a man whom we have already detected in one lie ^ 
 
 Mr. B. presents quite an array of evidence to the effect 
 that JosCj^h was the author of this infamous production ; but, 
 strange to say, almost every bit of evidence has come from Utah. 
 In fact, when anyone wants to prove Joseph a polygamist, or the 
 author of Polygamy, they seek all their evidence from Utah. 
 That you may know just how far you can rely upon the evidence 
 which comes from tUat source, we will read a recommendation 
 by one of those who knew the persons best. On November 9th, 
 1856, Brigham Young said : — " 1 have many a time in this stand 
 " dared the world to produce as mean devils as we can ; we can 
 ** beat them at anything. We \\di\'t the greatest and smoothest liars 
 ** in the ivorld, the cunningest and most adroit thieves, and any 
 " other shade of character that you can mention. We can pick 
 "out ELDERS in Israel right here who can beat the world at 
 " gambling ; who can handle the cards ; can cut and shuffle 
 "them with the smartest rogue on the face of God's footstool." 
 
 " We can beat the world at anything." 
 
 Does Mr. Bays really think that in the great court of common 
 justice, the intelligent, reasonint^, unprejudiced men and women 
 who compose the jury will accept such testimony as truth, after 
 examining the credentials which brand those who give evidence as 
 |?eing among the greatest and smoothest liars in the world ? 
 
t2 
 
 As Mr. B, mixes up the evidence which he furnishes to 
 prove Joseph a Polygamist with other evi ience to prove iiim the 
 author of the " Revelation '" under discussion, we will consider 
 both subjects conjointly. 
 
 On p. 364 he uses part of a speech made by Brigham 
 Youno^ on the day when the Utah Church accepted Polygamy as 
 a tenet of their church, to prove his contention. In it Brigham 
 states that the words were written by William Clayton as they fell 
 from the lips of the Prophet. That it was copied by N. K. 
 Whitney, and preserved under lock and kev by Brigham until 
 1852. 
 
 Now, how did Brigham know that William Clayton wrote 
 it as it fell from the lips of the Prophet.? By hearsay — Clayton 
 told him. Just to show you that Clayton was quite deserving of 
 the credential given by his president we will read an extract from 
 an affidavit sworn to by this man for the benefit of the Utah 
 Church. 
 
 "On the morning of July 12, 1843, Joseoh and Hyrum 
 " came into the upper sto^-y of the '' brick store," and it was here, 
 he claims, this " revelation" was given. Joseph, Hyrum and he 
 were the only ones present. Joseph and Hyrum are dead. 
 How easy for him to lie about them, Dead men tell no 
 t^les But thanks be to God, sufficient evidence has been 
 left on record to brand this testimony as an infamous lie. 
 Again he says : — ** Towards evening (of the same day) Bishop N. 
 K. Whitney asked Joseph if he had any objections to his 
 " taking a copy of the revelation.'* Joseph replied that he had 
 not and handed it to him. How did he know this ? Mr. Whitney 
 told him — an evidence that these two had put their heads together 
 regarding the matter. Again Mr. Clayton says : — " Two or three 
 " days after the revelation was written Joseph related to me 
 " and several others that Emma had so teased and urgently 
 '• entreated him for the purpose of destroying it that he became so 
 *' weary of her teasing, and to get rid of her annoyance he told 
 " her that she might destroy it, and she had done so, but he had 
 •* consented to her wish in this matter to pacify her, realising that 
 ** he Knew the revelation perfectly and could re-write it at any 
 " time if necessary " 
 
 What need would there be for Joseph to tax his memory i^ 
 N.K. Whitney had a copy of the burned revelation ? 
 
 Why didn't Joseph say that he felt safe in letting Emma burn 
 the original, realising that Whitney had a copy ? We do not 
 think the author of this affidavit would be able to keep from 
 crossing himself upon these points if subjected to acrosa-examin- 
 ation. Joseph is dead. What a grand chance for this man to 
 lie about him. And here is the evidence which brands his state- 
 ment as a lie, all the more infamous because it is told of a 
 
virtuous man, now dead. Emma Smith, the third party men- 
 tioned in this story of the destruction of the " revelation " denied 
 an) i^iiowledge of such a production to her son in tthe following, 
 questions ami answers. 
 
 Question. — " What about the revelation in polygamy ? 
 " Did Joseph Smith have anything like it ? 
 " What of spiritual wifery ? " 
 
 Answer. — *' T/ie*-e 7uas no revelaiio., on either polygamy or 
 ** spiritual wives. There were some rumors of the sort of which 
 *• 1 asked my husband. He assured me that all there was of it, was 
 " that in a chat about plural wives he had said ** Well such a 
 '* system might be if everybody was agreed to it, and would 
 " behave themselves, but they would not ; and besides ** IT WAS 
 -C0N1RARY TO THE LAWS OF HEAVEN." 
 
 Here is emphatic testimony that all this nonsence about 
 that " revelation " being burned by Emma Smith, is an infamous 
 lie, and a dastardly attempt by Utahites, to excuse their filthy lust, 
 by seeking to fasten the institution of this crime against the virtue of 
 womankind, upon an innocent man. 
 
 But let us follow the- evidence of this man a little further, 
 and see if he does not lie himself complelely *' out of court." 
 
 Again he says: — " Hyrum very urgently lequested Joseph 
 " to write the revelation by means of the Uri?fi and Thummim, 
 "but Joseph in reply said he did not need to, for he knew the 
 " revelation perfectly from beginning to end." 
 
 You have no doubt heard it said that one of the qualifica- 
 tions in the make up of a good liar is that he should have a good 
 memory. When Clayton swore to what we have just read, he 
 evidently forgot that the " Urim and Thummim " had not been 
 in Joseph's possession since the time when he had completed 
 the translation of the Book of Mormon. In this connection we 
 read the following testimony by Jo.-seph himself: — ** But, by the 
 wisdom of God, they (the plates, breastplate and " Urim and 
 " Thummin ") remained safe in my hands until I had accom- 
 " plished by them what was required at my hands ; when 
 " according to arrangements the messenger called for them, I 
 " delivered them up to him. and he has had them in charge until 
 " this day, being the 2nd day of May, 1838 " He never received 
 them again, and Hyrum knowing this could not have made the 
 request attributed to him, 
 
 Oh, what a tangled web they weave 
 Whose practice is to lie — deceive. 
 
 Mr. Bays does not give the affidavit of this man. In view 
 of the contradictions which we have already found the reasoij is 
 obvious. 
 
14 
 
 Again, Clayton savs : — *• The * copy ' was carefully pre- 
 "served by BISHOP WHITNEY, and but few knew of its 
 •* existence until the temporary location of the camp of Israel at 
 ** winter quarters, on the Missouri River in 1846." 
 
 Please remember that Clayton says that this " copy " was 
 in the possession of Bishop Whitney — carefully preserved — until 
 he delivered it up to Brigham Youn? at winter quarters in 1846. 
 We ask you to keep these facts in mind, because we shall 
 presently compare this statement with what others have said about 
 the " revelation."' On pages 374-375 Mr. B. publishes an affidavit 
 sworn by David Fulmer, for the benefit of the Utah Church. 
 
 He says : — 
 '' On or about the 12th day of August, 1843, while in a meeting of the 
 '' ' High Council ' Dunbar Wilson ma(h inquiry in relation to the subject 
 " of a plurality of wives, as there were rumours about respecting it, and 
 " he was satisfied that there was something in those remarks, and he wanted 
 " to know what it was ; upon which Hyrum stepped across the roa'l to 
 " his residence, and soon returned, bringing with him a ' copv ' of the 
 " revelation on Celestial marriage given to Joseph Smith, July 12, a.d. 
 •' 1843. and read the same to the High Cotincil, and bore testimimy to its 
 " truth." 
 
 On page 375 the following extract from a letter by Thomas 
 Grover is sfiven : — 
 
 '• The High Council of Nanvoo was called 'ogether by the Prophet 
 '• Joseph Smith, to kuow whether they would accept the revelation on 
 
 "Celestial marriage or not Brother Hyrum was called 
 
 " upon to read the revelation. He did so, and after reading it said : — 
 " ' Now you that believe this revelation and go forth and obey the same, 
 " shall be saved, and you that reject it shall be darned.' " 
 
 You will no doubt have noticed that in the testimony of 
 David Fulmer, IF TRUE, Hyrum Smith alone is mentioned 
 in the presentation of the alleged revelation. It is claimed that 
 Hyrum said it had been given through Joseph. Joseph was not 
 present to testify of it himself ; therefore if the incident really 
 happened those present only had the /es/imony of Hyrum 
 to connect Joseph with it. They give no evidence that 
 they ascertained if this testimony was true or not. 
 Hence Mr. Fulmer's evidence is of no weight against 
 JOSEPH SMITH. Mr, Grover, however, was a little more wide 
 awake than this, he was going to get Joseph into it somehow, 
 50 he starts out by saying : — " The High Council of .Vanvoo was 
 called together by the Prophet, Joseph Smith, to know whether 
 they would accept the revelation on Celestial marriage or not." 
 Yes, he got Joseph into his affidavit, but in doing so he contra- 
 dicted his friend, David Fulmer. He .says the Council was called 
 by Joseph to consider the " revelation." 
 
 David Fulmer says the matter came up incidentally by 
 Dunbar Wilson asking a question. 
 
«5 
 
 Which one of these men tells the truth ? William Marks 
 — both say he was present — says neither of them told the truth, 
 for no such event ever transpired in the High Council, He 
 ought to know^he was the president of it. But let us follow 
 this conflicting evidence a little further. IF Joseph had called 
 the meeting one would naturally expect him to be there to see 
 the revelation through and testify of it. We believe if Joseph 
 was not able to be present that Hyrum was sufiicient of a 
 business man to take the matter up in a business-like way, and 
 not wait until someone else introduced the subject, and demanded 
 an answer. We would also expect him to have the ** copy " 
 with him and not have to go lor it if the meetiny had been called 
 to deal ivith it. However, we suppose that contradictions of this 
 kind are very small matters in Utah, or with those who seek to 
 brand Joseph with this crime. Again, 
 
 " Hyrum stepped across the road to his residence, and soon 
 "returned, bringing with him a 'copy' of the revelation on plural 
 " marriage." 
 
 What copy.? Young, Clayton and Whitnoy say there 
 was only the " original," and the " copy " made 
 for Bishop Whitney. They say the " origmal " was burnt 
 some twenty-eight days pre/ious to this. "Bishop Whitney 
 retained possession of the *' copy " until he delivered it 
 up to Brigham at winter quarters in 1846." Where did the 
 " copy " said to have been in Hyrum's possession come from .? 
 
 Mr. B. also introduces the testimony of Mercy B. 
 Thompson, who testifies to the truth of Thomas G rover's 
 testimony. Hence she too cjntradicts David Fulmer, for his 
 statement does not agree with Grover's. Again, she says that 
 Hyrum put this revelation into her hands, and left it with her 
 several days. Here she contradicts Clayton and others, who state 
 that the "original " was burnt, and that the only "copy " made 
 was retained bv N. K. Whitney until 1846. What a perfect 
 hodge-podge of contradictions ! 
 
 Mr. B. also introduces what he would like us to believe is 
 independent testimony in the affidavit of Leonard Soby, which 
 agrees with Grover's statement, but contradicts David Fulmer's. 
 Mr. Soby's testimony is not independent, for he was a firm 
 believer in the doctrine of Polygamy. 
 
 Against this evidence from Polygamic sources we have 
 the emphatic testimony of William Marks — who was president of 
 the High Council when this " revelation " is said to have been 
 presented — that no such " revelation " was ever presented to the 
 Council in his presence. Since all these men say he was present 
 at the time they allege it was presented we believe that the 
 testimony of this man, who demonstrated his sterling qualities by 
 standing aloof from polygamy, should demand a greater claim 
 upon the public attention than the testimony of those who 
 
t6 
 
 accepted such a corrupt doctrine. Mr. B. also gives affidavits 
 fnm E. Robinson and wif© to the effect that Hyrum Smith 
 taught them Polygamy in 1843; but he forgot to remark that 
 for many years, while members of the Reorganized Church, 
 they testified that just the reverse was true. Having testified both 
 ways their evidence is vakieless. 
 
 If by chance their testimony in the last instance were true 
 it does net implicate Joseph in the teaching of the doctrine. 
 They say it was Hyrum ih^t taught them the principle of plural 
 marriage. But buch testimony as this should never convict even 
 Ilyrnm, in view of the fact that before they were expelled from 
 the Reorganized Church they testified the other way. 
 
 Mr. Bays also refers to the tact that Joseph F. Smith, a 
 leading man in Utah, is a son of Hyrum Smith, presumably as 
 evidence that Hyrum was a Polygamist. If this can be considered 
 as evidence, that Hyrum was a polygamist, will not the fact that 
 the sons of Joseph Smith are all firm and unyielding anti- 
 polygamists, stand as evidence that their father was an anti- 
 polygamist too ? 
 
 On page 373 Mr. B. gives the following extract from the 
 history of Joseph Smith, published by the Utah Church, ani 
 said to have been an item in Joseph's diary for October 5, 
 1843:- 
 
 " Give instructions to try those persons who were preaching, 
 " teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plural wives ; for according to 
 " the law I hold the keys of this power in the last days ; for there is 
 "never but one on the earth, at a time, upon whom the power and its 
 " keys are conferred ; and I have constantly said that no man should 
 " have but one wife at a time, imless the Lord direct otherwise." 
 
 From this he infers that '• Joseph claimed the sole right of 
 alloting wives to members of the church, and that he had these 
 men tried for breaking over this rule and taking wivas without 
 a ' revelation ' from the Prophet." 
 
 That this interpretation is false will be instantly seen if 
 you take into consideration that not only those who were 
 practicing, but also those who were PREACHING, and those 
 who were TEACHING the doctrine, were to be tried. Joseph 
 held some power. Only one had that power at a time What 
 was it.? To be " Prophet, seer and revelator!'" Someone had 
 been breaking over this law. Were they only breaking over it 
 by practicing polygamy, "without a revelation from the Prophet,J' 
 as claimed by Mr. Bays and the Utah people ? No! For the 
 language clearly shows that they were breaking over the rule by 
 PREACHING and TEACHING, as well as practicing polygamy 
 without a revelation from the Prophet ! When we remember 
 that these words were penned just two months and twenty-three 
 
clays after the revelation is said to have been given, and but ond 
 month and twenty-three days after the Utah people claim it was 
 presented to the High Council, we are forced to consider it a 
 foregone conclusion, that no revelation had been given, and that 
 the evidence in support of the Utah contention is a tissue of lies. 
 
 Here is evidence that there were in the Church those who 
 claimed to have had revelations on plural marriage. We read it 
 from a book written against the Church, and which claims to be 
 a "Contemporary History of the Mormons, or Latter Day 
 Saints." edited by Charles McKay, L.L.D.. and published by 
 Wardj Lock and Co. in 1851, 
 
 Speaking of the year or two previous to Joseph's death he 
 says :— 
 
 '* Joseph at this time appears to have been quite as convinced of 
 
 " the divinity of his mission as the most credulous of his disciples. He 
 " dreamed dreams and he saw visions ; he imagined that what he spoke 
 " was spoken by the Almighty, and that in him was all authority in 
 " matters of religion. But there were men in the Church who despised 
 " Joseph Smith, as an imposter, while pretending to believe in him, knaves 
 " who used MormonJMn for their own purposes — either of sensuality or 
 " ambition — and who led him by their extravagant licentiousness into 
 *' continual difficulty, Many of those persons pretended to havt 
 ' 'revelations' quite as valid as those of Joseph, by which they were 
 *• permitted to have as many wives as the patriarchs of old, provided they 
 " could afford to maintain them. Joseph could not tolerate this scandal 
 " and every offender was forthwith excommunicated and publicly declared 
 " to be cut off from the Church. One man of this kind named Higbee 
 "gave him more trouble than all the rest, and involved him in vexatious 
 
 "law proceedings which were only brought to a close in 
 
 •• May, I844. Higbee, it appears, had been publicly accused by Joseph of 
 " having seduced several women, and was cut o/from the Mormon Church in 
 " consequence. Whether the charges were or were not true is now difficult 
 "and perhaps not important to discover, but Higbee sued Joseph before 
 '• the Municipal Court of Nauvoo for slander and defamation, and laid his 
 •' damages at 5000 dollars. At nis suit Joseph was arrested, and the case 
 " came before the Municipal Court on a writ of habeas corpus on the 6th of 
 
 " May At this trial several disclosures were made, 
 
 •' which went to show a most deplorable laxity of morals on the part of men 
 " who had once been members and office-bearers of the Church, and who 
 " had been cut off for their adulteries, and handed over to Satan by the 
 " Prophet, and oth« r heads of the sect. The Court having heard the 
 " evidence of Joseph and Hyrum Smith and others decreed, first : — ' Th^t 
 "Joseph Smith should be dischatged from arrest on the ground of the 
 " illegality of the writ . and secondly, that Higbee's conduct having been 
 " fully shown to be infamous, and the suit to have been instituted bj 
 " private pique, malice, and corruption, he was not entitled to his costs." 
 
 This extract points out, first : — That certain persors wh# 
 were making a convenience of the Church for the gratification of 
 their own lust pretended to have had " revelations " permitting a 
 plurality of wives, 
 
i8 
 
 ^/^^«d?, Joseph had those who either taught or practiced 
 those doctrines excommunicated forthwith — of course those whom 
 he caught at it. Does not this scrap of history harmonize with 
 the extract which we have read from Joseph's diary ? And does 
 it not unite with it in branding the *' evidence " in support of 
 Mr. Bay's contention as a mass of corruption and lies ? We 
 think it should be clear to every reasonable mind that at the 
 time when Joseph penned those words he was referring to men 
 who had been breaking over the rule that he should be sole 
 " Prophet, Seer and Revelator," and pretending to have revela- 
 tions, authorising them to preach, teach, or practice the doctrine 
 of polygamy. " I have constantly said that no man should have 
 more than one wife at a time." This shows beyond the 
 possibility of reasonable doubt that Joseph was abiding by the 
 God-given law of the Church, and was standing upon the side of 
 right and truth. 
 
 " Unless the Lord direct otherwise." — Ah ! here is some- 
 thing said to be from his own pen which stamps that 
 "revelation" alleged to have been given barely three months 
 before as a FRAUD. *' Unless the Lord direct otherwise 1' 
 Not much fear of that. Had he not always taught, 
 "The law of the Lord is perfect," "Whatsoever God 
 doeth shall be forever ; nothing can be put to it, nor any- 
 thing taken from it?" Think you he would have used this 
 language if the Lord had directed the preaching, teaching or 
 practising of the doctrine contained in this so-called revelation ? 
 No ! Those words are conclusive proof that he was not the author 
 of it ! 
 
 The following, taken from the Times and Seasons of 
 February i, 1844, also shows what was the attitude of Joseph 
 towards the accursed doctrine : — 
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 '• As we have lately been crediWy informed that an Elder of the 
 Church of Jesns Christ of Latter Day Saints, by name of Hirum Brown, 
 has been preaching polygamy and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the 
 County of Lampeer, State of Michigan: — This is to notify him and the 
 Church in general that he has been cut off from the Church for his 
 iniquity ; and he is further notified to appear at a special conference on the 
 6th of April next, to make answer to these charges." 
 
 Joseph Smith ") Presidents of 
 Hyrum Smith j said Conference. 
 * Times and Seasons," vol. 5, p. 423. 
 
 This action was taken just six months and twenty days 
 after it is alleged the so-called revelation was given. We hardly 
 think Joseph Smith would have pursued such a course as this if 
 he had been the author of the *' revelation " authorising the 
 pleaching of it. Mr. B says it was done because the man 
 preached it in the wrong place. Bah ! what nonsense I Where 
 was the right pla«e ? Have we not already shown that men were 
 
t9 
 
 cut off for preaching (public work) and teaching (private work) 
 it, in the City o( Nauvoo — where only Latter Day Saints lived at 
 the time ? 
 
 We will now read another extract from Mr. McKay's 
 " History of the Mormons, or Latter Day Saints," which shows 
 that several others besides Higbee were cut off from the Church 
 for practising this accursed doctrine in Nauvoo. Page i66 
 reads : — 
 
 " But Higbee wag not the only person who had been expelled 
 from the Church who were concerned In these proceedinj^s." 
 
 And continuing, he gives the origin of the many storie* 
 that have been circulated, in which attempts have been made to 
 implicate Joseph in the practice of polygamy. 
 
 •'The libertines and seducers of Nauvoo, foiled before the 
 Municipal Court, tried other means to excite a seism, and adopted the 
 bold course of accusing Joseph of the very crimes with which he had 
 
 charged Higbee The Mormons then and ever 
 
 since (18s I) have indignantly denied the truth of this particular charge ; 
 and of all the charges brought against Joseph as regards a plurality of 
 wives — and in especial reference to the spiritual wife doctrine — they allege 
 what appears to be t?i" noat probable, that he was at all times anxious to 
 preserve the Church tV. • from taint, and to exclude adulterers, seducers, 
 and persons of immoral lives." 
 
 In order to get their infamous charges before the people 
 they conceived the idea of issuing a paper against the Saints, 
 and on the loth of Mav. 1844, just four days after Higbee's case 
 was tried before the Municipal Court, the prospectus appeared. 
 
 This is what the Historical Record, published by Andrew 
 Jenson, the statistician of the Utah Church, has to say about it : — 
 
 " About the loth of May a prospectus of a paper called the 
 Nauvoo Expontor was issued, and distributed among the people by these 
 
 apostates Its signers were no other than the two Laws, the 
 
 two Higbees, and the two Foster's, every one of them vile, adulterous, 
 base men, who had been guilty of the most outrageous wickedness." — 
 " Historical Record," vol. 7, p. 549, 
 
 Again on p. 550 the following appears : — 
 
 "The Expositor made its appearance June 7th, 1844, and was 
 
 filled with ihefoulest abus-^ of Joseph and the Saints 
 
 Almost every line breathed a murderous spirit, and it was very clear that 
 it such a sheet were suffered to remain in existence mobs would be 
 raised, and the acts of violence and bloodshed which had been endured in 
 Missouri would be repeated, and the Saints be driven from their homes. 
 Anything that disturbs the peace of a community is properly called a 
 nuisance. This sheet was to all intents and purposes a nuisance." 
 
 Again in vol. 8. p, 373. B. H. Roberts is quoted as 
 follows : — 
 
 " The first and tlie only number of the Expositor was published on 
 the 7th day of June, 1844, and contained a viost scandalous attack upon 
 the most respectable citizens of Nauvoo," 
 
1 have quoted from the " Historical Record " that you 
 taight see that what Mr, McKay says about the Saints at that 
 time denying the charges made against Joseph Smith is 
 substantiated by the publications of the Utah Church. 
 
 At that time the matter published in the Expositor was 
 ** the /oulest abuse of Joseph and the Saints " — a most scandalous 
 attack upon the most respectable citizens of Nauvoo." Then, 
 they indignantly denied the charges of a plurality of wives— and 
 alleged that Joseph was ** at all times most anxious to preserve 
 the Church free from taint." Remember what I read from Mr. 
 McKay's book calls the men who published this sheet "the 
 libertines and seducers of Nauvoo." He says " that they had 
 been cut off for their adulteries, and when foiled before the 
 Municipal Court adopted the bold course of accusinof Joseph of 
 the very crimes with which he had charged Higbee." In other 
 words these fellows adopted the plan employed by thieves to 
 detract attention from themselves. Thieves run and raise the 
 cry of " stop, thief !" and thus fool the crowd into following 
 someone else, while they themselves egcape. Listen to what Mr. 
 McKay says of the stories they circulated : — 
 
 " It is utterly incredible that Joseph Smith, who, great imposter 
 as he was, never missed an opportunity to denounce seducers and adulterers 
 as unfit to enter his Church, should have been concerned directly or 
 indirectly in proceedings like these, though it is scarcely surprising that 
 when such stories had been circulated by men whom the " Prophet " had 
 thwarted or reprimanded, there should have been found some persons 
 willing to credit them." 
 
 Vile men ! Lying stories ! A scandalous sheet ! But 
 since the Utah people have adopted polygamy as a tenet of their 
 faith, they have presented quite an astonishing change of front. 
 They have now gone over to the side of these libertines, seducers, 
 and adulterers, and have actually had the copy of the Expositor 
 containing these foul aspersions reprinted, and use it as evidence 
 (?) that Joseph Smith was a polygamist. How inconsistent and 
 contemptible to denounce these fellows as vile, adulterous and 
 base men in their publications, and call their stories ** scandalous 
 attacks on respectable citizens," and then in after years turn 
 round and use these stories to answer their present purpose of 
 keeping the rank and file in the dark. 
 
 Truly it seems that since the Utah people have adopted 
 the practice of the same crimes as Higbee and his friends were 
 excommunicated for, there is something of an affinity between 
 them, they all take refuge behind the same lie — " birds of a feather 
 flock together." 
 
 Undoubtedly there was a great deal of truth in the 
 following by Orson Spencer in his editorial Millennial Star^ May 
 I, 1848. (Vol. 10, p, 137). 
 
•' Such wandering stars as J. C. Bennett and the Higbee's do not 
 seem to be sufficient beacons to keep some restless and aspiring souls 
 from the Maelstrom of polution and apostacy. ' Fools are always 
 meddling.' says Solomon. The doctrines ot corrupt spirits are always in 
 close affinity with each other, whether they consist in spiritual tvifeism, 
 sexual resurrection, gross lasciviousness, or the unavoidable separation of 
 husbands and wiveSj or the communion of property." 
 
 And these are the kind of men whotn Mr. B. asks you to 
 believe in preference to good, honest, upii ,'ht men and women, 
 who have demonstrated their sterling qual lies by standing aloof 
 from polygamy, and its kindred abomi:iations, and also by 
 TELLING THE ONE STORY ALL ALONG— that Joseph 
 Smith was neither a polygamist nor the author of that detestable 
 ** revelation !" Will you do it ? 
 
 But even Mr. B. acknowledges that [oseph did oppose 
 polygamy before his death. He quotes Elder William Marks as 
 follows : — 
 
 *' About the l.st of June, I844, situated as I was at that time, being 
 the presiding Elder of the state of Nauvoo, and, by appointment, the 
 presiding Officer of the " High Council," I had a good opportunity to 
 know the affairs of the Church, and my convictions at that time were that 
 the Church in a great measure had departed from the pure principles and 
 doctrines of Jesus Christ. I felt much troubled in mind about the 
 condition of the church. I prayed earnestly to my Heavenly Father to 
 show me something in regard to it, when 1 was wrapt in vision, and it was 
 shown me by the Spirit that the top branches had overcome the root in sin 
 and 7vickedness and that the only way to cleanse and purify it was to 
 disorganize it, and in due time the Lord would re-organize it again. There 
 were many other things suggested to my mind, but the lapse of time has 
 erased them from my memory. A few days after this occurrence I met 
 Brother Joseph. He said that he wanted to converse with me on the 
 affairs of the Church, and we retired by ourselves. 1 wilt give his words 
 verbatim, for they are indelibly stamped upon my mind. He said he had 
 desired for a long time to have a talk with me on the subject of polygamy. 
 He said it would eventually prove the overthrow of the Church, and we 
 should soon be obliged to leave the United States, unless it could be 
 speedily put down. He was satisfied it was a cursed doctrine, and that 
 there must be every exertion made t« put it down. He said that he would 
 go before the congregation and proclaim against it, and 1 must go into the 
 High Council, and he would prefer charges against those in transgression, 
 and I must sever them from the Church unless they made ample satisfac- 
 tion. There was much more said, but this was the substance. 
 
 The mob commenced to gather about Carthage in a few days 
 after, therefore there was nothing done concerning it, 
 
 After the Prophet's death I nnade mention of this conversation to 
 several, hoping and believing that it would have a good effect ; but to my 
 great disappointment it was soon rumored about that Bro. Marks was 
 about to apostatize, and that all he said about the conversation with the 
 Prophet was a tissue of lies. From that time I was satisfied that the 
 Church would be disorganized, and the death of the Prophet and Patriarch 
 tended to confirm me in that opinion. From that time 1 was looking for a 
 reorganization of the Church and Kingdom of God. 1 feel thMkful that V 
 
22 
 
 have lived to again behold the day when the basis of the (J^huVch is the 
 
 revelations of Jesus Christ, which is the only sure foundation to build 
 upon. I ff el to invite all my brethren to become identified with us, for the 
 Lord is truly in our midst." 
 
 Dated Shabbona. De Kalb, County Illinois, Oct. 23, I850. 
 and signed William Marks. 
 
 From this it will be seen that notwithstanding Joseph's 
 opposition, polygamy had taken quite ahold upon a section of the 
 membership. Who were they ? William Marks says the " top 
 branches had overcame the root in sin and iniquity." He here 
 likens the Church to a tree. Christ also does the same in one 
 place; "The Kingdom of Heaven is like to a grain of mustard 
 
 seed which indeed is the .smallest of seeds, but 
 
 when it is grown it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a 
 tree. — Matt. 13 : 31-32. First the seed, then the root, then the 
 twig, then the branches, and finally it becomes a grown tree. 
 The Church of latter days also grew after this manner. The 
 first members would be the root, and the latter ones the branches 
 and " top branches." Joseph Smith was one of the first members 
 — hence he could not have been one of those represented by the 
 " top branches." Besides we have already shown that he 
 opposed the doctrine all along. But Mr. B. only takes the state- 
 ment of Wm. Marks as an evidence that Joseph had repented of 
 his action after makmg this '* revelation " public. Of course he 
 ignores all the other evidence of Joseph's opposition to it, and 
 asks "why he did not have a revelation forbidding it, when he 
 saw the evil it was doing?" Great goodness! Have we not 
 shown that Joseph had all along been executing the only law of 
 marriage ever revealed by God to man ? We will read it : — 
 Of marriage the Lord said to the Church in a revelation 
 given March, 1831, when a mission to the Shakers, who held 
 strange views on marriage, was about to be taken : 
 
 " And again I say unto you, tli.it whoso forbiddeth to marry, is 
 not ordained of God unto man ; wherefore it is lawful that he should have 
 one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth 
 might answer the end of its creation ; ami that it might be filled with the 
 measure of man according to his creation before the world was 
 made," — Old Ed., Doc. and Cov., Sec. 6^ ; par. 3. 
 
 From the organization of the Church of Jesus Christ, 
 April 6th, 1830, to June 27th, 1844, a period of fourteen years, 
 the elders preached the gospel — "the New Covenant" — and 
 taught the purity of the marriage relation as adopted and 
 proclaimed in and by the Solemn Assembly of the Church held 
 on August 17th, 1835, as follows : 
 
 " We declare that we beli«ve that one man shonld have one wife 
 and one woman but one husband, except in case of death, when either is 
 at liberty to marry again," (Doctrine and Covenants, section on 
 Marriage) 
 
23 
 
 "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave 
 unto her and none else ; and he that looketh upon a woman to lust after 
 her, shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit ; and if he repent 
 not he shall be cast out." — Doctrine and Covenants, 42 : 7. 
 
 We also read Iroin the Book of Mormom, what was a 
 reproof of polygamy among the Nephites. Do you not think it 
 an eloquent reproof of those who practice it today ? 
 
 " Wherefore, I must tell you the truth, according to the plainness 
 ot the word of God. For behold, as I enquired of the Lord, thus came 
 the word unto me, saying, Jacob, get thou r.;> into the temple on the 
 morrow, and declare the word which I shall gi e thee, unto this people." 
 
 " And were it not that I mus -.peak unto you concerning 
 
 a grosser crime [than pride], my hear^ would rejoice exceedingly, because 
 of you. But the word of the Lord burthens me because of your grosser 
 crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord, This peop'e begin to wax in 
 iniquity ; they understand not the Scriptures ; for they seek to excuse 
 themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were 
 "written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and 
 Solomon truly had many tvives and concubines, which thing was 
 abominable before me, saith the Lord ; wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I 
 have led this people forth out of the Land of Jerusalem, by the power of 
 mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch [seed] from 
 the fruit of the loins of Joseph. Wherefore I, the Lord God, will not 
 suffer that this people shall do like unto thevi of old [in having many 
 wives and concubines] . Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken 
 to the word of the Lord ; For there shall not any man among you have 
 save it be one wife and conci^bines he shall have none: For I, the Lord 
 
 God, delighteth in the chastity of women." You know 
 
 that thtse couiniandmcnts were given to our father Lehi ; wherefore ye 
 
 have known them before," " Ye have broken the hearts 
 
 ot your tender wives, and lost the confidence ot your children, because of 
 your bad examples before them ; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend 
 up to God against you. Behold the Lamanites, your brethren, v/hom ye 
 hate because of their filthiness and the cursings which hath come upon 
 their skins, are more righteous than you ; for they have not forgotten the 
 commandment of the Lord which was given unto our fathers, that they 
 should have save it were otie wife ; and concubines they should have 
 
 none." " And now this commandment they observe 
 
 to keep ; wherefore, because of this observance in keeping this command- 
 ment, the Lord God will not destroy them, but will be merciful unto 
 
 them ; and one day they shall become a blessed people." 
 
 " Arouse the faculties of your soul ; shake yourselves, that ye may awake 
 from the slumber of death ; and loose yourselves from the pains of hell, 
 that ye may not become angels to the devil, to be cast into that lake of 
 fire andj brimstone, which is the second death. — Book of Jacob, 2 ; 
 3. 6, 7. 9. II 
 
 We have seen how Joseph sought to enforce this law. 
 How he caused those who violated it to be expelled, both before 
 and immediately after the bogus revelation claims to have been 
 given, and he went down to death opposing it. For the men who 
 were responsible for delivering him into the hands of his enemies, 
 had been expelled forpractiiiing it — Higbee, e/. al. The words of 
 the Lord spoken through him are still the most powerful opposition 
 to the principle, and reproof of the practice, known to man. Can 
 any man ask more at the hands of Joseph than he was doing.? — 
 enforcing the law which had already been given. 
 
We desire to call attention to several points in the testimony 
 of Elder Wm. Marks. 
 
 (i) Joseph had a conversation with him about polygamy, 
 in which he said it was a cursed doctrine. 
 
 (2) If it was not put down it would prove the overthrow of 
 the Church and they would be obliged to leave the United 
 States. 
 
 (3) Joseph was to declare against it before the congregation, 
 and Wm. Marks was to sever the transgressors from the 
 Church. 
 
 (4) Joseph's death prevented this action. 
 
 (5) The Church became disorganised. 
 
 (6) The leaders of the Utah faction treated what he said as 
 a tissue of lies. 
 
 On the first point very little need be said, it simply proves 
 that Joseph did not change the altitude he had always maintained 
 towards polygamy. The second point shows that his ideas were 
 dead against the institution of polygamy. Brigham and his 
 co-adjudors, waited till they got to the Utah valley, before they 
 sought to make it a tenet of their faith. No doubt this was because 
 they knew such a practice could not be carried on in any centre of 
 population. Joseph was always for remaining at Nauvoo, until 
 the Saints should be reinstated in their rights in Missouri as witness 
 a paragraph from his reply to Henry Clay : — " Why Great God ! 
 ** To transport 200.000 people through a vast prairie, over the 
 " Rocky Mountains to Oregon a distance of nearly 2,000 miles 
 " would cost more than four millions." 
 
 That he was determined to go before the congregation and 
 proclaim against the doctrine is evidence that he could see, that the 
 Gospel ship would be wrecked on the fatal rock of polygamy, 
 unless he, with the assistance of a faithful crew, could guide it 
 into the placid waters, clear of the rocks and breakers ahead. 
 If those who were determined to steer for the fatal rock refused 
 to be guided by the chart — God's revealed word in the books of 
 the Church — they were to be discharged — cut off. 
 
 Joseph was taken away, his life being the penalty for the 
 uncompromising stand he had taken on this question, and there 
 was a temporary disorganization of the crew of the Gospel ship. 
 Many deserted the good old barque, for less substantial vessels 
 and enlisted themselves under the leadership of different men. 
 The main portion of the crew was hoodwinked into following 
 those who were determined to steer for the fatal rock of Polygamy. 
 Unheeding the plain marks on the chart that the good ships 
 " Solomon " and " David," besides a host of others had been 
 shipwrecked upon that particular rock, they recklessly steered 
 towards it, until at last the crash came. Their vessel had gone 
 aground upon the fatal rock. There was a momentary shock, 
 St fierce roaring of the angry billows, but when the first ^usts Qf 
 
^5 
 
 anger had subsided many could be seen clinginof to the rock, 
 which had made shipwreck of their faith, afraid to leave it lest 
 they should meet a violent death. 
 
 Some never recovered from the shock, and were lost in 
 the depths of the sea of spiritual darkness. Others were in 
 danger of perishing, but by this time the good old Gospel ship 
 which so many had deserted, was once again manned by a 
 faithful crew, and with her searchlight trained upon that fatal 
 rock she was once again sailing the turbulent sea, and thousands 
 of weary swimmers and others who had become tired of clinging to 
 the cause of their disaster, were landed safe on her trusty deck. 
 She is still sailing on, on her mission of love and mercy, and is 
 known among men as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ 
 of Latter Day Saints. 
 
 In support of his contention that Joseph Smith was a 
 polygamist Mr. B, gives the testimony of Lovina Walker, to the 
 effect that Joseph's wife had told her that " she had witnessed 
 the * sealing ' of four women to Joseph, and that she had given 
 her consent thereto." Emma Smith denied over and over again 
 that her husband had any other wife or wives than herself ; and 
 shall we ask this woman, who " won for herself a reputation for 
 honour and integrity which won for her the respect and esteem of 
 those who knew her best," tu stand aside, while we hear another 
 woman say that Mrs. Smith " told her so and so ?" No I 
 Honour and integrity count before " heresay evidence I" 
 
 Again on p. 377 he gives an affidavit by Emily D. P. 
 Young to the effect that she had been married to Joseph Smith, 
 May nth, 1843, in the presence of Emma Smith. Who are we 
 going to believe? — Mrs. Smith or this woman.? To show that 
 this woman was " instructed " how to testify we quote from the 
 plaintiff's abstract of evidence in the Temple Lot suit, p. 364. 
 Under cross-examination she testified that she was married to 
 Joseph March 11. 1843, at another dme, May nth, 1843. 
 
 She also said; — "I was not married to Joseph Smith 
 nnder the re"elation on sealing, but I '* was married to him under 
 the revelation on plural marriage." 
 
 She was then asked : — " Now, I would like for you to 
 explain how you were married to Joseph Smith under the 
 revelation on plural marriage when the Church you belong to 
 claims that revelation was not given until July, 1843 ; just tell us 
 how you could be married under a revelation in March, that was 
 not given till July ?" 
 
 She replied : — " Well, I don't know anything about that." 
 Here is another woman who claims to have been married 
 to Joseph Smith. In " Representative Women of Descret, page 
 U, th^ following^ appears : — 
 
26 
 
 "Sr. Zina (D. Huntington Young) was married in Nauvoo, and 
 had two sons, but this not proving a happy union she subsequently 
 separated trom her liusband. Joseph Smith taught her the principle of 
 marriage for eternity, and she accepted it as a divine revelation, and was 
 sealed to the Prophet for time and all eternity, after the order ot the new 
 and everlasting Covenant." 
 
 Ihe historian of the Re-organized Church has taken the 
 pains to inquire into this case a little. In a tract written by him 
 he says : — 
 
 " Neither the date of her marriage to Mr. Jacobs, nor that of her 
 sealing to Joseph is given in this extract ; but fortunately we have the 
 required data at hand. In the record of marriages in Hancock County, 
 Illinois, book A, page 40, is the record of the marriage of Henry B. 
 Jacobs and Zina D. Huntington, March 7. 1841, by John C. Bennett, 
 Mayor of Nauvoo. 
 
 A careful search of the record discloses no divorce of these 
 parties, 
 
 In the " Historical Record." published by Andrew Jenson, of 
 the Utah Church, vol. 6, page 233, is found the following: — 
 
 " Zina D. Huntington, afterwards the wife of Pres. Brigham 
 
 Young, sealed to the Prophet, Oct. 27th, 1841, Dumick B. 
 
 Huntington officiating." 
 ** According to these statements, taken from official records 
 and the publications of the Utah people themselves, it was just 
 SEVEN MONTHS and TWENTY DAYS after her marriage to 
 Jacobs that she was sealed to Joseph Smith, During this seven 
 t?ionlhs and twenty days she bore two sons to Jacobs, separated 
 from him, obtained a divorce (of whieh there is no record) 
 received instruction from Joseph Smith on the principle of 
 marriage for eternity," and was sealed to him. To suggest that 
 further refutation is necessary would be an insult to the intelli- 
 gence of the reader." (Was. Jos. Smith a pol, p. 2 — 3). 
 
 To shew the value placed upon the evidence of these 
 women by the Civil Courts of America we will read a portion of 
 the decision of Judge Phillips in the Temple lot suit — a suit in 
 which the legal continuation — the Reorganized Church — of the 
 Church founded by command of God in 1830, sought to obtain 
 possession of the " Temple lot " — a piece ot land acquired by 
 the original Church situated in Independence, Missouri. Upon 
 the point under discussion he said: — 
 
 "It is charged by the respondents as an echo of the Utah 
 Church that Joseph Smith. • the Martyr,' secretly taught and practiced 
 polygamy ; and the Utah Contingent furnishes the evidence and two of 
 the women to prove the fact. It perhaps would be uncharitable to say 
 of these women that they had borne false testimony as to their connection 
 with Joseph Smith , but in view of the evidence and circumstances 
 surrounding the alleged intercourse it is difficult to escape the conclusion 
 that at the most they were but sports in ' nest hiding.' " 
 
 This clearly shows that he thought they had been guilty 
 of a bit of " sharp practice." A ** sport " in America is identical 
 with the class of person we call a " spieler." 
 
 A " spieler " or " sport '\ is one who resorts to question- 
 able practices in order to gain the point. Continuing, he says : — 
 
27 
 
 " In view of the contention of the Salt T^ke Party, that polygamy 
 obtained at Nauvoo as early as 1841 [that is with the consent of the 
 Church] it must be a little embarrassing to President Woodruff of that 
 organization, when he is confronted as he was in the evidence in this 
 case with a published card in the Church Organ at Nauvoo in 1842, 
 certifying that he knew of no other rule or system of marriage than the 
 one published in the Book of Doctrine and Covenant, and that the 
 "Secret Wife System" charged against the Church was a creature of 
 invention, by one Dr. Bennett, and that they knew of no such Society. 
 
 That certificate was signed by the leading men of the Church 
 
 And a similar certificate was published by the Ladies' Relief Society of 
 the same place, signed by Emma Smith, the wife of Joseph Smith, and 
 Phoebe Woodruff", wife of the present President Woodruff. No such 
 marriage ever occurred under the rules of the Church, and no offspring 
 came from the imputed illicit intercourse. Although Joseph Smith was 
 in the full vigor of young manhood, and his wife Emma was giving birth 
 to healthy children in regular order, and was enciente at the time of 
 Joseph's death." 
 
 Althous^h the " Reorganized Church " has continually 
 called upon the Utah people to produce evidence that Joseph 
 had any issue but by his legal wife they have utterly failed to do 
 
 so. 
 
 ***** 
 
 From a feeling of delicacy the following was not spoken 
 of in the lecture, but we submit it for the reader's consideration 
 regretting that the nature of the case demands the publishing of 
 
 it, 
 
 "Mr. Wilford Woodruff, then president of the Utah Church, 
 did in 1892 concede this lack of issue. On May 30, 1892, Mr, H. Neidig 
 (not a member of any Church) of Wampun^ Pennsylvania, wrote Mr. 
 Woodruff on this point, and Mr, Woodruff", through his secretary, George 
 Reynolds, replied as follows : — 
 
 " The facts that you refer to are almost as great a mystery to us 
 as they are to you : but the reason generally assigned by the 
 wives themselves is that owing to the peculiar circumstances by 
 which they were surrounded the}'' were so nervous and m such 
 constant fear that they did not conceive" 
 Comment is unnecessary, but we are not surprised at the effect of this on 
 Mr. Neidig. He writes under date of June 20, 18g2, and says : — 
 
 "The answer came June 7th, and amazed me. I am not yet 
 
 fully recovered from my astonishment, that a grave man, on a 
 
 grave subject, on a question which is bound to be a hinge on 
 
 which must turn an important point of Mormon history. 
 
 Should thus seek to account for what he concedes to be a fact." 
 
 •• The enquiry of Mr George F. Edmunds, of Carthage. Illinois, when 
 
 considering this theory of Mr. Woodruff's is pertinent. He says : — 
 
 • What ! a mature married woman, married by the sanction of Almighty 
 
 God, in fear? In fear of what ?' " 
 
 '* When we remember that this revelation was purportedly given 
 for the purpose of raising up a righteous seed, and then consider the 
 claim that all these women became so frightened as to prevent the 
 purpose of the institution being REALIZED, we have reached the climax 
 of absurdity,"— Was Jos. Smith a Polygamist(p. 10, ) 
 
We will now read what we believe to be the correct 
 solution of the question of the lack of issue to Joseph by any 
 other than his legal wife. The following Questions were put to 
 the wife of Josepii Smith, by her son. 
 
 Question. — " Did he (Joseph) have any other wives than 
 "yourself .?" 
 
 Answer. — "He had no other wife but me, nor did he to 
 " my knowledge ever have." 
 
 Question, — ** Did he hold martial relations with woman 
 '* other than yourself ? " 
 
 Answer. — He did not have improper relations with any 
 ** woman that ever came to my knowledge." 
 
 Question. — " Was there nothing about spiritual wives 
 " that you recollect .? " 
 
 Answer. — " At one time my husband came to me, and 
 "asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages 
 " or any thing of the kind, and assured me that if I had they 
 " were without foundation ; that there was no such doctrine, and 
 " never should be with his knowledge or consent," 
 
 "I KNOW THAT HE HAD NO 01 HER WIFE, 
 ** OR WIVES THAN MYSELF IN ANY SENSE, SPIRIT- 
 " UAL OR OTHERWISE." 
 
 Joseph Smith could not, according to the practice of the 
 Utah church, have had other wives, without the knowledge and 
 consent of the woman whose testimony we have just read. 
 
 Will not her reputation for " honor and integrity," and 
 Mr, B. recommendation of these qualities in her, cause you to 
 believe what she has said in preference to the lying and con- 
 flicting evidence (?) to the contrary .? 
 
 Returning again to the authorship of the " revelation," we 
 submit the following from the finding of Judge Phillips in the 
 " Temple lot suit" : — 
 
 " Claim is made by the Utah Church that this doctrine is predi- 
 cated of a revelation made to Joseph Smith in I843, No such revelation 
 was ever made public during the life of Joseph Smith, and under the law 
 of the church, it could not become an article of faith and belief, until sub- 
 mitted to, and adopted by the church, This was never done. 
 
 " No more complete and caustic refutation of the claim made by 
 Brigham Yonng, can be found than in exhibit " W " in this case, in a 
 book entitled 'The spiritual wife system proven false" by Granville 
 Hedrick, the head of the respondent church in I856. He ridiculed the 
 pretention of Brigham Young that he had this *' revelation '' unpro- 
 claimed, locked up in his private chest for nine years. 
 
 He says : — " Now how strangely inconsistent that the revelation 
 should be given 9 or lo years before its time, and have to lie 8 or 9 years 
 under his patent lock, before it would be time to proclaim it. Here then 
 we have a specimen of an abortive revelation, come before its time, and 
 had to be put in the sacred desk, under a patent lock for 8 or nine years 
 and shown occasionally — just often enough to get the thing used to it, so 
 that when it got old enongh it could go abroad. So much for this "revej. 
 
29 
 
 ation."come in an abortion— got burned up— then locked up---and noW 
 has gfone forth to damn everybody that don't believe it. Why 1 it is a per- 
 fect Phoenix." 
 
 Also the follovvinp^ from the decision of Judge Sherman in the 
 " Kirkland Temple Suit " :— 
 
 '• That the said Plaintiff the Re-organized Church of Jesus Christ 
 of Latter day Saints, is a religious society, founded and organized upon 
 the fame doctrines and tench, and having the same Church organization 
 as the original Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, organized in 
 I830, by Joseph Smith and was organized pursuant to the constitution, 
 laws and usages of said original Church 
 
 " That the Church in Utah, the defendent, of which John Taylor 
 is president, has MATERIALLY and LARGELY departed from the 
 faith, doctrines, law«». ordinances and usages of said original Church of 
 Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and has INCORPORATED into its 
 system of faith the doctrines of CELESTIAL MARRIAGE and a 
 PLURALITY OF WIVES, and the doctrine of Adam God worship, 
 CONTRARY to the laws and constitution of said original church." 
 
 These are the decisions of two of the most eminent 
 men in the civil courts of America, after they had examined all 
 the evidence the Utah people could possibly bring in proof of 
 their contention. What a pity Mr. B. was not there 
 to convince these learned men that Joseph was a Polygamist, and 
 the author of that degrading " revelation !" 
 
 Conscious that we have given evidence enough to satisfy 
 every mind open to conviction that he was neither, we will devote 
 a few minutes to answering the question, " Who was the author 
 of this immoral, degrading document .?" In August, 1831 the 
 Lord said to the Church — 
 
 There was among you adulterers and adultresses, some of whom 
 have turned away from you, and others remain with you,. that hereafter shall 
 be revealed. Let them beware and repent speedily, lest judgment shall 
 come upon them as a snare, and their folly shall be made manifest, and 
 their works shall follow them in the eyes of the people. — (Doc. and 
 Cor. 63 : 4), 
 
 In due time the Lord did reveal one of them, and the works 
 of the others have made them manifest to all. N". K. Whitney 
 was the one whose iniquity the Lord revealed : — 
 
 Let my servant N. K. Whitney be ashamed of the Nicolatin^ 
 band, and of their :>ecret abominations, and of all his littleness of soul before 
 me, saith the Lord." 
 
 This rebuke was given through Joseph, July 8th, 1838, 
 and appeared is '' The Millennial Star," vol. 16, p. 183. It can 
 also be found in the Utah Doc. and Cor , p. 416. Here we have 
 the Lord condemning a " Nicholatine band " We all believe 
 that the doctrine of the Nicholatine's was polygamy. The Lord 
 always speaks in our own language, and according to our under- 
 standing of things. Whitney was a member of this band of 
 Polygamists. According to sworn affidavits by him he did not 
 forsake it. This band was a secret society, as witness the Lord's 
 reference to secrei abominations. No doubt the determined 
 
30 
 
 Opposition of Joseph was the main cause of secrecy 
 thus screened by secrecv a> Polygamists are now, 
 and ever have been, and bound by oaths not to 
 reveal these * Secret Abominations,'' the Nicholtine band 
 pathered into it all the corrupt men and women, who had found 
 their way into the Church, and bid defiance both to the laws of 
 the land, and to the God-given laws of the Church No wonder 
 Joseph caused so many to be expelled from the Church durino; 
 the few years preceding his death, for while thev could conceal 
 their evil practices, behind the secrecy by which they were 
 entrenched, it was not so easy to conceal the fruits of such illicit 
 intercourse. When the evidence of ilieir corruption was before 
 him, he invariably denounced them ard expelled thetn from the 
 the Church When he was taken away, is it anythinir strange 
 that this Nicholatine band sought to extend its bounds ? Does 
 it not look just a bit suspicious, that N. K. Whitney, the man the 
 Lord revealed was a member of the Nicholatine band, should 
 have been the one to deliver up to Brigham Young the bogus 
 document hearing Joseph's name? Brigham was also a self- 
 confessed Polygamist, as was Clayton, the man who claims to 
 have written the words as they fell Irom Joseph's mouih ; and 
 Joseph C. Kingsbury, who made the " copy '" produced by 
 Brigham Young. 
 
 How easy for these four self-confessed members of the 
 *• Nicholatine band " to concoct this " celestial revelation," and 
 palm it ofT upon the world as a genuine revelation," given 
 through Joseph Smith ! We have alieady seen how these men 
 and others nave lied to maintain their positir^n, and, on the other 
 hand, how men an(i women of integrity, worth, and truth, have 
 denied the story told by them. Whom shall we believe } 
 Shall we believe those who come to us with a reputation of being 
 i\iQ '' greaigst and smoothest liars in the world V' Or shall we 
 believe those who " possessed a reputation for honor and 
 integrity which won the respect and esteem of those who knew 
 them best .?' 
 
 Upon which testimony should reasonable beings base their 
 judgment of the case ? 
 
 The fact of the matter is " this imtnoral and degrading docu- 
 ment '■ is a clever imitation of the style of the rev^elations given 
 through Joseph, adapted to the unholy doctrines of that abomin- 
 able " Nicholatine band," by Clayt >n, Wliitney, Kingsbury, 
 Young, et al. 
 
 It was not a new thing for people to do this kind of thing as 
 witness the following, written by Joseph. Dec. i6, 1838: — 
 
31 
 
 We find that there has been frauds^ secret abominatiotis, and 
 evil works of darkness going on, leading the minds of the weak and un- 
 unwary into confusion and distraction, and all of which have been en- 
 deavoured to be />rt/;//^r^ o//" 2</!>rt« the Presidency, who weae ign«^rant of 
 these things which were palmed upon the Church in our name.-- Millen- 
 nial Star, vol 16, p. 459. 
 
 If they would seek to palm off their " secret abominations *' 
 as the work of Joseph during his life, what can we expect after 
 his death ? 
 
 As an evidence that this fraud hjvS been concocted since 
 Joseph's death we again read the following;, said by the Utah 
 people to be an extract from Joseph's diary, Oct. 6, 1843. 
 
 Gave instructions to try those persons who were PREACHING, 
 TEACHING, or practicing the dectrine of phiral wives, for according to 
 the law I hold the keys of this power in the last days ; for there is never 
 more than one on the earth at a time, on whom the power and its keys 
 are conferred ; and I have constantly said that no man shall have but one 
 wife at a time, unless the Lord direct otherwise." 
 
 Those who concocted the " Polygamy fraud," evidently had 
 excess to Joseph's diary, and seeing this decided proof of his 
 opposition to Polygamy, decided to turn it to advantage. Accord- 
 ingly they incorporated some of the sentiment used here into 
 their production, with a view to making it look as though Joseph 
 Smith had received it prior to penning this note. It can be found 
 in the " revelation" on Polygamy, Utah Doc, and Cor., para- 
 graph 2, and is as follows : — 
 
 (And I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power 
 in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on 
 whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred.) 
 
 But they reckoned without their host, for with all their 
 * adroitness ' and' cunning,' the statement in Joseph's diary stands 
 out in bold relief as an evidence that their production is a 
 "fraud." 
 
 The ''power" referred to In their " revelation " is that of 
 allotting wives, and they try to make it appear that Joseph was 
 having the persons alluded to in his diary tried for breaking over 
 this rule and taking wives that were not allotted to them by him. 
 But we have already shown the absurdity of such an interpreta- 
 tion, Some of these persons were to be tried for '• preaching " 
 and some for "teaching" the doctrine of plural wives "without 
 a revelation from the Prophet." This demonstrates most clearly 
 that the " power " referred to was that of being sole " Prophet, 
 Seer, and Revelator," and not that of allotting wives. But did 
 Brigham and his " Nicholatine Clique " introduce polygamy 
 immediately on their assumption of power.? No! That would 
 never have done. Better to wait until they got all they could to 
 Salt Lake, and there beyond the power of civil law they could 
 proclaim this unholy doctrine, and enforce the " Celestial law " 
 by violence and bloodshed. And thus matters went on until 
 
■.852, when the bogus revelation was produced, and the deadly 
 shadow of the " Nicholatine band " settled down upon the Utah 
 Church, from which it has never been removed. Many were 
 murdered when trying to escape from the toils, and others dared 
 not try lest they met the same fate. Since then many have been 
 rescued by the Reorganized Church, and we trust that many 
 other *' brands will be plucked from the burning." We thank 
 you for the patient manner in which you have listened, and will 
 continue the investigation when we next speak in this Chapel. 
 The Church which we represent is always ready to furnish a man 
 to affirm in honourable debate that it is the Church of Jesus 
 Christ in organization, faith, doctrine and practice, providing the 
 representative of the Other side will affirm the same for his 
 Church. 
 
 Ji^ecture % 
 
 Delivered February 25. I900, at Hamilton West, N.S.W. 
 
 ^N our last lecture we were examining evidence, pro and con, 
 as to whether the Book of Mormon is a fraud or not. We 
 placed it upon trial on the charges of " fraud " and " imposi- 
 tion." We found that none of the allegations made against it 
 could be sustained. To-night we shall consider several other 
 allegations made in Mr. B.'s book. The first one is that in one 
 of the revelations given through Joseph Smith — that on Priest- 
 hood, Doc. and Cov., p. 223-224 — the Prie thood is said to have 
 been transmitted from Caleb to Elihu, Elihu to Jeremy, Jeremy 
 to Gad. and from Gad to Esaias.* But Mr. B insinuates that 
 Joseph did not consult his chrological tables when he was 
 having this revelation. Anyone who will read one of the lectures 
 on faith, found on p. 21-27 o^ the Doctrine and Covenants will 
 see that Joseph was not likely to be caught ** napping " on 
 chronology. But Mr. B. reasons: — "Chronology points out a 
 great difference in the times when these men lived, hence the 
 revelation is false, and per consequence, all others are equally 
 false." Will any sensible man risk anything on such a faulty 
 thing as chronology ? Will any intelligent person affirm that the 
 chronological table from which Mr. B. took his dates is true ? 
 Need we point out the material disagreement between Usher and 
 Helas, the leading Chronologists ? Do not all eminent writers 
 acknowledge that the dates quoted by Mr. B, are the most un- 
 certain ones in the whole realm of Bible chronology.? Why it is 
 generally conceded by all writers of note, that the scriptural data 
 ♦ Not Isaiah, 
 
35 
 
 from which the especial chronological dates, quoted by him is com- 
 puted, are '' apparently irreconcilable,'* If the revelation objected 
 to, claimed only to be the work of man, it would be Joseph Smith, 
 against the author of the chronological table, and the case of each 
 would be equally uncertain. But we must not forget that the 
 relevation claims to be from God. If that claim to true, the 
 revelation is cor reel, and the chronological table incorrect, 
 No.v this is just where we join issue. Let Mr. B. prove that 
 the dates given are correct, and then he will have an argument 
 worthy of consideration by intelligent people. As the matter 
 now stands he is '* beggin^,^ the question '' both ways. 
 
 It is next charged that Joseph Smith, the translator of the 
 Book of Mormon uttered several prophecies which were not 
 fulfilled. *' If so he was a false Prophet and no reliance can be 
 placed in any revelation that came through him." Here is the 
 first one objected to. It was delivered December 25, 1832 : — 
 
 " Verily, thus saith the Lord, concerning the wars that will 
 shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of oouth Carolina, which 
 will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls. The 
 days will come that w ir will be poured out npon all nations, beginning at 
 that place: for beholJ, the Southern States shall be divided against the 
 Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even 
 the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon 
 other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations ; and 
 thus war shall be poured ou» upon all nations. 
 
 And it shall come to pass, after many days, slaves shall rise up 
 against their masters, who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war. 
 
 And it shall come to pass also, that the remnants who are left of 
 the land will marshall themselves, and shall become exceeding angry, and 
 shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation ; and thus, with the sword, and 
 by bloodshed, the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn; and with famine 
 and plague, and e.irthquakes. and the thunder of Heaven, and the fierce 
 and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to teei 
 the wrath, and indiijnation, and chastening hand of an Almighty God, 
 until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations; then 
 the cry of the Saints, and of the blood of the Saints, shall cease to come 
 up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of 
 their enemies. 
 
 Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved, until the 
 day of the Lord come ; for behold it cometh quickly, saith the Lord. 
 Anrien," 
 
 Is this a false prophecy 1 Let the history of the United 
 States answer. Was not war poured out upon the whole nation .? 
 Did not slaves rise up against their masters .? Were not the Southern 
 States divided a.,Miiist the Northern States .' Did not the most 
 costly war known to the world eventuate .^ Did not the United 
 States become a scene of carnage and bloodshed unparalled in 
 the history of the world.? Did not the Southern States caUonthe 
 nation of Great Britain to assist them .' Did not the remnants 
 who were left uf the land — the Indians — marshal themselves and 
 vex the nation with a sore vexation 1 Were not the Indian 
 
34 
 
 massacres of 1862, the most appalling that ever occurred ? Has 
 not war been wagins: somewhero on the earth ever since the 
 American war? And still the end is not yet. Has not famine 
 andplague, lightnings and earthquakes been stacking through the 
 earth, hand in hand with war, causing ruin, devastation, danger 
 and death on every hand ? 
 
 Truly the major portion of this prophecy has been fulfilled 
 and the signs of the times declare the sure fulfilment of the other 
 events foretold, even down to the consumption decreed. 
 
 Has anyone ever written, since the war, a more accurate 
 account of the American civil war, than is here forcasted, years 
 before the trouble eventuated ? 
 
 History is a standing rebuke to those who claim that this 
 prophecy has failed, 
 
 Mr. B. also calls attention to a prophetic statement made 
 by Joseph to a Mr. Seaton in 1833. Itfortells the wars, famines, 
 earthquakes, etc., which are spoken of in the prophecy of 1832, 
 and has just as certainly been fulfilled. We marvel that any in- 
 telligent man, should so seek to impose on the credulous, by 
 questioning the fulfillment of what we have already pointed out. 
 " The next false prophecy '' — so dubbed bv Mr. Bays — is the 
 following extract from a letter by Joseph to John C. Calhoun of 
 South Carolina, dated January 2nd, 1844 : — 
 
 '' If the general government has no power to re-instate expelled 
 citizens to their rights, there is a monstrous hypocrite fed and fostered 
 from the hard earnings of the people. A real "bull-beggar" upheld by 
 sychophants. And although you may wink to the priests to stigmatize, 
 wheedle the drunkards to swear, and raise the hue and cry of " Impostor.'' 
 
 false Prophet ! " Yet remember if the Latter 
 
 Day'Saints are not restored to all their rights, and paid for all thetr losses 
 according to the known rules of justice and judgment, reciprocation, and 
 common honesty among men, that God will come out of His hiding place 
 and vex the nation with a sore vexation ; yea the consuming wrath of an 
 offended God shall smoke through the nation with as much distress and 
 woe as independence has blazed through it with pleasure and delight. 
 
 Where is the strength of government ? Where is the patriotism of 
 a Washington a Warren and Adams ? And where is the spark from the 
 watch fires of '76, by which one candle might be lit that would glimmer 
 upon the confines of democracy ? Well might it be said that one man 
 is not a state, nor one state the nation. In the days of General Jackson, 
 when France refused the first installment for spoliations, there was power 
 force, and honour enough to resist injustice and insult, and the money 
 came. And shall Missouri, filled with negro drivers and white men 
 stealers, go "unwhipped of justice" for ten fold greater sins than France ? 
 No ! Verily no ! While I have powers of body and mind ; while water 
 runs and grass grows ; while virtue is lovelv and vice hateful ; and while 
 a stone points out a sacred spot where a fragment of American liberty 
 once was, I or my posterity will plead the cau«;e of injured innocence, 
 until Missouri makes atonement for her sins ; or sinks disgraced degraded 
 and damned to Hell, where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not 
 quenched." 
 
35 
 
 Before considering the propli Jtic language in this statement, 
 it will perhaps be well for us to consider briefly the circumstances 
 which led up to the making of it. In the year 1831, a con- 
 siderable body of the Church settle'1 in Missouri, where they pur- 
 chased lands from the general government, and industruously 
 set about improving them. But their religious views brought 
 down upon them the ire of th-eir neighbours, many of whom 
 though professing christians, were lawless a'ld corrupt men. In 
 July 1833, they began to violently persecute the Saints. Men 
 were whipped, tarred and leathered, pelted vith rocks, and other- 
 wise maltreated Some were killed outrigh . their bodies hacked 
 about in a most brutal way and their ll ,'sh given as food to 
 others who were prisoners of the mob. Homes were demolished 
 and their, unharvested grain destroyed. Finally they were 
 
 forcibly driven from ihe state and their houses and lands appro- 
 priated by the mob. Mr. B. makes a very laboured attempt to 
 show that |the conduct of the Saints was largely responsible for 
 this treatment. But let me inquire if any infraction of law, should 
 demand punishment of such a brutal character, among humane 
 and law abiding citizens } We will let these lawless, inhuman 
 wretches give taeir own reasons for the brutal lueasures employed 
 by them. Here is a resolution passed at their first meeting : — 
 
 "We the undersigned citizens of Jackson County, believing that an 
 important cricis is at hand, as regards our civil society in consequence 
 of a pretended religious Society of people that have settled, and are still 
 settling in our county, styling themselves Mormons, and intending as we 
 do to rid our Society, peacably it we can. forcibly if we must; and be- 
 lieving as we do that the ARM OF CIVIT. LAW, does not afford us a 
 guarantee, or at least a sufficient one. against the evils, that are now in- 
 flicted upon us and seems to be increasing by the said religious sect, 
 deem it expedient and of highest importance to form ourselves into a 
 company, for the better and easier accomplishment of our purpose, which 
 we deem it almost superfluous to say is justified as well by the law of 
 nature, as by the law of self defence." 
 
 If that is the way they do things in America, the boasted 
 land of freedom I think you and 1 would be much safer if we 
 remain 'neath the '• Union Jack " of Old England. 
 
 Just think of it — because the arm of civil law, could not 
 punish the Saints — and if they had broken the country's laws, the 
 arm of law would certainly have reached them — these fellows 
 thought they were justified in organizing into a mob, to drive 
 them from their homes, and take their properties for themselves. 
 All this beneath the standard of freedom, and in the glorious 
 light of democracy 1 
 
 Ah democracy 1 where are the charms, 
 
 That sages have seen in thy face ? 
 Dost thou foster bloodshed and alarms? 
 
 And drive citizens out from their place? 
 
3^ 
 
 Ah friends, a government. " of ihe people, for the people, 
 and by the people,*' is a grand thing in some ways, but it has its 
 disadvantages. Kow ? I will show you : — 
 
 While the saints were being so violently persecuted, they 
 appealed to the Governor of the Stale for protection. But who 
 was he ? One placed in power by a majority of the people. If 
 he desired re-election he must do all he could to please that 
 majority, during his tenure of office. The mob were in the 
 majority, and so instead of protecting the minority — the Saints — • 
 he lent himself with the power of state to the pleasure of the mob. 
 Thus overpowered. 1,200 free citizens of a free country, were driven 
 from their properties, amounting in the aggregate to 2,000,000 
 dollars in value — and ;;11 purchased from the general government. 
 To the general governmeit they then appealed, for the restor- 
 ation of their rights. Here again they were met by men who had 
 been placed in power by a majority. To obtain re-election they 
 must please that majority, 
 
 " Gentlemen your cause is just, but the general government has 
 no power ! " 
 
 So spake the chief executive officer of the nation to a dep- 
 utation of the Saints, who appealed to him on behalf of the body, 
 for a restoration of their rights. Tlieir cause WAS JUST, but 
 the government of the United States had no power to redress 
 their wrongs 1 
 
 Bah ! well was it said: — 
 
 " Weak indeed must be our Republican institutions, and as con- 
 temptible oar national capacity, if it is a fact that American citizens, after 
 having purchased lands from the government, and received the government 
 guarantee to be protected in the enjoyment of them, can be lawlessly and 
 causelessly driven off by violence and cruelty, and yet the government has 
 
 no power to protect them, or redress their wrongs 
 
 Well may the nations of the old world ridicule the weakness, and impotency 
 of our free institutions — a government not able to protect its own citizens ! 
 A government, it must be famous indeed in the annals of history, and a 
 pattern to the world, which is so governed as to admit of the most flagrant 
 abuses known to the civilised world, and acknowledged by all to be such, 
 and yet no power to redress them ! 
 
 Hear it oh )e Barbarians ! Hnarken to it oh ye savages ! And 
 hasten, yea, hasten all of you to America ; there you can glut your avarice 
 by plunder, and riot in the blood of innocence till you are satisfied, and 
 the government has no power to restrain, nor strength to punish, nor yet 
 ability to redress the sufferers at your hands." 
 
 Does this not show the weakness of elective administra-- 
 tion .^ This man realised that the cause of the Saints was just, 
 but he was but clay iu the hands of the "power behind the 
 throne." Thai power said no ; and he must say no too, or be 
 deposed at the next election. 
 
 But some may reason that the Saints must have been to 
 blame or the government, would be bound to take the matter up, 
 \Vc who are living under imperialistic administration, where the 
 
37 
 
 Governors are nominated by the cr )wn, are used to seing indepen- 
 dent action by independent men, but where the Governor, or 
 other ollicials, is elected — well he ,must please those who elect 
 hini. Hear what one of our most open and bitter, yet honourable 
 opponents has to say in this connection. Professor Turner at 
 one time of Illinois College, in writing of the conduct of the 
 people of Missouri towards the Saints says : — 
 
 " Who began the quarrell ? Was it the Mormons? Is It not 
 notorious on the contrary, that they were hunted like wild beasts, from 
 county to county, before they made any desperate resistance ? Did they 
 ever as a body refnse obedience to the laws, when called upon to do so, 
 until driven to desperation by repeated threats and assults trom the mob? 
 Did the state ever make one decent effort to defend them as fellow citizens 
 in their rights or redrcs*: their wrongs ? Let the conduct of its Governors, 
 attorneys, and the fate of their final petitions answer, Have any who 
 plunderedand openly massacred the Mormons ever been brought to the punish- 
 mcnt due to theircrimes? Let the boasting murderers ofbeggingandhelpless 
 infancy answer. Has the state ever remunerated, even those known to be 
 innocent, for the loss of either their property or arms ? Did either the 
 pulpit or the press throughout the State, raise a note of remonstrance or 
 alarm? Let the CLERGYMEN who ABETTED, and the editors who 
 encouraged the mob, answer.'* 
 
 The persecution was purely and simply a religious one. 
 With the mob, clergy, press, politicians, and governor against 
 them, the Saints could hope for little from the State of Missouri. 
 So they appealed to the general government with the result which 
 we have already seen. At the next election tor the presidency, 
 Joseph wrote asking each candidate *' what would be their rule of 
 action towords the saints if elected.'' " One of them. Mr. J. C. 
 Calhoun replied that his rule of action would be the same as 
 heretofore, and in the Missouri outrages connection he re-iterated 
 the opinion that the Federal Government had no power. It was 
 in reply to this communication that Joseph made the statement 
 which Mr. B. calls a " false prophecy." Let us now examine 
 it. 
 
 ist : — It is stated that " if the Saints were not restored to 
 all their rights, and paid for all their losses, that God would come 
 out of his hiding place and vex the nation with a sore vexation 
 and that the wrath of God would smoke through the land with as 
 much distress, and woe as independence had blazed through it 
 with pleasure and delight. Will any sane man affirm that this 
 part of the statement has not been literally fulfilled ? Did not 
 the wrath of an offended God, smoke the land of America, during 
 the civil war, with as much distress and woe. as independence 
 had caused it to thrill with pleasure and joy ? Bah ! men must 
 be in bad straits for "false prophecies," when they quote true ones ! 
 
 2nd : — He and his posterity, were to plead the cause of 
 injured innocence, until Missouri made atonement for her sins 
 Of sunk degraded and damned to Hell, 
 
3^ 
 
 For 40 years the sons of Joseph Smith —worthy sons of a 
 worthy sire — have occupied leaaing positions, in the legal con- 
 tinuation of tlie church of their father, and notwithstanding Bays 
 to the contrary they have been pleading the cause of injured 
 innocence. The State of Missouri has not made atonement for 
 the crimes perpetrated against the early saints, but who will affirm 
 that the inhuman perpetraiers of those brutal outrages, have not 
 sunk degraded and damned to Hell? Will Mr. B. do it? No! 
 He says the prophecy has failed because the land of Missouri has 
 not sunk to Hell. What childish nonsence ! Who ever heard 
 of a land going to Hell ? Who perpetrated the outrages ? Why 
 the people ! Then unless those people repented God would 
 surely punish them. Just think of what those ^eople did. They 
 drove the Saints from their rightful property ; deliberately mur- 
 dered men, women, and children, and maltreated many others 
 to such an extent that they had to tie handkerchiefs round their 
 bodies to keep their bowels from falling out. They ravished 
 women, and girls of tender years; and drove them from their 
 homes at dead of night, in the depth of winter, amid the snow and 
 sleet, with no clothing upon them but their night clothes, no shoes 
 upon their feet, and their previous treatment so terrible, that they 
 might be traced by the blood, which freely flowed from the 
 ghastly wounds inflicted. They had boasted that they would feed 
 the prisoners taken on " Mormon beef" and actually cut flesh 
 from the bodies of the dead, cooked it, and presented it to several 
 prisoners to eat ! (They refused it). Horrible! You say ? Yes, 
 horrible ! But true ' Do you think that such persons could 
 escape the Hell where the worm dieth not, and the lire is not 
 quenched unless they repented ? I do not, for I read : — " The 
 fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and MURDERERS, 
 and whorewongers, and sorcerers, and idolators, and all liars, 
 shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brim- 
 stone. — Rev, xxi : 8." Now this concludes the evidence for the 
 prosecution There are many other arguments made in Mr. B.'s 
 book, but as our time is limited, and they do not have any direct 
 bearing on the Book of Mormon, and are mostly so palpably 
 absurb that they bear their own refutadon upon the face of them, 
 when read by discriminating people, we will pass them by. A 
 few argumients remain in which an attempt is made to refute 
 some of the evidence which we shall use for the defence. These 
 we will notice at the proper time and place. We will now pro- 
 ceed to bring forward evidence, for the defence of the divine 
 authenticity, of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon 
 claims to be a record of two distinct colonies of people, who left 
 the old world, and by the grace of God were permitted to reach 
 the shores of America. The Inst colony was called Jaredites, 
 after Jared their leader. Now, it is the popular belief that after the 
 confounding of languages at Babel, the people were scattered all 
 
39 
 
 over the face of the earth. I have been tol'1 that some of them 
 came to Australia, and that in this way the land was populated. 
 The Book of Mormon says that some went to America. Do you 
 believe it ? If not, why not ? The book savs they became a 
 powerful people, were blessed to a marked decree, both tempor- 
 arily and spiritually, but afterwards turned from the Lord and 
 became verv wicked. They were destroyed just a little while 
 before the second colony arrived on the continent. An abridge- 
 ment of the record left by them is found in the Book of Mormon, 
 written by Moroni, the sonof Mormon. The second colonv were 
 of the tribe of Joseph, and left Jerusalem in the reio^n of Zede- 
 kiak. King of Judah, in the year 600 bc. and bv Almighty 
 guidance reached the shores of America. Here they became a 
 numerous people, and finally divided into two nations. One 
 nation was called Lamanites, after Laman their leader; 
 the other Nephites, after their leader, Nephi. The Lamanites, 
 of whom the American Indians are descendents 
 became an idolatrous and benighted people. The Neohites wor- 
 shipped Goi, and wore civilised and enlightened. The Book of 
 Mormon is a history of th^^m. down to about the year 400 a.d. It 
 tells of their w'ars, worship, advancement, and various; vicissitudes. 
 The teachings of their prophets and leaders are given, also an 
 account of a visit by Christ to the western continent, after His 
 resurrection. It is recorded that He preached the Gospel, and 
 organi.sed a Church, just as he did in Palestine. An abridge- 
 ment of the records kept by them were carefully engraved upon 
 plates of i>^old in the "reformed Egyptian " characters, and care- 
 fully hid in the earth by Moroni, the son of Mormon, in a stone 
 box specially prepared for them. In the year 1827. these records 
 were found by ]\Ir. Joseph Smith, after he had received directions 
 from an angel, as to their whereabouts. With them was found a 
 ** breastplate," and the " Urim of Thummim," through which, with 
 the assistance of the Holy Spirit, he was enabled to translate them 
 into the English language. Mow, we know that it is a d-fficult 
 thing for people to believe, that God will make an instrument of 
 any person now living upon the earth to perform such a work as 
 Joseph Smith was instrumental in doing. It has always been 
 hard for people to believe in anything of a miraculous nature. 
 When Jesus came to the earth His claims were, and are still, 
 rejected by the Jews. The cry of " blasphemer," " false 
 prophet," "impostor," etc.. were raised concerning Him. In 
 what wav did He break the force of these charges ? Eirst by a 
 miraculous manifestation, known as the transfigu'ation, Peter, 
 James, and John, were made e-pecial witnesses of the divinity of 
 His mission. Then a kno\yIedge that He was the Christ was im- 
 parted by means of the Holv Ghost, to every one who obeyed 
 from the heart the form of doctrine delivered them. Jesus could 
 also say, *' search the Scriptures, for they are they which testify 
 
4C 
 
 of me." But the most powerful testimony of all is spoken of by 
 Paul in Heb. ii. 4 : — 
 
 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders and 
 divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to His own will, 
 
 But notwithstBnding this mighty array of witness, Jesus was 
 rejected as an impostor by the majority of people amona^ whom 
 he lived. His claims are still disbelieved by the majority of 
 mankind, but that does not make them one whit less true. The 
 Book of Mormon and its translator are called upon to meet the 
 same charges to-day as Jesus met 1900 years ago. And thank 
 God, they break the force of them in the same way as Jesus did. 
 First three especial witnesses testify that an angel came 
 down from heaven, and showed them the platos of the Book of 
 Mormon and commanded them to bear record that the claims 
 claims made for the Book were true. Next eight other witnesses 
 dechrc that they handled the plates. Since then tens of thous- 
 ands have testified that God has revealed to them the divine 
 auiheniicity of the Book of Mormon. Besides this the Scriptures 
 declare that such a book should come forth, and he joined to the 
 Bible, and become one with it in the hands of the Lord, to the 
 convincing of jew and Gentile that Jesus in the Christ. 
 
 The Lord also bears witness of its divinity in the same 
 manner as he testified of the mission of Jesus, viz,, " with signs, 
 wonders, divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost," Joseph 
 Smith, the humble instrument in God's hands in bringing the 
 Book of Mormon forth, was born December 23, 1805, in Sharon, 
 Windsor Countv, Vermont, U S.A. At the age of fifteen he 
 attended a religious revival, and became greatly concerned about 
 bis soul's salvation. He desired to serve the Lord, but there 
 were so many churches represented at this revival that he was at 
 a loss to know with which one he shoukl unite. He was convinced 
 that differing greatly as they did in doctrine, all of them could 
 not be right. He believed, however, that one of them might be 
 right, and in his young heart he desired to know which one it 
 was. 
 
 While still undecided upon this point he chanced one day 
 while reading his Bible to be confronted with : — 
 
 "If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God, that giveth to 
 all men liberally, and iipbraideth not, and it shall be given unto him,"^— 
 James i : 5. 
 
 Ah ! In the simplicity of his soul he saw here a wav 
 opened up in which the question could be answered, which had 
 been troubling him so much. Accordingly, with the honesty of 
 purpose which comes from an implicit faith and loving trust in 
 God he retired to the woods and asked the question of Him that 
 knoweth all things. He told tlie Lord of his desire to serve 
 Him ; of his desire to know which w.is the true Church, for he 
 wanted to join it, He implored God to manifest which was the 
 
one he should join. Is it anyiaiUo^ stranjsfe that he received aii^ 
 answer to that prayer? If he had come baclc ckiming ttiat he 
 had received some vague answer most people would have 
 believed him ; but he received more than thai, for he afterwards 
 testified that while pleading with the Lord a pillar of light above 
 the brightness of the sun came down from on high, and rested 
 upon him, and that two personages whose brightness and glory 
 defy all description stood above him in the air, and among other 
 things told him to join none of the sects, for thev were all wrong 
 and taught for doctrine the commandments of men, having a, 
 form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof. He went and 
 told one of the clery:ymen who had participated in the revival 
 about the experience he iiad enjoyed, but to his surprise he was 
 told that "it was all of the devil." The cry of ''imposition '*' 
 an 1 " fraud " that was raised by that gentleman has since been 
 taken up by many others, who can take up their Bibles and read 
 of such happenings in Bible times, and believe them ; but if 
 such things happen to-day they must be of the devil. ** It is not 
 possible for God to do such wonderful things in this age !" Ah ! 
 friends, you will liave to shake off the partial infidelity which 
 envelopes you, an I learn that " with Him all things are possible." 
 On the night of September 21, 1823, Joseph again 
 received a message by an angel from en high, writing of which 
 he says :~ 
 
 " He called me by name and said unto me that he was a 
 messenger sent from the presence of God unto me ; that God had a work for 
 me to do ; and that my name should be had, for gcod and for evil among all 
 nations, and kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and 
 evil spoken of among all people, He said there was a book deposited, 
 written upon plates of gold, giving an account of the former inhabitants 
 of this Continent, and the source from which they sprano^. He also said 
 that the fullness of the everlasting gospel was contained in it, as delivered 
 by the Saviour to the ancient inhabitants ; also that there were two 
 stones in silver bows — and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, 
 constituted what is called Urim and Thnmmin — deposited with the 
 plates ; and the possession and use ot these stones were what constituted 
 seers in ancient or former times ; and that God had prepared them for 
 the purpose of translating the book." 
 
 In the year 1827 an angel of the Lord delivered the Plates, 
 Breastplate, and Urim and Thummin into his hands, and with 
 the last-named instrument, aided by the Holy Spirit, he translated 
 the engravings that were upon the plates into English. Some- 
 persons have told me that they cannot believe that God insp'red 
 Joseph to write the Book of Mormon ; and yet these persons 
 firmly believe that God inspired Moses to write the first five books, 
 of the Bible. If God could inspire Moses to do Miat, he could 
 also assist Joseph to translate the Book of Mormon. Bear in 
 mind, we do not ask you to believe this on the unsupported 
 testimony of Joseph, for we shall introduce many other evidences 
 that Joseph was inspired to- do this work, and that the Book of* 
 
4« 
 
 Mormon is a true record of God's dealings with the ancient 
 inhabitants of America. We shall first introduce the testimony 
 of three especial witnesses, who testify that the plates, with the 
 engravings thereon, were shown to them by an angel of the 
 Lord. It is found, in the preface to the Book of Mormon, and 
 IS as follows : — 
 
 '' Be it known unto all nations, kindred, tongues and people unto 
 whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, 
 and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, 
 which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites their 
 brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of 
 which hath been spoken • and we also know that they have been translated 
 by the gift and power of God. for his voice hath declared it unto us ;* 
 wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify 
 that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates ; and* they 
 have been shown unto us by the power of God. and not of man. And we 
 declare with words of soberness that an angel of God eame down from 
 Heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw 
 the plates, and the engravings thereon : and we know that it is by the 
 grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and 
 bare record that these things are true ; and it is marvellous in our eyes, 
 nevertheless the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear 
 record of it ; wherefore to be obedient unto the commandments of God, 
 we bear testimony of these things, And we know that if we are faithful in 
 Christ we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found 
 spotless before the judgment seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him 
 eternally in the heavens. And the honour be to the Father, and to the 
 Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God, Amen. 
 
 Oliver Cowdery 
 David Whitmer 
 Martin Harris 
 
 For seventy long years, the opposers of the Book of Mormon 
 have sought to impeach the testimony of these men ; but it is 
 ftill the same bright testimony to-day as it was seventy years ago 
 — unimpeached and unimpeachable. Mr. Bays takes the ground, 
 in his book, that these men wilfully lied in saying that they saw 
 the Angel, and that he showed them the plates and the engrav- 
 ings on them. Well, we say as latter day saints have always 
 said, LET HIM PROVE THAT THEY DID NOT SEE 
 THE ANGEL, and then they will be convicted of lying and 
 fraud. The testimony of these three men is affirmative evidence 
 of the strongest possible kind, and until that evidence is nega- 
 tived — proven false — it must be accepted as the truth, for all 
 known rules of logic declare the truth of this principle. One 
 strong proof that their testimony is true, lies in the fact that about 
 the year 1838 differences arose between the three witnesses and 
 Joseph; but not regarding tne Book of Mormon, or the testimony 
 which they had given. A controversy insued, in which some 
 strong and perhaps harsh statements were made. Now, if as 
 Mr, Bays insinuates, these four men had put their heads together 
 to concoct a fraud, one would naturally expect that Joseph would 
 
43 
 
 be rather afraid to ruffle their feelings, lest they should expose 
 the conspiracy. But Mr. B. argues that they would hardly, for 
 personal reasons, desire to expose a conspiracy in which they had 
 played such a prominent part. But how was Joseph to know 
 that they would not ? It must be plain to any reasonable mind, 
 from the way he went into this controversy, that he did not fear 
 an exposure by any of these men. Why was he not afraid ? Was 
 he as good a judge of character as Mr. 1^ pretends to be, and 
 did he know that they would not tell ? Or do you think they 
 first settled it not to tell, and then entered upon their controversy ? 
 Is it reasonable to believe that men would enter into a peaceful 
 agreement before entering upon a very heated and determined 
 controversy, such as the one in question proved to be ? Hardly ! 
 
 On the other hand, it is a palable absurdity to say that 
 Joseph Smith knew that these men would not tell. IF /here had 
 been illicit association amo?ig them It is the extreme end of 
 absurdity, for any person, to undertake to say what ar other per- 
 son would do under such circumstances. 
 
 Mr. B 's theory may look very well on paper, but all reason- 
 able beings will see the fallacy of setting up the THEORY of one 
 man, as the STANDARD by which to judge the actions of all 
 men. 
 
 It must be somewhat embarassing to Mr. Bays and his theory 
 when he is confronted with the action of Mr. C. P. Barnes, con- 
 cerning the conspiracy between himself, James, }. Strang, and 
 others, in which they sought to have J. J. Strang elevated to the 
 position of President of the Cnurch, and the " gathering place " 
 transferred to Voree. 
 
 C. P. Barnes confessed that he had been in this disgraceful 
 conspiracy. That they had imitated the Book of Mormon plates, 
 by engravings made upon the metal of an old kettle, by an old 
 saw file, and had then used corrosive acid to give the " plates " 
 an" ancient appearance." So you see Mr. Bays' theory is not a 
 perfect standard by which to judge the actions of all men. As we 
 have already stated, the fact that Joseph Smith entered into a 
 heated controversy with these men, which ended in complete 
 estrangement, without any fear of exposure from them, is indis- 
 putible evidence that there zvas nothing for them to expose, Mr. 
 Bays' attempt to discredit the evidence that the three witnesses 
 continually re-affirmed their testimony, is of such a ridiculous 
 nature, that we do not deem it necessary to insult any audience, 
 by pointing out the false reasoning used. 
 
 Throughout the whole of their lives— and they were all 
 long livers — they constantly declared that Joseph Smith >vas a 
 Prophet of God, and that their testimony concerning the Book of 
 Mormon was true. This was aftir-icd bj' each one, on his dyin§ 
 bed. 
 
44 ^ 
 
 * • • On« mighta.< well try lo prove that Peter. James and John, 
 did not \vitue-^s the transfiguration as io prove that these men did 
 not see the angel. It is a very easy thing to write in capitals at 
 the top of a chapter THEY DID NOT SEE AN ANGEL, and 
 then fill it with a. mass of nonsense, but no mortal man will ever 
 be able to prove that they did not see an angel. Here is a sample 
 of the profound reasoning of Mr. Bays : 
 
 *' If I had seen an Angel ; if I had heard the voice ot God ; if I 
 had- bowed by Joseph Smiths side and felt the touch of Angel hands in 
 ordination, and tieard the declaration that he was a prophet of the living 
 God, all the combined powers of Earth and Hell could never have induced 
 me to forsake him. And yet this is exactly what Oliver Cowdery did" 
 
 No^'sir, I cannot believe it it is too absurd. These witnesses 
 never saw the Angel ; they heard not the voice of God, or they could not 
 have pursued the course they did later in life." 
 
 What a pity, since Mr. Bays thinks that all men would act 
 as he xvould, that he cannot get all men to believe as he does ! 
 If-he and his theories are the standard by which the acts of all 
 men should be judged, why is it that he cannot get all men to 
 believe as he does 1 If he had e.xperienced what Oliver Cowdery 
 test.ifie4 be did, the "combined powers of Earth and Hell could 
 not. have forced him to forsake Joseph Smith." Heroic indeed ! 
 But does he mean to tell us that he would not have forsaken 
 Jos^l^.h, if he had thought the prophet had fallen .? He admits on 
 page. 250 that this was why Oliver had forsaken Joseph, He and 
 others believed, that Joseph had fallen from favour with God. and 
 although many of thern found out the mistake when it was too 
 late, ^^hey withdrew from him because they, as honourable men 
 could not countenance some of the actions, which were wrong- 
 fully palmed off upon the presidents of the church. Viewed in 
 this light the action of Oliver Cowdery though ill-advised appears to 
 have been an honourable action by an honourable man. Men of 
 this kind are not found practicing fraud such as Mr. B would have 
 us believe Oliver and Joseph were guilty of. Ah ! Davis H. Bays 
 your standard was again far loo low. if when you said the combined 
 powers of eartli and hell, could not have induced you to forsake 
 Joseph, as Oliver did, you meant that you would have stuck to 
 him, even had you thought he was a 'fallen " prophet. 
 
 Yes sir ! instead of impeaching the testimony of these 
 good men and true, by your pettifogging, you establish the fact 
 that, they were honourable men, and that their testimony is true, 
 We will now introduce the testimony of eight other especial 
 witnesses, who testify that they saw and handled the plates from 
 vhich the Book of Mormon was translated :— 
 
 " Be it known to all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto 
 whom this work shall come that Joseph Smith jr., the translator of this 
 work, has shown nnto u.s the plates of which hath been spoken, which have 
 t^e appearance of gold . and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has 
 translated, we did handle with our hands , and we also saw the engravings 
 
4.^ 
 
 thereon, all of which has the appc.irance of ancient work, and curious work- 
 m;inship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said 
 Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a 
 surety, that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. 
 And we give our names unto the WTn4d to witness unto the world that 
 which we have seen ; and we lie not, God bearing witness of it. 
 
 Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer. Peter Whitmer, junr. John 
 Whitmer, Hiram Page, Joseph Smith, senr., Hyrum Smith, Samuel H. 
 Smith." 
 
 We next call attention to the thousands of Latter Day 
 Saints who testify that God has revealed to them that the Book 
 of Mormon is a divinely translated record of His dealings with 
 the ancient inhabitants of America, In every land and every 
 clime such testimonies are borne daily. 
 
 In our last lecture we referred to several men named 
 Higbee. Foster, Law, et. al., who were expelled from the Church 
 before Joseph Smith's death, and who published a paper in the 
 City of Nauvoo against the Saints. Let us listen to what these 
 men have to say about the Church, even after they had been 
 excommunicated : — 
 
 " As far as our acquaintance with the Church of Jesus Christ of 
 Latter Day Saints we know no men or set of men can be more thoroughly 
 acquainted wiih its rise, its organization, and its history than we have 
 reason to believe we are. We all verily believe, and many of us know of 
 a surety, that the religion of the Latter Day Saints as originally taught by 
 Joseph Smith, which is contained in the Old and New Testaments, the 
 Book of Mormon, and Book of Covenants, is verily true, and that the pure 
 principles set forth therein are the immutable and eternal principles of 
 Heaven." 
 
 Although excommunicated their faith in the Church, and 
 divinity of the Book of Mormon was still as firm as ever. 
 
 Let us now turn our attention to the Bible and see if we 
 cannot find other evidence there. We have already said that the 
 people of whom the Book of Mormon is a record were descend- 
 ants of the tribe of Joseph, who was sold into Egypt. We turn 
 to the 48th Chapter of Genesis and read that Joseph brough*; his 
 two sons Ephraim and Manasseh that Jacob, their grandfather, 
 might bless them ; — 
 
 " And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it upon 
 Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's 
 head, guiding his hands wittingly ; for Manasseh was the first born. 
 And he blessed Joseph, and said, God before whom my Fathers Abraham 
 and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this 
 day, the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads ; and 
 let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers, Abraham 
 and Isaac ; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the 
 earth." 
 
 There may be differences of opinion as to where the midst 
 of the earth is, but we have a clue given in the 19th verse by 
 which we can find it without much difficulty. That verse says 
 that the seed of Ephraim should become a multitude of nations, 
 
46 
 
 This multitude of nations all springing from the one stock were 
 to dwell in the midst of the earth. Now muster all the knowledge 
 you have acquired of nations, and tell me after you have searched 
 the world over where you find a multitude of 7iatiotis 2\\ springing 
 from the one stock. Nowhere will you find a multitude of 
 nations springing from one common source but upon the 
 Continent of America. There we find a multitude of Indian 
 nations, all bearing evidence that they are of one seed. Turn 
 again to the 49th chapter of Genesis and we find a further 
 blessing of the tribe of Joseph : — *• Joseph is a fruitful bough, 
 even a fruitful bough by a well ; whose branches run over the 
 wall," (Verse 22.) Now we shall presently show you that the 
 •' wall." spoken of here means the sea. Continuing, in verse 26 
 we read : — 
 
 " The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings 
 of my progenitors, unto the utmost bounds of the everlasting hills, and 
 they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him 
 who was separate from his brethren," 
 
 Jacob here declares that the posterity of Joseph were to 
 receive a greater blessing than his progenitors. Who were his 
 progenitors.? Abraham and Isaac ! What was their blessing ? 
 i"o possess the land of Palestine ! But Joseph's posterity were 
 to receive a greater blessing than this, away off to the bounds of 
 the lasting hills. Now it you were to leave Palestine, and journey 
 east or west, it matters not which — until you reached the utmost 
 bounds of the everlasting hills, where would you stop t Some- 
 where on the continent of America. You just look up your maps, 
 and see if you would not, Joseph's inheritance then must be the 
 land of America. Let us now turn to Deutt. 33rd chapter, and 
 from the 13 to 16 verses we read : — 
 
 " And of Joseph he said, blessed of the Lord, be his land [Joseph 
 is going to have a land of his own you see,] for the precipns things of 
 Heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that couchest beneath. And for the 
 precious fruits bronght forth by the sun, and for the precious things put 
 forth by the moon, and f jr the chief things of the ancient mountains, and 
 for the precious things of the lasting hills." 
 
 Now this was the blessing placed upon Joseph's land. If 
 America is Joseph's land, we will expect to find it blessed in this 
 way. Is it 'i Is it blessed with the precious things of heaven 'i 
 Yes, for it is the only land upon the earth that claims to have 
 been blessed with present day revelation. The revelation of 
 God's will to mankind is the most precious thing of heaven. 
 Is it blessed with the blessings of the deep .'* Where does most 
 of our tinned fish come from .? America ! Is it blessed with 
 the precious fruits brought forth by the sun and moon ? 
 Where does most of the canned fruit we import come from .? 
 America ! Is it blessed with the chief things of the ancient 
 mountains, and the precious things of the lasting hills ? Yes ! 
 for gold, silver, and copper in abundance has been, and is still 
 being extracted from the mountains and valleys of that land. 
 
47 
 
 Yes, the land of America has every blessing pronounced upoil 
 Joseph's land. But have we any account in the scriptures that 
 loseph's prosterity went over the sea to a strani^^e land? 
 
 We read in the 49 chapter of Genesis, verse 22. that 
 Joseph's branches were to " run over the wall." We promised to 
 show you that this wall was the sea. Now turn to Isaiah 16:8. 
 Here we have the Prophet speaking of the same people : — 
 
 " For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah ; the 
 lords of the heathen have broken down the principal plants thereof, they 
 are come even unto Jazer, they wandered through the wilderness; her 
 branches are stretched out. they ARE GONE OVER THE SEA." 
 
 Now turn to the Book of Mormon, page 36, and read how 
 these people fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy : — 
 
 " And we did sojourn for many years, yea even eight years in the 
 wilderness, [the bible says they were to go through the wilderness] ahd we 
 did come to the land which we did call bountiful, because of its much fruit 
 and wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord, that we 
 might not perish. And we beheld the sea, which we called Irraentum, 
 which being interpreted is, many waters." 
 
 Just where the Bible leaves off, the Book of Mormon 
 writers take up the thread of the story, and say they wandered 
 through the wilderness, and finally crossed over the sea. Where 
 did they go to ? Imaarine yoirself leaving Palestine, ard journey- 
 ing over ttie ocean until you came to land. What land would you 
 come to ? America ! Inspect your maps and see if you would 
 not. There is a most striking description of the Continent of 
 America in Isaiah 18: i — "Woe to the land shaddowiui!: with 
 wings which is beyound the Rivers of Ethiopia.', But Mr. B. 
 says we are wrong when we apply that Scripture to America. He 
 claims that Egypt is the land referred to. This cannot be true, 
 for the "Rivers of Ethiopia ' /7d>z£; throuyh Egypt, and conse- 
 quently that land cannot be said to be '* beyond " them. He 
 makes a great play upon the word " beyond " and labours hard 
 to show that America is not " beyond the Rivers of Ethiopia^ We 
 agree with him that those Rivers are the Nile and its tributaries. 
 Well, let us see whether America is " beyond " them or not. Mr, 
 B. says the land referred to is " directly south " of Jerusalem (p. 
 '.92). If this hypothesis be true, the Nile and its tributaries must 
 Aow yrom east to ivest, or any land *' directly south " would not be 
 " beyond " them. Do they } No ! The rivers flow '' directly 
 south !" Jerusalem is to the north east, and any land " beyond " 
 those nwers must be SOUTH WEST of Jerusalem. Does America 
 fill the bill } Yes ! for the part of America upon which the 
 Nephites landed is SOUTH WEST of Jerusalem. You will, 
 therefore, appreciate the following quotation from Mr. B.'s book 
 when applied to his own theory ; — 
 
 No amount of sophistry or special pleading can change the facts of 
 ^^o^ra^Ay involved in this question, and so all this fine-spun theory, . , . 
 falls to the ground a hopeless mass of ruin, never again to be recon- 
 structed," (p. 193). 
 
4«* 
 
 Again, Egypt is not " shadowing with wings !" But he sa^ s 
 it is " shadowed " with wings — flies are very prevalent. What 
 nonsense ! Would he have us believe there are no flies in 
 America ? Jf we are to know the land by the number of flies in 
 it, I am afraid we will have had a hard time telling which land has 
 the most flies. But I believe the text says that Ihe land was doing 
 the *' shadowing," not that it was being '' shadowed " by the flies 
 Where can we find a land casting the shadow of wings upon 
 the great deep ? Nowhere but in the Western Hemisphere where 
 America spreads out the form of one great wing to the north, and 
 the otijer to the south, with a narrow neck of land between. The 
 Old testament says that Joseph's posterity would go over the sea to 
 that land. The I^ook of Mormon says they did so. Whiston's 
 edition of Josephus p. 34-39 says that at a certain time a colony 
 of people left Jerusalem and went over the sea to a strange land. 
 Page 137 of the Book of Mormon says that the people of 
 Nephi left Jernsalem in the first year of Zedekiah, king of Judah 
 — 600 years b.c, 
 
 Now turn to the 49th chapter of Jeremiah (30-32) and read 
 a warning given by the Lord to the people of Jerusalem, in the 
 reign of Zedekiah ; 
 
 Flee, get you far off, dwell deep [go secretly] oh ye inhabitants of 
 Hazor, saith the Lord ; for Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon hath taken 
 counsel against you. and hath conceived a purpose against you, Arise , 
 get you up into the wealthy nation, that dwelleth without care, saith the 
 Lord, which have neither gates nor bars, which dwell alone. And their 
 camels shall be a booty and the multitude of their cattle a spoil." 
 
 Here thev were commanded to go to some place which 
 was afar off. They were to go secretly. They were to go to a 
 wealthy nation that dwelt without care, whose flocks were uncared 
 for, and whose gold and silver should be a spoil to them. The 
 Book of Mormon says the people spoken of therein went to that 
 very place. On page 43 we read : — 
 
 And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as 
 we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of 
 every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the ass. and the horse, and the 
 goat, and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for 
 the use of men. And we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of 
 silver, and of copper." 
 
 How clearly this scrap of Book of Mormon history points out 
 the fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecy ! But perhaps some of you 
 will be wondering where the people came from who were in 
 America before the Nephites went there. We have already 
 explained that they came from the Tower of Babel when the 
 languajjes were confounded, and that they were destroye 1 by the 
 Lord, because of wickedness, just before the people of Nephi 
 arrived upon the Continent. Nt)w, if what we have pointed out 
 from the Bible and Book of Mormon is true, and if the descend- 
 
4^ 
 
 Ints of Joseph went to America we would naturally expect to find 
 evidence that Hebrew people had been the pre-histonc inhabitants 
 of that Continent. 
 
 We have not time to call attention to one-tenth of the 
 evidence which could be adduced upon this branch of our 
 subject ; but we will read you sufficient to satisfy the reasoning 
 mind that the ancient inhabitants were of Hebrew extraction, as 
 are also the North American Indians of to-day, 
 
 Mr. A. A, Bancroft, the American historian, describes a 
 relic found in America as follows;— 
 
 " A slab of stone of hard and fine quality, an Inch and a half 
 thick, eigfht inches long, four und a half inches wide at one end, and 
 tapering to three at the other. Upon the face of the slab was the figure of 
 a man. apparently a priest, with a flowing beard, and a robe reaching to 
 his feet. Over his head was a curved line of characters, and upon the edge 
 and back of the stone were closely and neatly carved letters. The slab, 
 which I saw myself, was shown to the Episcopalian clergyman of Nawark, 
 and he pronounced the writing to be the Ten Commandments in ancient 
 Hebrew." Bancroft, vol, 5, p. 95, or Pal. to Ind., p. 66. 
 
 The followino: is a description of a stone (supposed to be 
 a keystone) found near Newark, Ohio, by Dr. Wyrick ; — 
 
 "This stone has upon each of its four sides a 
 
 Hebrew inscription, in the Hebrew character, which when translated reads r 
 "The King of the earth." "The word of the Lord," "The laws of 
 Jehovah," " The Holy of HoHe.s." Another stone, encased in a stone box, 
 buried some twenty feet in the earth, was found on the ist of November, 
 185 1, and has four cuts on its four sides with the characters on each side, 
 the English of which appears to be an abridgement of the Ten Command- 
 ments. The translation was given by J. W. McCarty. The word ' Moses,' 
 and the statement ' Who brought them out of the land of Egypt ' appears 
 above an image on the stone." — Palmyra to Independence, p. 67. 
 
 " Another relic, owned by Mr. Strock. of Newark, contained in 
 Hebrew: ' It is good to love the aged,' and ' The heart is deceitful.' A 
 third relic in the shape of a wedge had on its respective four sides in 
 Hebrew : ' The Lord is King of all the earth.' ' The sword of the Lord is 
 the law,' ' The Holy of Holies,' ' The Dew of life is the Lord awakening 
 souls.' " — ibid, p. 67. 
 
 In May, 1861, the editor of The Israelite. Mr. G. R. 
 Lederer, wrote : — 
 
 " We suppose that ma«y, if not most of our readers, have seen in 
 religious, as well as in secular papers, the accounts of some relics which 
 were found a few months ago in a mound near Newark, Ohio These 
 relics consist of stones of strange shapes, bearing Hebrew inscriptions 
 which makes the case particularly interesting to me as a Hebrew. In 
 calling a few days ago on mr friend, Mr. Theodore Dwight (the recording 
 secretary of the American Ethnological Society, and my associate in the 
 editorship of this magazine), my eyes met with the very object of my 
 desire. That I examined these antiquities carefully, none of our readers 
 will. I think, entertain any doubt. I recognised all the letters except one 
 (the ayin), though the forms of many of them £^re different from those novy 
 in use." 
 
Now, how do you account for the fact that HebresV 
 inscriptions upon stone have been dug up upon the American 
 Continent, and read by Hebrew scholars ? Is it not a strong 
 evidence that the claim of the Book of Mormon that the ancient 
 inhabitants of the land were of Hebrew extraction, is true ? 
 
 We will now introduce what we deem strong evidence 
 that the Book of Mormon claim that the Lamanites or Indians 
 are of Hebrew descent is true, On the chart over our head we 
 have printed several words m Eui^lish, Indian, and Hebrew, or 
 Chaldaic, which we have selected from ** Star of the West," p. 
 100-107, and Pal. to Ind., p. 72-73. 
 
 
 WORDS. 
 
 
 English. 
 
 Indian. 
 
 Hebrew. 
 
 Jehovah 
 
 Yohewah 
 
 Jehovah 
 
 God 
 
 Ale 
 
 Ale or Aleim 
 
 Jah 
 
 Yah 
 
 Jah 
 
 Shiloah 
 
 Shilu 
 
 Shiloh 
 
 Heavens 
 
 Chemmim 
 
 Shemmim 
 
 Father 
 
 Abba 
 
 Abba 
 
 Man 
 
 Ish or Ishie 
 
 Ish 
 
 Woman 
 
 Ishto 
 
 Ishto 
 
 Wife 
 
 Awah 
 
 Ewah, or Eve 
 
 Thou 
 
 Keah 
 
 Ka 
 
 Winter 
 
 Kora 
 
 Korah 
 
 Canaan 
 
 Canaai 
 
 Canaan 
 
 Now 
 
 Na 
 
 Na 
 
 Hind part 
 
 Kesh 
 
 Kish 
 
 Waiter of the High Priest 
 
 Sae^an 
 
 Sagfan 
 
 Praise to the first cause 
 
 Halleluwah 
 
 Hallelujah 
 
 You will notice the remarkable similarity between the Indian 
 and Hebrew wor1s. Many of them are identical. And do not 
 forget that these are only a few words that we have selected, tor 
 both language abound with the similarity which we have pointed 
 out. How did this similarity of language come about ? Was it 
 by chance ! No, It could not have been. The Indians must 
 have sprung from Hebrew stock. Why, you say, this is begin- 
 ning to be interesting. There must be something in the claims of 
 the Book of Mormon after all. There is sufficient merit in its 
 claims to demand an honest investigation by every honorable 
 man and woman. But the question is asked, why were the Book 
 of Mormon inscriptions engraved in Egyptian characters, if the 
 Nephites and Lamanites were of Hebrew descent .? The answer 
 is easily given. They were of the tribe of Joseph who sold into 
 into Egypt, and no doubt during their sojourn in that land they 
 acquired the language of the people. The Book of Mormon 
 gives us to understand they they had two languages, *' The learn- 
 ing of the Jews and the language of the Egyptian." Now, there 
 can be no learning when there is no language. So we arQ safe in 
 
5? 
 
 saying that they had two languages. But some of you will be 
 wondering, whether the Scriptures say that these people were to 
 have a record or not. Yes, the Gcriptures do say so ! Turn to 
 Hosea 8 : ii. 12 where we read : — 
 
 Because Ephraim hath made many altars to sin, altars shall be 
 unto him to sin. I have written to him the jjreat things of my law. but 
 they were counted as a strange thing. 
 
 Now. where can vou find one scrap in the Bible that has been 
 written to Ephraim. You cannot find it. It is not there. The 
 Book of Mormon claims to be the "great things of God's law," 
 written to Ephraim. Is it not counted a strange thing ? 
 
 In Ezekial 37, 15-22, the prophet fortells in a most striking 
 manner the coming forth of the Hook of Mormon, and its being 
 united with the Bible in convincing both Jew and Gentile that 
 Jesus is the Christ. It reads as follows : 
 
 " The word of the Lord came again unto me saying, Moreover' 
 thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it for judah, and for 
 the children of Israel, his companions : then take another stick, and write 
 upon it, for Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel 
 his companions : and join them one to another into one stick ; and they 
 shall become one in thine hand. And when the children of thy people 
 shall speak uhto thee, saying. Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by 
 these V Say unto them. Thus saith the Lord Cod ; Behold I will take the 
 the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel 
 his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and 
 make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. And the sticks 
 whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes. And say 
 unto them. Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the children of 
 Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them 
 on every side, and bring them into their own land: and I will make them 
 one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel ; and one king shall be 
 king to them all." 
 
 Two sticks are here spoken of, which in God's own time will 
 joined together in one, to be instrumental in his hands in gather- 
 ing all Israel back to their own land where they shall be one 
 people, and where one King shall rule over them. Now, who is 
 that king to be .? Christ Jesus, whom they now despise! Can 
 you not see that before they will all gather back to their own land, 
 and submit themselves to the rule of Christ, that there is a great 
 work to be done ? The prophet says the " two sticks " will be 
 instrumental in that work. Now, what is "a stick ?" If you go 
 into any of the Jewish synagogues on their " Sabbath Day," you 
 will see the Rabbi reading|from]what is called the stick of the law. 
 It is a long piece of parchment rolled upon two sticks, one at each 
 end, and as he unrolls one end, he rolls up the other, just as a 
 paperhanger does when he is cutting the margin off a roll of wall 
 paper. \Vhat the Jews call a stick we call a book. Now, what 
 is the stick of Judah ? I think we will all agree that it is the New 
 Testament. Well, where is the stick of Joseph ? We have already 
 seen that his inheritance, was at the utmost bounds of the ever- 
 lasting hills. We have seen that it is impossible to get turiher 
 
32 
 
 away from Palestine than America ; for if when travellings toward 
 the west we g:o any further than America, we get nearer to Pales- 
 tine on the east. If we travel toward the east, and go past 
 America, we get nearer to Palestine on the west, 
 
 America then is the land upon which we must look for 
 the stick of Joseph, which is in the hands of Ephraim. We 
 present the Book of Mormon for your consideration, as the stick 
 of Joseph — that is what it claims to be. But some of you mav be 
 desiring to ask " if the New Testament is not sufficient to accom- 
 plish this mission ?" No, it is not- The Bible says the work 
 can only be accomplished by the unison of two books. Now I 
 know that some think that the New Testament is the stick of 
 Joseph, but that cannot be, for the stick of Joseph was to be in 
 the hands of Ephraim. (v. 19). Was the New Testament ever 
 in the possession of the seed of Ephraim } No ! It has always 
 been in the hands of the Gentiles, and it is the stick of Judah. 
 Take the New Testament and go and try to convert a Jew with 
 it. He will ridicule you, and tell you that Jesus was a blasphemer, 
 and an illegitimate child. He will have nothing to do with the 
 New Testament : but in God's own due time he will be brought 
 to see, through the united testimony of the New Testament and 
 Book of Mormon, that Jesus is the Christ. But, you say, the Book 
 of Mormonfhas had 70 years already in which to convert the Jews 
 and it has failed. 
 
 No friends, that is not so. It has not failed for it has not 
 tried yet. In the time of Jesus, the Jews were given the first 
 chance to accept the Gospel, but when they refused to hear it, 
 the Apostles turned to the Gentiles. Jesus said at one time, 
 "The first shall be last, and the last first." How is that > We 
 will show you. 1900 years ago the Gospel ^2.% first to the Jews, 
 and the Gentiles the /^r/ to hear it. But since then then, there 
 has been a dark night of Apostacy. and it became necessary that 
 God should again send His Gospel to the earth. Did it come to 
 the Jews first time } No ! The first were to be last. It came first 
 to the Gentiles in this dispensation, but when " the fullness of 
 Gentiles be come in," (Luke 22 : 24) and the time come for the 
 Jews to be all gathered back to their own land, it will be preached 
 to them. Then the united testimony of the New Testament, and 
 the Book of Mormon will be used to convince them that Jesus is 
 the Christ. "Oh, yes." I have been told, ''we could believe all 
 that the Book of Mormon claims, if the miraculous were left out." 
 Now we are going to show you that the Bible says, the book would 
 come forth in a marvellous way. Go with us to the 29th chapter 
 of Isaiah. The first 6 verses foretell the destruction of Jerusalem 
 The prophet then begins to portray the condition of the nations 
 which fight against mount Zion (the Gentiles) and also the con- 
 dition of the Jews, just at the time when a book that is sealed is 
 Xo copac forth : 
 
^3 
 
 tt shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and, behoW, 
 he eateth ; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty : or as when a thirsty 
 man dreameth, and behold, he drinketh ; but he av/aketh, and, behold, he 
 is faint, and his soul hath appetite : so shall the multitude of all the 
 nations be, that fight against Mount Zion. 
 
 What a faithful picture of the spiritual condition of th^ 
 Gentile nations ! What a feast of fat things the people of these 
 nations are having religiously ! But it is only a dream. It is by 
 no means the reality of 1900 years ago. Then people could feast 
 upon the rich Iruits of the spirit, sucli as prophecy, tongues 
 divine healing, etc., etc. Bnt those tilings are not upon the 
 religious bill of fare of the nations of to-day. They are only 
 dreaming, instead of feasting, as did Peter, and Paul, and others 
 of the long ago. 
 
 Stay yourselves, and wonder ; cry ye out, and cry : they are 
 drunken, but not with wine ■ they stagger, but not with strong drink. 
 
 Drunken, but not with wine .^ Staggering, but not with strong 
 drink .'' How could they be drunken and staggering then .'* In 
 the 17th chapter of Revelations we have a striking picture drawn 
 of the old Mother Church. Verse 6 reads, ''And I saw the 
 woman drunken, with the blood of the saints ," and verse 2 tells 
 us that this same woman — the Mother Church — made the inhabi- 
 tants of the earth drunk, with the wine of the wrath of her forni- 
 cation — false doctrine, This false doctrine was imbibed from a 
 cup which she held in her hand, full of abominations, etc, (verse 
 4). How true ! Have not the nations of to-day been made 
 drunken with the false doctrines imbibed from the Mother 
 Church ? 
 
 But Isaiah tells us that the Jews themselves would Jbe in a 
 similar condition, for he says : — 
 
 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, 
 and hath closed your eyes : the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he 
 covered. 
 
 Are the Jews not in that condition to-day, just the same as 
 Orthodox Christianity.'' Does God communicate with them, like 
 as in days of old ? No j They believe like the rest of the world, 
 that God ceased to speak long centujies ago. The prophet con- 
 tinues : 
 
 And the vision of all [both Jew and Gentile] is become unto you 
 diS the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver tome that is 
 learned, saying : Read this I pray thee ; and he saith I cannot, for it is 
 sealed, and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying : Read 
 this I pray thee, and he saith, I am not learned. 
 
 Now that part of the prophecy met with a liberal fulfillment. 
 After the Angel had delivered the Book of Mormon plates to 
 Joseph Smith he carefully ^ transcribed some of the characters 
 that were upon them, and Martin Harris took the transcription to 
 Professor Anthon of New York, who told him that they were 
 Egyptian and other characters, but, who added, I cannot read a 
 sealed book. After learning the marvellous claim mad^ tox the 
 
54 
 
 feook oi Mormon, this man changed his mind, and published his 
 opinion that the words were a mixture of Greek, liebrew, 
 Roman, and other characters. Now, Mr. Bays dcvotts a good 
 deal of space to this point; in fact he seems to con-ide.i this his 
 stronghold. He considers ii so strong that he says : 
 
 Everything now depends upon the one question, were the 
 characters on the plates Egyptian ? If they were, then I am free to admit 
 that the Mormon Church is the Church of Christ. If th^y were not Egypt- 
 ian, then the Church of the saints is not the Church of Clirist. — P. 260. 
 
 To carry his point he submits a copy of the transcript, to 
 three Professors of language. 
 
 But lest these gentlemen might not give the saints justice, 
 Mr. B., who is a fair-minded {?) gentleman, says in the letter 
 which accompanied it : 
 
 Dear Sir, — I herewith inclose what purports to be a fac-simile of 
 the characters found upon the gold plates from which it is claimed the Book 
 of Mormon is translated. The advocates of Mormonism maintain that 
 these characters are Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian, and Arabic. 
 
 Of course you know, had the transcript been submitted to 
 these professors of language, in theological seminaries, who are 
 antagonistic to the claims made by the Samts. wiihout this ex- 
 planation, they mi-;ht not have been so liberal to the Saints. 
 There is no doubt whatever in my mind, but that this explan- 
 ation was of material assistance to these learned gentlemen, when 
 they gave their opinions as to what language was represented on 
 the transcript ! 
 
 Now, I don't know that the Saints, ever claimed that the 
 Book of Mormon plates were inscribed, with such an idiotic 
 mixture of characters, as Mr. B. credits us with claiming What 
 we have claimed is that Professor Anthon said, that the chaiacters 
 were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic We will now read 
 a list of the characters which each of these men say were repre- 
 sented in the transcript. Professor Anthon : Egyptian, Chaldaic, 
 Assyrian and Arabic ; Jitmcs B. Angell : Chaldaic or Aramaic. ; 
 No Assyrian; Chas. H. S. Davi.s : Ao Egyptia7i, Chaldaic, 
 Assyrian or Arabic : Dr E. Moldei.kie : No Egyptian or Assy- 
 rian. Anthon's 2nd opinion : Greek, Hebrew, Roman, etc. 
 
 How these men contradict each other ! Professor Anthon 
 says there were Greek, Hebrew, Roman and other characters, 
 while Chas. H. Davis sa)S "1 can positively assert that there is 
 not a letter to be found in the fac-simile submitted, that can be 
 found in the alphabet of any Oriental language.'' What a glar- 
 ing contradiction ! But 1 suppo.se that does not matter a great 
 deal to Mr. B., he seems to have liad a great weakness for contra- 
 dictory evidence all tlirough. 
 
 Again Mr, Davis contradicts Mr. Angell who says, that 
 there were Chaklee 01 Aramaic characters such as s. h, g. 1. b, n. 
 Jlow could there be such characters, if there were no oriental 
 
55 
 
 Utters^ '* particularly Egyptian, Chaldaic,'* etc, etc. ? What a di- 
 vision, and wnat an extent of confusion in the camp of learning ! 
 Isaiah was a true Prophet, when he said ** The wisdom of their 
 wise men shall perish^ and the luiderstanding of their prudent 
 men be hid," (29 : 14.) Can any reliance be placed in what these 
 men say, when they contradict each other so ? I can not afford to 
 build upon such contradictory statements ? Mr. B. has signally 
 failed to prove that the Book of iMormoii inscriptions were not 
 Egyptian and until he furnishes the pro f, we must regard the 
 Church of the Saints " as the Church of Christ." 
 
 The Book of Mormon claims to have been written in "Re- 
 formed Egyptian," or a blending of the Hebrew and Egyptian 
 and possibly other languages. The language used among the 
 people was in this respect somewhat similar to our English lang- 
 uajfe. The roots from which our words come, are from many 
 languages. So the English language is a blending of many 
 languages. The language of the Book of Mormon people was 
 a blending of at least two — Egyptian and Hebrew. The Indians 
 are from the same stock. We have found evidences that they are 
 of Hebrew descent, an,d that much of their language is similar to 
 the Hebrew. Can we find any evidence that they ever had any 
 knowledge of Egyptian, We will read a clipping from an 
 American paper : — . 
 
 SECRET ORDERS AMONG EGYPTIANS AND INDIANS. 
 
 Columbus, Neb., Sept. 3. 
 Editor World Herald,— The following paragraph occurs in your 
 issue of August 6th : — 
 
 " Glimpses of the Midway," 
 " Tie that binds the Red Man to the Egyptian," 
 
 " Egyptologists may find food for reflection in the fact that 
 Egyptians in the streets of Cairo and a number of Indians at the 
 exposition have discovered, that they belong to the same secret organiza- 
 tion. The Egyptians claimed that they learned the signs and words of 
 the order in far away Egypt, while the /^ed men know the unwritten words 
 but never were in Egypt." 
 
 Egyptologists may not be prepared to explain this tie between the 
 Red man and Egyptian, but there are statements made by revelation 
 which have awaited many years, this incident of the Exposition to give 
 an added proof of the divinity ot the Book of Mormon. 
 
 First : It teaches that 2500 years ago descendents of Joseph, 
 like him. learned in all the knowledge of the Egyptians, migrated from 
 Jerusalem and settled in the land now known as America. 
 
 Second : These Hebrews retained their knowledge of the 
 Egyptian and made use of its characters upon both sacred and historical 
 plates from which the Book of Mormon was finally translated' It is, 
 however, stated that the true Egyptian became corrupted by use and was 
 known among them as " reformed Egyptian." 
 
 Third : One or more powerful societies were known among them, 
 the principal being called " Gadiantoii " and this at times was more potent 
 than either civil or sacred law, 
 
56 
 
 iFourth : Because of their final great wickedness they were 
 cursed, becoming dark-skinned, in fact we know them as the American 
 Indian. 
 
 Filth : While the Egyptians continued this secret society from 
 au unknown past to the present day, and members of it are visiting the 
 Trans-Mississippi Exposition [at Omaha, Nebraska] , the Hebrews carried 
 the secret knowledge of the same secret order across the Pacific and 
 instituted it upon American soil, which, coming down through these 
 aborigines, was acquired by the Red Men of to-day, some of whom also 
 appeared at the exposition and recognised the mystic signs of their 
 ancient brotherhood. 
 
 Though not recognised by the Saints as one of their number, the 
 writer has ot late been interested in the multiplying proofs of the 
 genuineness of Joseph Smith's claims, and I am convinced that we, Hke 
 the Jews ot old, must build up a sepulchre to the prophet our fathers 
 have slain ; otherwise our cause may be worse in judgment than that of 
 the Utati apostasy. 
 
 W. K. Lay. 
 
 How comes it that the North American Indians at the expo- 
 sition, recognised the signs of an Egyptian Secret Society, if their 
 forefathers had never been in Egypt ? 
 
 And how could they know the unwritten words of an Egypt- 
 ian Society, without having some Egyptian words in their vocabu- 
 lary .^ These questions must be very embarassing, to those who 
 would have us believe that the ancient inhabitants of America had 
 no knowledge of Egyptian. 
 
 We have shown that there are both Uewbrew and Egyptian 
 words in the Indian vocabulary, and that they are not there by 
 chance — chance would never reveal the unwritten words of a secret 
 society. Is this not strong evidence that '* Reformed Egyptian " 
 (a bleading of Egyptian and Hebrew) was the current language at 
 the time when the Book of Mormon was written ? 
 
 *' Oh, yes," I have been told, "that seems to be very plain, 
 but what puzzles us, is how Joseph Smith, an ignorant lad, could 
 translate the language, when a learned man like Anthon failed to 
 do so." Isaiah says that the learned man would not be able to do 
 so, and that the book would be delivered to one that was not 
 learned. But would the unlearned mar translate it? In his 
 own strength, No ! But he would be able to do so, by mspiration 
 from God. 
 
 " Wherefore the Lord said, Fornsmuch as this people [those 
 living in the day and age in which this book shall come forth] draw near 
 HiC with their mouth, and with their lips do honor me, but have removed 
 their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept 
 of men : therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among 
 this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder; the wisdom of their 
 wist men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall 
 be hid." (v. 13-14.) 
 
 When God inspired Joseph Smith to translate the Book of 
 Mormon, he did '* proceed to do a marvellous work, even a mar- 
 vellous work and a wonder." We all believe that Moses was in- 
 ii^ired lo write the tirst five booHs of the Bible^ and was it less 
 
possible ^or God to inspire Joseph to translate this ancient record ? 
 Shall we. like those of old say, *' We know that God spake throuijh 
 Moses/' hut doubt thai He couLi inspire anyone to do a work for 
 him to day ? Perish the thought ! It smacks of infidelity, for 
 " with Him all things are possible." The Lord kept His 
 promise, and did such wonderful work in the bringing forth of 
 the Book of Mormon, that the good and true of earth's children 
 have declared it to be a marvellous work and a wonder, while the 
 scoffers and unbelieving have seen the wisdom of their wise men 
 perish, and the understanding of their prudent men has been 
 hidden, when they have endeavoured to fight against the work 
 which Ijod did. 
 
 They have hidden their counsel from their fellow men, and 
 have ** sought deep to hide it from the Lord," and they shall 
 surely feel the "woe" pronounced up them by the Him (v. 15). 
 
 But the prophet even points out the /ime when this marvel- 
 lous work should be done 
 
 " Is it not yet a very little while, and Lebanon shall be tnrned into 
 a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be esteemed as a forest ? 
 
 You see ! This marvellous work was to be performed just a 
 little while before the land of Palestine should be restored to its 
 ancient productiveness. You know that just after our Saviour 
 left the earth the Jews w^re scattered all over it, and the land * 
 which had once been so fertile, became a burren waste. For 
 many long centuries, it lay in this condition, until in 1853 the 
 former and latter rains began to return, and from that day onward 
 nature has conunued to exhibit her glories in that land. In 1856 
 ong bunch of grapes taken from the Mount of Olives weighed 19^ 
 pounds. I recently read that a much larger bunch than that has 
 been grown of late. Now, it was just a little while before 1853 
 that the maivellous work of bringing forth the Book of Mormon 
 ' was performed — 1827-30. Do you think that Isaiah was was a 
 true prophet when he foretold the coming forth of the Book and 
 its translation in a marvellous manner .'' If you do, that book 
 must come forth, and it must make its appearance before 1853, or 
 before ** Lebanon is turned into a fruitful field." It is too late 
 for it to come forth in the future, and no book, making such 
 claims, ever came forth before that date, Everything points to the 
 Book of Mormon as the sealed book of which Isaiah prophccied. 
 We will now devote a few moments to some internal evidences of 
 the truth of the book. The Book of Mormon -speaks of several 
 cities that were inhabited by the Nephites, and gives a fair de- 
 scription of their location. It fact it gives such a good descrip- 
 tion of their whereabouts, that we have read of explorers going 
 and finding the cities by the description given. 
 # * * # * 
 
 Since the lecture the following clipping has come into my 
 bands ;— 
 
*' femmett S. Compton, who is connected with Marvard Univei*- 
 sity, has become convinced that Joseph Smith did not make up all the 
 
 Mormon Bible An expedition from the Mormon 
 
 Church is now in Mexico and Central America, looking over the ruins of 
 great cities, and places of worship, seeking tor proofs of the authenti(iity 
 of their Bible. Mr. Compton, who is an auihority on archaeology was 
 invited to go with the party, but returned because he feared the hot 
 weather, having already had a touch of the fever which prevails in 
 Yucatan during the rainy season. 'I can't say that the Mormon faith 
 appears any less preposterous to me ^han it did,' Mr. Compton said at the 
 Brown Palace Hotel last night. ' But I am pretty well convinced that 
 some of the narratives on which it is based, relating to those old cities of 
 Yucatan, were not wholly imaginative. I don't feel at liberty to discuss 
 the matter at length, for you see I only went along because of my 
 
 knowledge in certain lines of archaeology, in tracing out ruins 
 
 "While I shall leave the detailed reports with reference to the Book of 
 Mormon to the representatives of that Church, with whom I am working, 
 I can say this, that we found cities and settlements, that fitted into the 
 accounts of cities and fortresses in the Mormon Bible in a way that could 
 not have been accidental. We found bas-reliefs describing battles and 
 journeys, and re'igious observances exactly as described in the words of 
 Joseph Smith. — The Denver Republican, June 9, 1900. 
 
 Mr. Compston tries to account for these remarkable 
 coincidents, by a theory, that some traveller had visited 
 the cities, apd had told Smith about them, and 
 furnished him with the material by vvhich he could describe 
 them. Is it likely, that any traveller would go and tell an obscure 
 young man such as Joseph Smith was, and not tell the rest of the 
 world? Hardly! Travellers generally let the world know by 
 publishing a book, describing their travels and discoveries. They 
 do not go and tell obscure young men. Besides, Mr. Compston 
 adds a little further down : — 
 
 " We went to places where I am sure no white man had been fof 
 centuries, cutting our way through the most tangled jungle you ever could 
 think of, and crossing swamps and rivers, where it was a fight to make 
 every foot of way." 
 
 How does this fit in with his theory that some traveller had 
 been there, and had told Joseph Smith of his discoveries ? 
 
 The only feasible way of accounting for this remarkable 
 coincidence, is by believing that He who is all powerful, assisted 
 Joseph Smith in the translation of the record left by these ancient 
 
 people. 
 
 * m * * tk 
 
 We will read a clipping from an American paper, describing 
 some of these cities. 
 
 " A DEAD NATION. Remarkable Discoveries Made i> 
 THE State of Chiapas. Mexico. Recently returned explorers from tht 
 State of Chiapas, confirm and add to the remarkable reports concerning 
 important archaeological discoveries, A fine broad paved road, built by 
 prehistoric inhabitants, has been traced from Tonala down into Guate 
 mala, and thence in a curve up into Mexico, terminating at Palenque, All 
 along the road are still to be seen the remains of ruined cities, and a 
 careful estimate of the population of these places is about 30,000,000, 
 Qn that part of the road near Palenque the ruins are of great magfnitud«, 
 
Mouses four and often Ave stories hi^h have been found in the depth o{ 
 the forest. Many of these houses are pyramidal in form, and so covered 
 are some of them with vegetable mould that large trees are growing from 
 the roofs. In some of the houses great employment has been made o^ 
 stone beams of tremendous weight; and the architecture indicates a high 
 degree of scientific attainments." 
 
 How do you account for these discoveries ? Do you 
 think that Joseph Smith sent someone down there to build these 
 cities simply to bolster up the claims of the Book of Mormon ? 
 No I That is absurd ! 30,000,000 of a population I Why should 
 not God inturm us of his dealings with such a nation ? But we 
 must hasten to a conclusion. The last and greatest evidence 
 which we can present in defence of the Divine authenticity of the 
 Book of Mormon is that God Himself has confirmed it by signs 
 and wonders, and miracles, just as He confirmed the mission of 
 Jesus 1900 years ago. Thousands of people the world over can 
 testily that they have beheld His mighty power. We have seen 
 His mighty arm made bare in this land, just as in days of old. 
 I have seen the gifts of " tongues " and *' prophecy," and have 
 seen the liberal fulfillment of the prophecies uttered. I have 
 also seen the sick healed in a way that was truly miraculous. 
 Many upon whom I have myself laid hands have testified that 
 they were healed instantaneously. Some of them aie here to-night. 
 I was raised from a bed of fever when a boy by the power of 
 God. I also remember that for years before my mother united 
 with the Church she was a helpless cripple to rheumatism. The 
 only way in which she could walk was by shoving a chair ahead 
 of her, and pulling herself along by it. But when she joined the 
 Church she was instantly healed, and has never been troubled 
 witti it since, No wonder she is a firm believer in this Latter 
 Day work I A Utile while ago while away up the North Coast I 
 met a young lady who told me that a while previous she had 
 suddenly become totally blind. She went to Sydney to consult a 
 specialist — had to be helped on to the steamer and off again, and 
 was led about the city by her friends. When Sunday afternoon 
 came she went to our chapel at Rozelle, and was administered to 
 in accordance with the instructions in James 5. She was instantly 
 healed, and is to-day a living witness of God's power. 
 m * * * * 
 
 Recently, while in Sydney, one of the young sisters there 
 
 told me that she was suffering from the effects of a severe chill, 
 
 caught at the mountains during a snowstorm three months before. 
 
 She had an awful cough, pitiful to listen to, and her mother 
 
 became alarmed, for she gave every sign of drifting into a decline. 
 
 She was administered lo, and as she sat in the chair had to put 
 
 her handkerchief into her mouth to keep from coughing. But 
 
 she did not cough afterwards, for by the power of God she was 
 
 instantly healed. 
 
 * ♦ ♦ ♦ * 
 
6o 
 
 We will now read an account of a miracle performed in 
 the days of Joseph Smith. It is from a book published by the 
 Church to which Mr. B. belongs. — Hayden's History of the 
 Disciples, p. 250-251. 
 
 " Ezra Booth, of Mantua, a Methodist preacher of much more 
 than ordinary culture, and with strong natural abilities, in company with 
 his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, and some other citizens of this place, 
 visited Smith at his home in Kinland in 1831. Mrs. Johnson had been 
 afflicted for some time with a lame arm, and was not at the time of the 
 visit able to lift her hand to her head. The party visited Smith partly 
 out of curiosity and partly to see for themselves what there might be in 
 the new doctrine. During the interview the subject turned on the subject 
 of supernatural gifts, such as were conferred in the days of the Apostles. 
 Someone said, • Here is Mrs. Johnson with a lame arm ; has Cod given 
 any power to men now on earth to cure her ?' A few moments later, 
 when the conversation had turned in another direction, Smith rose, and 
 walking across the room, taking Mrs. Johnson by the hand, said in the 
 most solemn and impressive manner : ' Woman, in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, I command thee to be whole' and immediately left the room. 
 The company were awe -stricken at the infinite presumption of the man' 
 and the calm assurance with which he spoke, The sudden mental and 
 moral shock — I know not how better to explain the well-attested fact — 
 electrified the rheumatic arm. Mrs. Johnson at once lifted it with ease 
 and on her return home the next day she was able to do her washing 
 without difficulty or pain." 
 
 Here is a latter day miracle, acknowledged in the history *of 
 Mr, B.'s own Church. I am always amused when I read that 
 extract, at the inconsistency of the writer. He attributes to shoe k 
 that which he does not think it possible for the Lord to do. Why 
 it just reads like a Pharisaic explanation of one of the miracles 
 of Jesus. But Mr. B. says he has been an elder of our Church, 
 and has laid on hands, without any result. Says that one year, 
 he kept an account of every administration, and watched to see 
 if there would any result follow. Is that an argument against 
 miracles to-day .' No, but it is a strong argument against his 
 faith ! Jesus said '* These signs shall folloiv them that believe, 
 , . . . . They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall 
 recover (Mark 16: 15-16). Did Jesus make an empty promise .'^ 
 No ! Then why was it these people did not recover.? It is very 
 plain that Mr. B. did not believe. He calls attention to the strik- 
 ing of Simon Magus blind by Paul, and the raising of Dorcas 
 from the dead by Peter as " evidence," that faith was not a neces- 
 sary factor on the part of the person healed, in the healing of the 
 sick. What childish nonsense ! Was it a case of " healing," 
 when Simon Magnus was struck blind ? And I believe it was a 
 case of raising of the dead when Dorcas was raised. Take all 
 the miracles of Jesus and His apostles, and you will find that 
 faith was always exhibited by the persons healed. In Matt. 13 : 
 58, we read that when Jesus was in His own country, among His 
 own kingfolk, '* He did not many mighty works there because of 
 their unbelief." 
 
6t 
 
 Well, friends, we must close now, with a brief summary of 
 the facts adduced. We have examined several charges made 
 against the Book of Mormon and its translator, but not one of 
 them has been substantiated. On the other hand we had quite a 
 " cloud of witnesses," testify to the truth of the book. First, the 
 emphatic testimony of eleven good men, and true, that it is a 
 divine record. Next the testimony of tens of thousands to the 
 same fact, revealed to them from on hii2:h. Then the testimony 
 of the Scriptures — plain and unequivocal. Archaeology, also, 
 has borne witness to many important statements made within the 
 book. But last, and best of all, God has borne witness that the 
 book is the work of His hands, by confirmii\g it, just as he con- 
 firmed the mission of Christ. What do you think of it, friends ? 
 Do you think that Joseph Smith; an ignorant farmer boy, began 
 by getting those 1 1 men to perjure themselves, and has since 
 fooled tens of thousands into perjuring themselves? Do you 
 think that he bribed the Old Testament writers to piU those evi- 
 dences into the Bible ? Did he go and learn the Indians Hebrew 
 and Egyptian in order to show that the ancient language was 
 " Reformed Egyptian ?" Did he go and teach them the signs 
 and unwritten words of that Egvptian Secret Society ? Did he 
 go down to Central America and build those ruins of ancient 
 cities in which it is estimated 30 millions of people lived. Ah ! 
 No ! Such thoughts are absurd. The evidences which we have 
 adduced are one long line of strong proofs that declare in words 
 of thunder that the Book of Mormon is a divine record. We 
 thank you, and conclude by saying that wherever, and whenever, 
 the *• Campbellite Church" will furnish a man who will affirm that 
 their Church is the Church of Jesus Christ, in faith, organisation, 
 doctrine, laws, and usages, we will furnish a man who will affirm 
 the same for our Church. 
 
 Truth having nothing to fear, is open and fair ; while error, 
 posing as the truth, skulks in the dark, afraid to come out into 
 the open, lest the counterfeit be revealed. 
 
1900. 
 
 HuTToN Printing and Paper Company. 
 
 f 
 
 Lambton and Wallsend. 
 
 >»'>*5^»5!We»> ^/=^/=O^CP^:fiel^^.t!jl^jl^j^^ ^^e^^^f^r^jf^^^!^J^^M