RLDS Church History Search

Chapter Context

RLDS History Context Results

Source: Church History Vol. 3 Chapter 18 Page: 350 (~1863-1864)

Read Previous Page / Next Page

350 made the copy, or rather, deceitfully kept the original. In his direct examination he said:-

"I knew in regard to the revelation concerning the doctrine of plural marriage, cannot tell you exactly when I first saw it; it was along in the middle of July somewhere, in 1842. Yes, I guess it was in 1842.

"Bishop Whitney got the revelation, and presented it to me, and wanted me to copy it, and so I went into a room by myself, and copied it; that is, I copied the revelation on plural marriage that he handed me, and just as I got through copying it, Hyrum Smith came in and wanted it,-the original revelation was what he wanted.

"He came in to see how I got along with it; that is, Bishop Whitney did, and then he went out and told Hyrum Smith that he would hand him the revelation in a few minutes, for I was not quite through making the copy. When I had got through making the copy, I took the one I had made myself and read it, and he took the other and read it at the same time to see if I had made any mistakes, and that it was correct, and when he found that it was all correct, he took the one that I had made, and went out and handed it to Hyrum Smith, who was outside the door ready to take it. I copied it just a day or two after it was given. The revelation I copied is just the same as the one published in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants by the Salt Lake Church in Defendant's Exhibit A."-Plaintiff's Abstract, pp. 333, 334.

It will be seen that the copyist is about one year too early in his dates. If notwithstanding his inaccuracy we accept this man's testimony, we must do so at the expense of his veracity and honesty, for he states that when Hyrum Smith came for the original, he and Whitney gave him a copy instead, and of course kept the original.

To accept this theory we must further believe that Hyrum Smith could be deceived by the substitution of a copy for the original, when one was in the handwriting of William Clayton, and the other in the handwriting of J. C. Kingsbury. Again, if we grant this theory notwithstanding its inconsistencies, it leads us to suspect that men guilty of such duplicity might fail to make a true copy.

(page 350)

Read Previous Page / Next Page

Amazing Testimony: When a NON-Christian finds the Book of Mormon..

RLDS Church History Search