Chapter 7


  1 Memoirs, pp. 57, 1 96; Anderson, Ancestry and Posterity , pp. 567-569; and
Joseph Smith III, "Reminiscences of Liberty Hall," Autumn Leaves 22 (December
1909):529-533.

  2 Joseph Smith III early enunciated his cautious course in "An Address to
the Saints," SH 1 (November 1860):254-256. He repeatedly counseled the Saints in
the Herald , in letters, and in person not to be overzealous about gathering. A
small sampling of such sentiments is collected in Heman C. Smith, "The Return,"
Journal of History 9 (April 1916):156-165. See also Launius, "And There Came
Prophets in the Land Again," pp. 246-260.

     3 Samuel A. Burgess, "The Regions Round About Jackson County and
Missouri," Journal of History 17 (July 1924):293-308.

  4 A. R. Blair, "Lamoni, Iowa--Way Stop on Return Road to Zion, "
Restoration Trail Forum 4 (August 1978):1, 3-4; and Launius, "And There Came
Prophets in the Land Again," pp. 260-275.

 Memoirs, pp. 194-197.

  6 Dennis Michael Quinn, "The Mormon Hierarchy, 1832-1932: An American
Elite," Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1976, pp. 126-127. After the death of
Brigham Young, Erastus Snow and Orson Hyde fell into conversation about the
late president's finances. One of them said, "I never want to see another
president die a millionaire." Joseph S. Hyde, "Orson Hyde," Ms 193, University of
Utah, p. 90. Cf. pp. 84-85.

  7 The first Utah edition of the Doctrine and Covenants did not appear until
1876. Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, p. 78, n. 34, remarks
that the 1876 edition--which included for the first time the revelation on celestial
marriage (Section 132)--was aimed at bolstering LDS claims, in the Reynolds case,
that plural marriage was a part of the Mormon religion. In 1879 another Utah
edition--with versification by Orson Pratt--appeared. Since that time new
printings and editions have appeared regularly in Utah.
  The Pearl of Great Price first appeared in a Utah edition in 1878. Chad J.
Flake, comp., A Mormon Bibliography 1830-1930: Books Pamphlets Periodicals,
and Broadsides Relating to the First Century of Mormonism (Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Press, 1978), p. 492, cites rumors that Brigham Young's
hostility to the book caused it not to be printed in Utah during his lifetime.

  8 Stenhouse, The Rocky Mountain Saints, pp. 662-663, states that Brigham
Young intended for Brigham Young, Jr. to succeed him as president of the church
and that this objective underlay the secret ordination of Brigham, Jr. and two
other sons as apostles in 1864. Of the three, only Brigham Young, Jr. ever was
admitted to the Quorum of Twelve.
     Quinn, "The Mormon Succession Crisis of 1844," p. 221, n. 92, cites
Stenhouse's statement that Brigham, Jr. was being groomed for the succession. "I
have found no evidence to suggest that President Young intended his son to be his
immediate successor to the presidency of the Church. On the other hand, he
undoubtedly anticipated that eventually one of his sons would become the
president by virtue of being the senior apostle in the Church. Ordaining John W.
Young an apostle at the age of eleven may have been a step in that direction."
But Quinn also notes, p. 220, that seniority in the Quorum of Twelve was not
unanimously adhered to in the nineteenth century. After the deaths of both
Brigham Young and John Taylor, some members of the quorum favored making
Joseph F. Smith the new president.
     John Codman, The Mormon Country. A Summer with the "Latter-day
Saints" (New York: United States Publishing Company, 1874), p. 16, stated that
Brigham Young was said to favor the claims of Brigham Young, Jr. to succeed
him.
     Stanley B. Kimball, Heber C. Kimball: Mormon Patriarch and Pioneer
(Urbana, Chicago, and London: University of Illinois Press, 1981), p. 294, contains
additional information concerning Brigham Young, Jr. being his father's heir
apparent.
     Jason W. Briggs was in Utah during Brigham Young's last years and
commented with biting irony upon his inconsistent attempt to establish a Young
dynasty after repudiating lineage as the basis for succession in the 1840s. See
"Assumption--Extraordinary," The Messenger of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints 1 (June 1875):32; and "Brigham Young's Successor," The
Messenqer of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 2 (June 1876):30.
     E. W. Tullidge, Life of Joseph the Prophet, p. 621, reported that in 1856 or
1857 he questioned Orson Pratt about the rumor that Brigham Young had ordained
his three eldest sons as apostles, with the intention that Brigham, Jr. would
succeed to the presidency. Pratt replied, "I guess the Twelve will choose their
own president at the death of President Young." Tullidge then and there
concluded that the Twelve had determined that there would be no Young dynasty.

     9 Shortly before his death, Brigham Young stripped Orson Hyde of his
seniority in the Quorum of Twelve and made John Taylor the new president of the
Twelve. After Young's death, Taylor delayed forming a new First Presidency until
after the death of Orson Hyde, November 28, 1878. The reason, as he told one of
Orson Hyde's sons, was that he felt the presidency rightly belonged to Hyde. "No,
I could not do otherwise, because I would have been taking your father's place.
The presidency, rightfully, under the order of the Priesthood, would have been
upon Orson Hyde." Joseph S. Hyde, "Orson Hyde," p. 89.

      10 Reed C. Durham, Jr. and Steven H. Heath, Succession in the Church (Salt
Lake City: Bookcraft Inc, 1970), pp. 78-95.

      11 Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, pp. 77-80.

      12 Ibid., pp. 92-93.

      13 Ibid., pp. 93 & 96.

     14 Ibid., pp. 94-95.

  15 John Wentworth--former mayor of Chicago, six-term congressman, and
editor of the Chicago Democrat--was prominent in organizing the meeting. At
Wentworth's suggestion, E. . Cragin, the chairman of the rally, invited Joseph
Smith IIl to participate. See Joseph Smith III to John Wentworth, February 18,
1882, LB #3, p. 427.

  16 This summary of Joseph Smith III's remarks is based on the extensive
account in the Chicaqo Daily Tribune, February 23, 1882, p. 6. Since the account
in the Tribune is a summary, it should be compared with Joseph Smith III to E. F.
Cragin, February 18, 1882, LB #3, pp. 417-426. The letter to Cragin, chairman of
the meeting, was written as an outline of his views, at a time when Joseph Smith
III feared he might not be able to attend the meeting.

 Joseph Smith III, et al., Memorial to Congress from a Committee of the
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, on the Claims and Faith
of the Church (Plano, Illinois: True Latter Day Saints’ Herald  Steam Book Office,
[1870] ).
  In 1875 the Semi-Annual Conference appointed H. J. Hudson, P. Cadwell,
and J. W. Briggs to draft another memorial to Congress, urging "more decisive
measures in the suppression of misrule and tyranny in Utah." The memorial urged
stricter law enforcement, voting guarantees, jury reform, appointment of
postmasters who would deliver anti-Mormon materials, and property guarontees
for Gentiles. HRC 4: 114-117.

  18 Joseph Smith III and Henry A. Stebbins to Rutherford B. Hayes, August
16, 1878, LB #1, pp. 424-426. Additional correspondence concerning Cadwell's
proposed nomination is found in LB #1, pp. 427-428 & 440-448. In P15, f25 and
P24, f44, RLDS Archives, are undated form letters in Joseph Smith III’s hand,
endorsing Cadwell for governor of Utah. These form letters were sent to various
citizens of political influence with the request that they sign and forward them to
President Hayes. Cf. Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, p. 93,
n. 5.

  19 Joseph Smith III and W. W. Blair to Rutherford B. Hayes, [January 1879],
P 1 5, f25, RLDS Archives; Joseph Smith III and W. W. Blair to Rutherford B.
Hayes, January 21, 1879, LB #2, p. 73; Joseph Smith III to Mrs. Rutherford B.
Hayes, December 29, 1879, LB #2, pp. 433-434; and Joseph Smith III to James A.
Garfield, June 18, 1880, LB #3, pp. 160-162. In 1879-1880, Joseph Smith III also
corresponded with Congressmen J. C. Burrows and Edwin Willitts. See LB #2, pp.
435, 436, 45 1 -454, 455-456, and 458.

  20 While in Washington, Gurley and Kelley published two pamphlets to
advance their cause: The Utah Problem and the Solution (Washington, D.C.: J. M.
Burnett, 1882) and Polygamy a Crime Not a Religion (N.p.: n.p., 1882). The
latter was in reply to criticisms in the Deseret News of January 24, 1882.
  In 1888 E. L. Kelley recalled:
  "Our church originated the Edmunds Law againts [sic] polygamy in the
Terri
Judiciary Committee in answer to the argument of George Q. Cannon. Written
arguments were presented to every member of the Forty-Seventh Congress."
Excerpt from an interview in the Cincinnati Telegram, May 18, 1888, as reprinted
in SH 35 (June 2, 1888):349-350.

     21 SH 29 (February 15, 1882):59. On Gurley and Kelley's activities in
Washington, see Zenas H. Gurley, Jr. to Joseph Smith III, Febrvary 16, 1882;
printed in SH 29 (March 1, 1882):75.

     22 SH 29 (May 1, 1882):138. Joseph Smith III privately relished his triumph.
In 1885 he recalled: "When the Edmunds Bill was pending, I filed a bill in
replication, and made the fight o three cornered one, sending two able men, one a
good lawyer, to meet G. C3. Cannon before the Committee. . . . Congress at last
assumed the ground I had occupied for years, that polygamy was not necessarily
religion; the law was passed the way prepared and new fearless men are enforcing
the law. Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, May 5, 1885, RLDS Archives.

     23 Joseph F. Smith to John Henry Smith, March 5, 1882, University of Utah.

     24 Deseret News, May 13, 1882, as cited in HRC 4:384-385.

     25 SH 29 (June 1, 1882):172-173.

     26 Secretary of State William M. Evarts' Circular Letter No. 10 of August
9, 1879 is found in U.S., Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign
Policy of the United States Transmitted to Congress with the Annual Message of
the President, December 1, 1879, pp. 11-12.

     27 SH 29 (October 15, 1882):332. A manuscript copy of the document
conveyed to Secretary Frelinghusen, dated February 13, 1883, is found in P19, f44,
RLDS Archives.

     28 Memoirs, pp. 201-202. The memorial--a rather lengthy document--
explained that the RLDS Church was o non-polygamous Church of Latter Day
Saints, numbering about 20,000 members. In particular it stated that confusion
with the polygamous and disloyal Mormon Church worked to its disadvantage,
especially since Evarts' circular letter. "The effect of this letter was such that in
Germany, Switzerland, France, Denmark, Italy, Norway and the Society Islands,
missionaries of the Reorganized Church were regarded with suspicion and were
refused liberty to propagandize, as such liberty is given to missionaries of other
American churches." The text of the memorial is found in HRC 4:414-419.

     29 Ibid., p. 202. Cf. "Home Again," SH 30 (March 17, 1883):161-162.

     30 HRC 4:422.

     31 "Minutes of the Annual Conference," SH 3 (April 1863):196.

     32 Ibid.

     33 RLDS Council of Twelve Minutes, Book A, p. 34 (microfilm at RLDS
Archives).

      34 E. C. Briggs and R. W. Attwood, Address to the Saints in Utah and
California. Polygamy Proven an Abomination by Holy Writ. Is Brigham Young
President of the Church of Jesus Christ or Is He Not?., rev. by Joseph Smith III
and Wm. W. Blair (Plano, Illinois: Church of L.D.S., 1869). This tract
originally had been prepared for use as a missionary tool in Utah, and was revised
by Joseph Smith III and W. W. Blair. Its basic argument was that polygamy
violated both scripture and church law.

      35 Joseph Smith III, Reply to Orson Pratt (Plano, Illinois: True Latter Day
Saints' Herald  Office, [ 1870].

      36 Joseph Smith III to E. L. Kelley, October 30, 1884, RLDS Archives.

      37 Howard, "The Changing RLDS Response to Mormon Polygamy," pp. 16-
17.

      38 The debate with Littlefield is given extended treatment here, because it
is typical of the arguments repeated so often in later years by Joseph Smith III.
Later writings which add little to these basic arguments will not be treated at
length.

      39 Lyman O. Littlefield, "An Open Letter Addressed to President Joseph
Smith, Jr.," reprinted in SH 30 (August 1 1, 1883):513-516.

      40 Joseph Smith III gingerly avoided discussion of whether such evidence
had been presented to David H. Smith.

      41 Perhaps a reference to Servilla Durfee.

      42 The identity of this elder is not known.

      43 "Joseph Smith's Reply," SH 30 (August 18, 1883):530-533.

      44 "L. O. Littlefield's Second Letter," reprinted in SH 30 (August 25,
1883):545-548.

     45 "Joseph Smith's Second Reply," SH 30 (September 8, 1883):576-581.

     46 "The Church and Its Counterfeit," reprinted in SH 30 (June 23, 1883):393-
394.

     47 Actually Lyman Wight, although alienated much earlier, was not
formally excommunicated until 1848, so theoretically seven of the twelve apostles
at Joseph Smith's death were still members of the quorum.
      In SH 30 (July 7, 1883):425-426, Joseph Smith III realized that he had failed
to discuss the situation of Lyman Wight, but took the ground that Wight was no
longer a member of the quorum in 1847.

     48 "Deseret News Reviewed," SH 30 (June 23, 1883):393-396.

     49 "L, O. Littlefield Makes Another Reply to Joseph Smith," reprinted in SH
30 (September 15, 1883):595-599.

     50 "Joseph Smith's Third Letter. He Denies that Abrahom and Moses Were
Polygamists," SH 30 (September 29, 1883):628-630.
     51 "Littlefield's Reply to Joseph Smith's Third Letter," reprinted in SH 30
(October 6, 1883):644-646.

     52 "Surfeited," SH 30 (November 3, 1883):697-698.

     53 "Joseph Smith's Fourth Letter to L. O. Littlefield," SH 30 (November 3,
1883):705-708.

     54 Richard Lyle Shipley, "Voices of Dissent: The History of the
Reorganized Church in Utah, 1863-1900," M.S. thesis, Utah State University,
1969, pp. 7 -73.

     55 See Alma R. Blair, "The Tradition of Dissent--Jason W. Briggs," in
Draper and Vlahos, Restoration Studies 1, pp. 146-161.
     Initially Briggs' writings in the Messenger were standard RLDS fare, but
when he began to question not only the LDS but the RLDS understandings of
scriptural inspiration, the gathering, and pre-existence, conservatives within the
church began clamoring that he be silenced.

     56 See Clare D. Vlahos, "The Challenge to Centralized Power: Zenus H.
Gurley, Jr., and the Prophetic Office," Couraqe: A Journal of History, Thought
and Action 1 (March 1971):141-158.
     Gurley's complaint was that a conference resolution established the
Doctrine and Covenants as dogmatic authority for the church. He was unwilling
to affirm that every revelation contained in the book was divinely inspired. The
refusal of Joseph Smith III to print his letters in the Herald  added fuel to the fire
and led to his temporary resignation as an apostle. Finally he withdrew from the
church in 1886.

     57 W. W. Blair to Hemon C. Smith, [January 1896?], LB #7, pp. 16-21.

     58 E.g., Joseph Smith III to John Codman, December 15, 1884, LB #4, pp.
132-135.

     59 On the problems in Salt Lake City see Shipley, "Voices of Dissent," pp.
78-79 & 87; and Stephen J. Bradley, "Josephites in Utah," copy of lecture given
July 10, 1966, LDS Archives, pp. 10-13.

     60 Ibid., pp. 80, 91, 93-94.

     61 R. J. Anthony to Joseph Smith III, February 1 6, 1882, RLDS Archives.
(Spelling as in original.)

     62 Shipley, "Voices of Dissent," pp. 68, 87-90.

     63 Memoirs, pp. 221-222. Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, May 5, 1885,
RLDS Arc i  ve contains the following explanation of his reasons for going to
Utah:
     "The time is as you say opportune. My first intention, that of helping to
unshackle the innocent in Utah, is still good. My purpose has not wavered in the
least. My labor has been long and hard to get a hearing; first of the outside world,
then of the people in Utah. I could not get the second, until I had the first I could
not fight the world, (the U.S[.]); the flesh, (polygamy) and the Devil, (the lies
told of Mormonism), as a combination; so had to take them in detail. . . .
  "Now I am ready in mind to go to Utah. . . . My proposition is to make the
fight upon the same grounds that I have occupied from the first~that polygamy is
not Mormonism, has never been leqally, occording to the law of the church itself,
and can not be. That if Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage, he was a
transgressor of law, both secular, and divine. . . .
  "I propose to admit nothing; except what is proved, and shall insist upon
good evidence for that, respecting the introduction of polygamy and shall try to
lead the better disposed to a better philosophy, as you suggest that they can be
good saints and be good citizens; retaining faith, church relationship, citizenship,
homes and prestige if they will."
  64 "Salt Lake District," SH 32 (April 25, 1885):272. R. J. Anthony reported
that many were asking the question, as quoted.

  65 W. W. Blair, "Salutatory," SH 32 (April 25, 1885):257; Conference
Minutes in SH 32 (May 9, 1885):293. In SH 32 (May 16, 1885), Joseph Smith III
commented upon his resignation as a member of the Board of Publication and
instructed readers to send all subscriptions, orders, remittances, and other
business to David Dancer, the Business Manager.

  66 Joseph Smith III to James Whitehead, September 8, 1884, LB #1A, pp.
262-263.

 Joseph Smith III, Journal, April 20, 1885, RLDS Archives.

 W. W. Blair, Journal, June 17, 1874, RLDS Archives.

 Complainant’s Abstract, pp. 28-29, 32-33.

  70 SH 32 (June 27, 1885):414; (July 4, 1885):428. Joseph Smith III, Journal,
June 17, 1885, RLDS Archives, states that he arrived on June 17th, while the
notice in the Herald  states that he arrived on the 18th.
  An overview of his itinerary, sightseeing, and social visits can be found in
his journal and in Audentia Anderson, "My Father's Letters," Vision 45 (January
1932):35-37; (February 1932):83-85; and (March 1932):121-123, 131.

  71 Memoirs, pp. 221-222. On Joseph Smith III's early activities in Salt Lake
City and the reaction of the press, see SH 32 (July 4, 1885):427-428; (July 11,
1885):455-456; and (July 18, 1885):464. In SH 32 (April 18, 1885):241, Joseph
Smith III suggested the sort of revelation John Taylor might deliver, abrogating
polygamy. The reaction of the Deseret News was reprinted in "Sacrilegious and
Hypocritical," SH 32 (July 4, 1885 :433-434. Joseph Smith III's reply is found in SH
32 (July 18, 1885):459-460.
  A description of Joseph Smith III's reception in Utah is given in Ethan
Barrows, "The Journal of Ethan Barrows," Journal of History 15 (July 1922):446-
447. Barrows, an RLDS convert in Utah, ascribed the failure of the prophet's son
to reap conversions to the spiritual deadness of the Mormon people and prejudicial
stories in the Deseret Evening News.

  72 Memoirs, pp. 237-242; and notices in SH 32 (August 29, 1885):555-556;
(September 5, 1885):574; (September 12, 1885):592; (September 19, 1885):603-604;
(September 26, 1885):619; (October 17, 1885):670-671; and (October 24, 1885):688.

  73 Glade F. Howell, "Early History of Malad Valley," M.A. thesis, Brigham
Young University, 1960, pp. 66-68 ond 88-90.

  74 Memoirs, pp. 237-238. Examples of his championship of the Josephites
as Mormon reformers are found in John Codman's The Round Trip by Way of
Panama through California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, and Colorado: With
Notes on Railroads, Commerce, Agriculture, Mining, Scenery, and People (New
York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1879), pp. 210-21 1; "Mormonism," International
Review 11 (1881):221-224; and A Solution to the Mormon Problem (New York and
London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1885). Codman and Joseph Smith III had
corresponded prior to meeting in Idaho. See Joseph Smith III to John Codman,
December 15, 1884, LB #4, pp. 132-135.

  75 Memoirs, pp. 427-428, and "Fourth of July in Salt Lake City," SH 32 (July
25, 1885):475. Joseph Smith III editorialized that the Mormon leaders' approval of
the insult to the American flag was a mistake. He concluded that their cry of
persecution at the hands of unconstitutional measures was "a display of wilful
ignorance." He called upon that 98% of Mormon men who were not polygamists to
assert themselves and put a stop to "further exercise of the foolish wisdom being
displayed." Following the account of Salt Lake's Fourth of July, the Herald  ran an
article entitled "July Fourth at Lamoni," to show the contrast between Mormon
"disloyalty" and RLDS "loyalty." SH 32 (July 25, 1885):475-476.
 Memoirs, pp. 225-226; Journal, June 30, 1885.

 James W. Gillen to Joseph Smith III; printed in SH 10 (December 15,
1866):177. Gillen wrote that at the close of Alexander's address in Provo, "a man
by the name of Corey [sic]. . . endeavored to bolster up their tottering fabric by
telling what your father did and said as an offset against positive law, but his folly
was made manifest to every one that had sufficient manhood to think for
themselves."

  78 See Howard Coray's untitled autobiographical reminiscences, Mss 1422,
Brigham Young University. Here he left an account, pp. 25-26, of how Hyrum
Smith taught him and his wife the revelation on celestial marriage. When both
Howard and Martha Jane Coray proved receptive, Hyrum sealed them on the spot,
in his buggy.

 Memoirs, pp. 230-232; Journal, July 10, 1885.

  80 Melissa Lott was born on January 9, 1824. She married Joseph Smith on
September 20, 1843. The marriage was recorded in the family Bible, which is now
in the possession of the LDS Church. See Brodie, No Man Knows My History, pp.
482-483, and Joseph Fielding Smith, Blood Atonement and the Origin of Plural
Marriage, pp. 55, 72.

  81 Joseph Smith III's account is found in Memoirs, pp. 244-246; Journal,
October 20, 1885; and Complainant's Abstract, pp. 489-490 For Melissa Lott
Willis' version, see Temple Lot Suit Transcript of Evidence, RLDS Archives, 2:93-
108, particularly pp. 97-98 and 107-108. (This typescript of the testimony is
henceforth cited as Temple Lot Transcript.)

  82 This question placed Melissa Lott Willis in an extremely embarrassing
position. Emma Smith Bidamon was highly respected among the women of Nauvoo
and noted for her veracity. Presumably, Melissa thought that Emma was ignorant
of Joseph's plural marriages. But, assuming the contrary, it would mean
impeaching Emma's reputation before her son to contradict Emma's "Last
Testimony." Furthermore, Melissa Lott Willis' testimony, Temple Lot Transcript,
2:101, 105-106, indicates that she cohabited with the prophet without Emma's
knowledge in the Mansion House. No matter how she answered this question, she
felt embarrassed and compromised.

  83 In Temple Lot Transcript, 2:93, Melissa Lott Willis said that Hyrum
Smith performed the wedding ceremony.

  84 In Temple Lot Transcript, 2:93, 97, 105-107, she testified that she
cohabited with Joseph Smith as his wife, both at the farm and at the Mansion
House. She even named Room No. One as the location in the Mansion House.

  85 During the Temple Lot case, under questioning which was extremely
frank for that time and place, she more than once bristled when a question was
too indelicate. She simply would not tell Joseph Smith III because to do so would
be unladylike. On p. 97, of her testimony she noted that during the interview at
Lehi she respected him as a gentleman and he respected her as a lady. Respect
for the social conventions of the day prevented Melissa Lott Willis from speaking
frankly to Joseph Smith III.

 Joseph Smith III's account of this interview is found in Memoirs, p. 235.

  87 This piece of dialogue was recounted by John R. Young to Vesta Pierce
Crawford, April 1931, University of Utah. After returning from Salt Lake City
to St. George, Foster gave his account of the interview in a testimony meeting.
John R. Young was present at the meeting.
  Concerning the episode between Eliza R. Snow and Emma Smith, see
Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, Linda King Newell, and Valeen Tippetts Avery,
"Emma and Eliza and the Stairs," Briqham Young University Studies 22 (Winter
1982):87-96.

 See "A Noble Woman," The Anti-Polygamy Standard 2 (February
1882):81.


  89 Sarah Pratt was one of the principal sources for W. Wyl's Joseph Smith
the Prophet: His Family and Friends (Salt Lake City: Tribune Publishing
Company, 1886). For additional background about Sarah Pratt's views on
polygamy, see Elden J. Watson, comp., The Orson Pratt Journals (Salt Lake City:
Elden Jay Watson, 1975), pp. 178ff, 515-516, 559-562, 590-593.

 Memoirs, pp. 32-34. Sarah Pratt gave her version of this interview to W.
Wyl, who reproduced his notes of her story in Joseph Smith the Prophet: His
Family and Friends, pp. 60-61, as follows:
     "Joseph Smith, the son of the prophet, and president of the re-organized
Mormon church, paid me a visit, and I had a long talk with him. I saw that he was
not inclined to believe the truth about his father, so I said to him: 'You pretend to
have revelations from the Lord. Why don't you ask the Lord to tell you what kind
of a man your father really was?' He answered: 'If my father had so many
connections with women, where is the progeny?' I said to him: 'Your father had
mostly intercourse with married women, and as to single ones, Dr. Bennett was
always on hand, when anything happened."'
     This source must be used with caution due to its bias and uncertain
methods of transcription and documentation. Assuming that both Joseph Smith
III's and Wyl's accounts record parts of the actual conversation, a reconciliation
between them can be affected as follows: (1) Both Joseph Smith III and Sarah
Pratt gave one-sided accounts, recalling those aspects of the conversation
supporting their own biases. (2) Sarah Pratt denied that she ever became a plural
wife of Joseph Smith, because in fact she stoutly resisted such advances. (3)
Joseph Smith III dismissed as rumor, gossip, innuendo, or hearsay all of Sarah
Pratt's stories which were not based on her personal observation. (4) Joseph Smith
III's questions were framed carefully to elicit only those pieces of information
which bolstered his "case." (5) For a variety of other reasons Sarah Pratt did not
tell him everything she knew: a sense of futility in reasoning with a man whose
mind was made up, modesty, or a desire not to dissuade him from his anti-
polygamous warfare.
     One aspect, however, of Joseph Smith III's account cannot be reconciled
with other statements of Sarah Pratt, viz., ". . . your father never said an
improper word to me in his life. . . was never guilty of an action or proposal of an
improper nature. . . towards me, or in my presence, at any time or place." This
statement in Joseph's Memoirs probably represents a lapse of memory based upon
Sarah Pratt's statement that she had never been a plural wife of Joseph Smith, Jr.

     91 Memoirs, pp. 246, 257, 230, and 233-234.

     92 Ibid., pp. 247-248 & 257.

     93 Ibid., pp. 224-225.

     94 E.g.,, Lucy Young, James A. Browning, and a large number of men in
Nephi. See Memoirs, pp. 227, 243, and 254.

     95 Memoirs, p. 230.

     96 Ibid., p. 226.

     97 Ibid., pp. 247, 253, and 256.

     98 Ibid., pp. 244, 252, and 255.

     99 Ibid., pp. 242, 250-251, and 259-260.

     100 Ibid., pp. 256-257.

  101 Ibid., p. 256.

     102 Ibid., pp. 251-252, 257.

     103 Ibid., p. 230.

     104 Ibid., pp. 243, 259.

     105 Ibid., p. 223; Joseph Smith III, Journal, June 27, 1885.

     106 Memoirs, p. 230. See John Henry Smith to Francis M. Lyman, July 21,
1885, John Henry Smith Letterpress Book 1:419, University of Utah. Here John
Henry Smith stated: "The reorganized Joseph. . . and me ore warm friends."
Further details concerning Joseph III's visits with John Henry are found in John
Henry Smith to Joseph Smith III, John Henry Smith Letterpress Book 1:425. John
Henry reported that they had met four times and soon would do so again. Joseph
admitted to John Henry that "the spiritual wife doctrine" was taught in his
father's day and that he believed "his father may have been in transgression,"
but--in John Henry's estimation--Joseph quibbled over the words "marry" and
"seal." Here Joseph was employing James Whitehead's testimony about sealing for
eternity as his second line of defense. His third line of defense was to argue that
even if his father cohabited with women other than Emma Smith, this only proved
he had transgressed God's law.

      107 Memoirs, pp. 233 and 244.

      108 Joseph Fielding Smith, Life of Joseph F. Smith, pp. 252-262. The
Endowment House served as a surrogate temple in Salt Lake City. The Salt Lake
Temple was begun in 1853 but was not dedicated until 1893.

      109 Alexander H. Smith to W. H. Kelley, June 24, 1885, RLDS Archives.

      110 Joseph Smith III to W. H. Kelley, June 22, 1885, RLDS Archives.

      111 Joseph Fielding Smith, Life of Joseph F. Smith, pp. 280-286.

      112 See Joseph F. Smith's letters to Martha Ann Harris, January 26, 1885;
Sarah E. Richards Smith, March 1 1, 1885; Sarah E. Richards Smith, April 8-10,
1885; Sarah E. Richards Smith, April 6, 1886. All of the foregoing are photocopies
of originals, University of Utah.

      113 Memoirs, p. 233; cf. p. 223. That Joseph Smith III viewed his cousin as
a victim of polygamy is made clear in Joseph Smith III to Levira A. Smith,
February 3, 1880, LB #2, pp. 486-487.

     114 Memoirs, p. 260.

     115 See Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, October 13, 1885, RLDS
Archives. ln this letter he related his discussions concerning legislation and
appointments.

      116 Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, January 7, 1886, RLDS Archives.

     117 Concerning this controversy, see Blair, "The Tradition of Dissent--Jason
W. Briggs," pp. 146-161; Vlahos, "The Challenge to Centralized Power: Zenus H.
Gurley, Jr., and the Prophetic Office," pp. 141-158; Launius, "And There Came
Prophets in the Land Again," pp. 320-361; and Memoirs, p. 262.

     118 Zenas H. Gurley, Jr. to Joseph Smith III, April 6, 1869, RLDS Archives.
Additional letters to Joseph Smith III amplifying these views were written on
December 5, 1873, January 1, 1874, March 25, 1879, and August 7, 1879; all in
RLDS Archives.
     Joseph Smith III's general line of reply to Gurley is found in letters dated
October 23, 1878 (LB #1, pp. 49 1 -493), April 12, 1879 (LB #2, pp. 149- 156), and
July 24, 1879 (LB #2, pp. 275-277).

      119 Roger Launius, "Joseph Smith III and the Quest for a Centralized
Organization, 1860-1873," in Restoration Studies II: A Collection of Essays about
the History, Beliefs, and Practices of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints, ed. Maurice L. Draper and A. Bruce Lindgren (Independence,
Missouri: Herald  Publishing House, 1983), pp. 104-120, shows that by the mid-
1870s Joseph Smith III had gained a fair measure of ecclesiastical and doctrinal
control over the RLDS Church.

      120 Zenas H. Gurley, Jr., History of the Reorganization (N.p.: n.p., 1886).

      121 Littlefield used the affidavit from Soby and a statement from Mercy R.
Thompson to renew the controversy with Joseph Smith III. Joseph Smith III tried
to impeach their testimony by showing inconsistencies in it. He also secured a
letter from Z. H. Gurley stating that he secured the affidavit from Soby on his
own initiative, not Joseph Smith III's, contrary to Littlefield's allegation that
Joseph Smith III first sought the affidavit and then suppressed it. See Joseph
Smith III's letters to Lyman O. Littlefield, May 26, June 16, and June 24, 1886, LB
#4, pp. 247-252, 253-257, and 261-262. Also see Joseph Smith III to Z. H. Gurley,
Jr., March 5, 1886, LB #4, pp. 234-235. Littlefield's position can be found in The
Historical Record 6:227-228.

      122 Biographical and Historical record of Ringgold and Decatur Counties,
Iowa. Containing Portraits of All the Presidents of the United States from
Washington to Cleveland, with Accompanying Biographies of Each; a Condensed
History of the State of Iowa; Portraits and Biographies of the Governors of the
Territory and State; Engravings of Prominent Citizens in Ringgold and Decatur
Counties, with Personal History of Many of the Leading families, and a Concise
History of Ringgold and Decatur Counties and Their Cities and Villages (Chicago:
Lewis Publishing Company, 1887), pp. 543-544.

     123 One Wife or Many," The Return 1 (November 1889):174-175. Copies of
the affidavit of Ebenezer and Angeline E. Robinson, dated December 29, 1873, are
found in both the RLDS Archives and the LDS Archives. Robinson's views were
well known to members of the RLDS hierarchy long before his break with the
church. See Ebenezer Robinson to E. L. Kelley, November 24, 1879; and Ebenezer
Robinson to Jason W. Briggs, January 28, 1880; LDS Archives.

      124 David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ. By a Witness to
the Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon (Richmond, Missouri: n.p., 1887).
Among other things, Whitmer stated, pp. 38-39, that he had as much evidence to
believe that Joseph Smith received the revelation on polygamy as to believe that
George Washington ever lived. "I never saw General Washington, but from
reliable testimony I believe that he did live." He cited as evidence the first
number of the True Latter Day Saints' Herald . He alleged that the present
leadership of the Reorganization would like to forget the statements made in that
number, by Isaac Sheen and William Marks, seeking to disconnect Joseph Smith
from the origin of polygamy in order to ovoid public odium. "Will God approve of
o church being built up upon representations of the innocence of Joseph Smith
regarding polygamy, if he is not innocent in the matter? Nay, verily: And I tell
you that the efforts of the Reorganized Church in this regard have not been
acceptable unto God: He does not want any truth covered up."
      The Herald  responded by reprinting the statements of Marks and Sheen, in
"What Was Suppressed?," SH 34 (December 10, 1887):793-795, arguing that these
statements proved nothing about Joseph Smith's involvement in polygamy.
Throughout 1887, the Herald  kept up a steady attack on David Whitmer.

      125 Explanation. Some Reasons Why We Withdrew from the Reorganized
Church," The Return 1 (December 1889):184-185. Robinson was baptized into the
Whitmerite Church on April 13, 1888. Joseph Smith III's recollections of
Robinson's departure from the RLDS Church are found in Memoirs, pp. 216-217.

      126 Robinson died March 11, 1891. His basic platform was outlined in
"Some Reasons," The Return 1 (January 1889):9- 10. He enumerated seven reasons
for believing that the Latter Day Saints had apostatized from their primitive
faith, even before the death of Joseph Smith. These included: changing the name
of the Church of Christ; the introduction of polygamy; Utah's Adam-God doctrine
and blood atonement; tithing; stipends paid to ministers; the doctrine of "avenge"
in the Doctrine and Covenants; and the Order of Enoch, secret oaths, and
fictitious names. In later issues, he laid the origin of Danites, temple rites, and
polygamy at the feet of Joseph Smith. Robinson's last installment of "Items of
Personal History of the Editor," The Return 2 (February 1891):28-30, carried his
recollections through the latter part of 1843. Here he told of Hyrum Smith's
teaching him polygamy and the opposition to the revelation in the High Council by
William Marks, Austin Cowles, and Leonard Soby. He also replied, p. 28, to
Joseph Smith III's attempts to undermine the credibility of his affidavits.
      Robinson received frequent counterfire from W. W. Blair in the Herald ,
throughout 1889.

      127 John K. Sheen to Joseph Smith III, October 20, 1874, RLDS Archives. In
the preface to the first number of The Relic Library No. 1 (April 15, 1889) he
declared, "I am not a member of any church."

      128 The publication of and comments about Isaac Sheen's article on
polygamy (n. 124), precipitated John K. Sheen's entry into the foray. See SH 34
(December 31, 1887):842, 848-849. For his remarks about the "Herod of Lamoni,"
see The Relic Library, No. 1 (April 15, 1889), preface. W. W. Blair warned readers
against patronizing The Relic Library in SH 36 (March 16, 1889):161-162, and
(April 6, 1889):210.

      129 John K. Sheen, Polygamy, or the Veil Lifted [York, Nebraska: 1889].

     130 Ibid., p. 10.

     131 Ibid., pp. 15-21.

     132 Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, pp. 117-119.

     133 Ibid., pp. 175-179.

     134 Ibid., pp. 210-212.

     135 "Law-Breakers," SH 33 (June 5, 1886):338; and "Law-Breakers.--No. 2,"
SH 33 (August 7, 1886):481-482.

     136 SH 33 (January 30, 1886):65; Joseph Smith III to W. P. Hepburn, January
[unclear date], 1886, LB #4, pp. 191-194.

     137 Joseph Smith III to W. P. Hepburn, February 9, 1886, LB #4, pp. 221-
224; Joseph Smith III to O. F. Edmunds, March 4, 1886, LB #4, pp. 231-232.

     138 "Can We Take the Oath," SH 34 (March 19, 1887):177; "The Oath:
Possible Results," SH 34 (April 9, 1887):225-226.

     139 SH 34 (December 24, 2887):825.

     140 Memoirs, p. 267.

     141 SH 35 (January 7, 1888): 1.

     142 Joseph Smith III, Journal, January 1-20, 1888, RLDS Archives; SH 35
(January 14, 1888):21, (January 21, 1888):36, (January 28, 1888):51, (February 4,
1888):65; Memoirs, p. 267.

     143 Memoirs, pp. 267-270. Cf. remarks in SH 35 (April 21, 1888):252, and
Joseph Smith III to J. C. Jensen, June 7, 1888, RLDS Archives: ". . . I was beset
by neuralgia till my courage, endurance and patience were all gone; and I could
enjoy nothing, not even being miserable."

     144 Memoirs, p. 271; Joseph Smith III, Journal, April 18 and May 7, 1888;
and SH 35 May 5, 1888):273.

     145 Memoirs, p. 271, and "Independence and the Corner Stone," SH 35 (June
9, 1888):353-354.

     146 RLDS general conferences were held in the Kirtland Temple in 1881,
1887, 1891, 1896, and 1904. The gathering in 1883 particularly attracted the
attention of the secular press. See SH 30 (May 5, 1883):273 and (June 2,
1883):346.

      147 Memoirs, pp. 272-281; Audentia Anderson, "My Father's Letters," Vision
45 (August 1932 :324-327.

      148 Joseph Smith III, One Wife, or Many (Lamoni, Iowa: Printed by the
Reorganized Church, n.d.). The tract was first offered for sale in SH 36 (May 4,
 889):273.
     In his Memoirs, Joseph Smith III stated that he began One Wife or Many
under inspiration two years before but had been unable to finish the tract until the
light returned to him in California. He said that he took up the work one morning
and succeeded in finishing it within two days. But in his journal it appears that
these were not two consecutive days. See Memoirs, p. 274; Journal, January 19
and March 13,  889, P2, J 119, RLDS Archives.

      149 W. W. Blair, "The Ministry of Joseph's Sons," in One Wife, or Many, pp.
14-16.

      150 Joseph Smith III, The Rejection of the Church (Lamoni, Iowa:
Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints, n.d.). From a notice in SH 34
(September 10, 1887):588, it is possible to date the publication of this tract. The
thesis of the tract was that God rejected the church in Nauvoo, because of the
failure to finish the temple speedily, as commanded by God. The Twelve went
back on their original theory of succession (1844) when they illegally reorganized
the First Presidency (1847). Brigham Young and his followers fell into gross
iniquity and lost their priesthood. When the "Reformation" of 1856-1857 required
mass rebaptism--into a polygamous church--the LDS effectively were baptized
into apostasy. But the Spirit called a righteous remnant to reorganize the church.

      151 "Questions Asked by Elder David Seeley of the Utah Church, and
Answered by Pres. Joseph Smith in San Bernardino, Cal.," P19, f47, RLDS
Archives. See Memoirs, p. 280. The account in the Memoirs seems garbled,
stating that Seeley composed written answers to Joseph's questions.

      152 Joseph Smith III to Joseph F. Smith, September 18, 1888, LB   4, pp.
326-328; Joseph Smith III to Joseph F. Smith, September 10, 1888, LB ft4, pp. 329-
330; Joseph F. Smith to Joseph Smith III, May 3, 1889, RLDS Archives. Joseph
Smith III to Bertha M. Smith, May 1 1, 1889, RLDS Archives, mentions writing a
thirty-six page letter to Joseph F. Smith. This letter is probably among the
restricted papers of Joseph F. Smith in the LDS Archives.

      153 On Joseph Smith III's visit to Northern California, see Memoirs, pp. 281-
283. Concerning Ina D. Coolbrith (1841-1928), see Josephine DeWitt Rhodehamel
and Raymund Francis Wood, Ina Coolbrith: Librarian and Laureate of California
(Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1973 ; Leonard J. Arrington,
"'Divinely Tall and Most Divinely Fair': Josephine Donna Smith--"Ina Smith--"Ina
Coolbrith,"' Utah Libraries (Spring 1970):8-14; and Annaleone D Patton,
California Mormons by Sail and Trail (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company,
1961). She co-edited the first Overland Magazine with Charles Stoddard and Bret
Harte and cultivated such young talents as Mark Twain, Prentiss Mulford, Joaquin
Miller, and Jack London. In 1915 she was named Poet Laureate of California.

     154 Memoirs, p. 283.
     155 Joseph Smith III to Mary Audentia Smith, July 3 [sic], 1889, RLDS
Archives.

      156 Kingsbury was certainly familiar with the inner workings of polygamy in
Nauvoo. In the Temple Lot case he testified that the prophet personally taught
him the doctrine and told him that he had taken plural wives. Temple Lot
Transcript 2:178. After Joseph Smith took Sarah Ann Whitney as a plural wife in
1842, the prophet arranged for a mock marriage between her and Kingsbury on
April 29, 1843, to disguise her relationship to himself. See Joseph C. Kingsbury,
"History of Joseph (Corroden) Kingsbury," Utah State Historical Society
(photocopy of typescript), p. S, and H. Michael Marquardt, The Strange Marriages
of Sarah Ann Whitnev to Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, Joseph C. Kinqsbury
and Heber C. Kimball (Salt Lake City: Modern Microfilm Company, 1973), pp, 12-
16. It was Kingsbury who made the copy of the revelation on celestial marriage
which Brigham Young published to the world in 1852. See his account in Temple
Lot Transcript 2:178-180, 189.

     157 Memoirs, pp. 292-293.

     158 Ibid., p. 295.

     159 Ibid., p. 296. Lucy Walker Kimball made no public challenge to Joseph
Smith III during his address, but she was introduced to him after the service. She
recalled that Joseph said, "I am very glad to see you, and I am not either afraid or
ashamed to see you." She told him that she was very desirous of having a chat
with him. In Lucy Walker Kimball's mind Joseph's remarks to her and his
argument that the question was not whether his father had more wives than one,
but whether it was right, implied he feared to argue the former question and
knowingly adopted a false position. "Now did he not give himself away there?,"
she said in her Temple Lot testimony. See Temple Lot Transcript 2:473-474.
     In 1904 Joseph Smith III denied a rumor that Lucy Walker Kimball publicly
confronted him at Logan with the assertion that she had been a plural wife of
Joseph Smith, Jr. See "Editorial Items," SH 51 (November 9, 1904):1043-1044.

     160 Memoirs, p. 290.

     161 Ibid, pp. 289-290.

     162 Ibid., p. 295.

     163 Ibid., p. 296.

     164 Ibid., pp. 285-287.

     165 Ibid., p. 283.

     166 Ibid., p. 298-299.

     167 Affidavit of John Taylor, November 19, 1889, RLDS Archives. Thomas
A. Lyne endorsed Taylor's recollections on December 12, 1889.

     168 Memoirs, pp. 290, 294, 296-297.

     169 Ibid., pp. 284 and 299.

     170 Ibid., p. 288.

 Ibid.

 Ibid., p. 291.

  173 Ibid., p. 283. See Joseph Smith III’s articles, "Is Conservative
Mormonism Disloyal?," Salt Lake Evening Times, November 27, 1889, reprinted in
SH 36 (December 14, 1889):808-810; and "Is Polygamy Productive of Good
Results?," Salt Lake Evening Times, December 14, 1889, reprinted in SH 36
(December 28, 1889):838-840. The publisher of the Times was Charles
Nichols, husband of Joseph Smith III's cousin Sarah Millikin Nichols.

  174 Larson, The "Americanization" Utah for Statehood, pp. 243-259;
Frank J. Cannon and Harvey J. O'Higgins, Under the Prophet in Utah: The
National Menace of a Political Priestcraft (Boston: C. M. Clark Publishing Co.,
1911), pp. 66-94.

  175 Cannon, Under the Prophet in Utah, pp. 95-111, gives a dramatic
account of the meeting and events leading up to it. Quotation from p. 110. Cf.
Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, pp. 259-263.

  176 The Manifesto is printed as an "Official Declaration" in the LDS
Doctrine and Covenants. There was some question whether or not it was a
revelation in the same sense as others contained in the Doctrine and Covenants.
It was added to that book in 1908.
  The Manifesto has been seen, almost uniformly, as a strategic retreat in
the face of federal pressure. An exception is the somewhat bizarre treatment of
Gordon C. Thomason, "The Manifesto Was a Victory," Dialogue: A Journal of
Mormon Thought 6 (Spring 1971):37-45. Thomason argues that while the
government appeared to win the battle, it lost the larger war. Thomason points
out that the church preserved the secrecy of its sacred covenants and was not
forced to break up existing plural marriages. But the federal government never
sought to destroy Mormonism per se; it sought to terminate the specific practice
of plural marriage. This it accomplished. Thomason's unrealistic assessment is
counter-balanced by that of Leonard J. Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, pp. 356-
379. Arrington shows that the Anti-Mormon crusade attacked both polygamy and
Mormon economic-political collectivism. The Manifesto defused much of the
crusade's impetus, and the admission of Utah into the Union carried the process
farther. The price which the LDS Church paid was relinquishing a substantial
portion of its temporal power--not just plural marriage. After statehood,
Arrington concludes, p. 379, "The temporal Kingdom, for all practical purposes,
was dead--slain by the dragon of Edmunds-Tucker."

  177 SH 37 (October 11, 1890):657. The editorial was unsigned, but Joseph
Smith III almost certainly wrote it. The style is his, and Associate Editor W. W.
Blair was away from Lamoni at the time.
  In what follows, citations are drawn from unsigned editorials in the Herald 
to show Joseph Smith III's attitude toward the Manifesto. Unfortunately, his
surviving correspondence makes little mention of the Manifesto, so these
editorials are the best available source for Joseph Smith III's immediate reaction
to it.

 "Mormons Will Obey," SH 37 (October 18, 1890):673.

 "Utah's Step Forward," SH 37 (October 25, 1890):690.

 "That Manifesto," SH 37 (November 1, 1890):705.

 "The Utah Herald  on that Manifesto," SH 37 (November 8, 1890):722-723.

 "Utah and Statehood," SH 37 (November 29, 1890):769-770.

 HRC 5:46-47.

 HC 1:196- 199.

 The rather complicated history of the property is outlined in
Complainant’s Abstract, pp. 12-20.

 On the Hedrickites see Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, pp.
76-83.

   Complainant's Abstract, pp. 18-19.

 Memoirs, p. 310.

 In 1891, the RLDS Church was reincorporated at Lamoni, Iowa, partly
to lay the groundwork for the Temple Lot suit The Articles of Incorporation are
printed in Complainant's Abstract, pp. 24-27. Particularly significant was Article
6, which read: "All property now held or owned by said church, in the name of any
person or persons, as trustees or otherwise, including the publication
establishment of said church, shall vest in said corporation. And all persons
holding such property in trust for said church are hereby directed and required to
transfer and convey the same to said corporation, as the property of said church.
And said corporation shall by operation of law succeed to all property now owned
by said church or held for its use, and may sue for and recover the same in the
name of said corporation" emphasis added). Article 1, which declared the
Reorganized Church to adhere to the doctrines and tenets of the original church
organized in 1830, and to be a reorganization thereof. Taken together, these two
articles laid the groundwork for a lawsuit to recover property held in trust for the
original church.
  One reason for the reincorporation in Iowa may have been Iowa's liberal
grant of power to a church corporation to sue. See 60 Fed. 937, 939-941.

  The purported deed from Edward Partridge to John Cowdery, Jane
Cowdery, and Joseph Smith Cowdery, March 25, 1839, is printed in 60 Fed. 937,
938-939.

  An outline of the negotiations with the Hedrickites is found in Joseph
Smith III to Stephen Maloney, July 12 [?], 1893, LB #1A, pp. 332-337.

      Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, June 18, 1887; George Edmunds to
Joseph Smith III, June 22, 1887; and Joseph Smith III to George Edmunds, June 29,
1887; all three letters in RLDS Archives. Quotations from the last letter. See
also Joseph Smith III's letters to E. L. Kelley, June 14, 1887, and July 6, 1887,
RLDS Archives.

    See the thirteen items of correspondence between C. A. Hall, president
of the Church of Christ, and LDS attorney John M. Cannon, September 4, 1892
through June 24, 1894, Mss 1363, Brigham Young University. These letters
demonstrate that the Church of Christ received legal advice and sizeable
financial assistance from the Mormon Church throughout the Temple Lot case.
     See also Emily Dow Partridge Young, Journal, entries for March 11, April
29, and May 6, 1892, University of Utah (photocopy of typescript). These entries
show that the LDS First Presidency was working closely with the Hedrickites in
the Temple Lot suit. Joseph F. Smith on April 29th boasted that the Josephites
did not want the testimony taken concerning plural marriage and were "quite mad
about it." Emily concluded that if the RLDS attorneys had initiated such
testimony themselves, "they could not know what they were doing."

   "Temple Lot Suit," SH 41 (February 14, 1894):99 incorrectly gives the
impression that the case was heard only on February 7th. Actually pleading began
on February 6th and was concluded on the 7th.

     "The Temple Suit," SH 41 (February 21, 1894):113. Joseph Smith III's
additional impressions of the attorneys in the case can be found in Memoirs, pp.
310-312.

    For a complete transcription of the testimony in the Temple Lot suit,
one must consult Temple Lot Transcript. For the RLDS side of the evidence, the
selections in Complainants' Abstract convey a fair impression of the testimony.

      Complainant's Abstract, pp. 27-37.

      Ibid., pp. 37-91. Quotation from pp. 40-41.

      Complainant's Abstract, pp. 91-105. See p. 98 for William's point-blank
disavowal of polygamy:
     "I never, prior to the death of my brother, or subsequent to his death,
taught or preached the doctrine of polygamy. I never did at any time or any place
preach the doctrine of polygamy, and any history that states that I did teach the
doctrine of polygamy, if any does state it, is false."

     Complainant's Abstract, pp. 107-165. To the standard litany of
Brighamite deviations from primitive Mormon doctrine, Blair added the following
(pp. 111-112): the Twelve's usurpation of the authority of the Presidency and
Bishopric, dictation rather than free discussion at conferences, and the notion
that the authority of the Utah priesthood was necessary for a true marriage.

      Long time residents of Jackson County and old Saints who testified
included Robert Weston (Complainant's Abstract, pp. 171-173), Isaac N. Rogers (p.
173), William McCoy (pp. 173-175, Thomas Hailey (p. 175), Dr. Clarence St. Clair
(p. 175), Hiram Rathburn, Sr. (pp. 215-231), John W. Brackenbury (pp. 231-232),
Robert Weston (pp. 248-253), and John T. Crisp (pp. 274-278), Martha A. Hall (pp.
278-279), Jacob Gregg (pp. 287-289), and William Stewart (pp. 289-290).

    Complainant's Abstract, pp. 179-188.


 Ibid., pp. 253-258.

 Ibid., pp. 165-171.
  Substantial parts of the testimony concerning polygamy have been
expunged from the Complainant's Abstract. Since the purpose of the abstract of
evidence was to present the evidence upon which the RLDS Church based its case,
this can be considered neither surprising nor dishonest.

  Temple Lot Transcript 2:350-351.
  See Emily Dow Partridge Young, Journal, March 19-24, 1892, University of
Utah (photocopy of typescript). The elderly woman recorded that RLDS attorney
Kelley's cross-examination was "rigid" and sometimes made her feel as though the
top of her head "might move off." She found some of the intimate questions
insulting, but recorded that she had to pocket her pride and suffer the indignation.
She considered it ironic that after so many years, "Joseph the Prophet is being
tried in court for teaching and practicing plural marriage," and some of his wives
were being called as witnesses. After testifying, she regretted that she had been
unable to handle the cross-examination better and mulled over many responses she
might have made but could not think of under the pressure of the moment.

 Ibid., 2:450-451.

 Ibid., 2:93.

   Ibid., 2:394-396. Noble told RLDS attorney E. L. Kelley that the
prophet slept with Lovisa Beaman. Kelley demanded to know whether Noble had
seen them in bed together. Not exactly, Noble explained. He had given counsel
to the prophet, telling him, "Blow out the lights and get into bed, and you will be
safer there." The prophet later told him that he took his counsel; pp. 427-428.

 Ibid., 2:239-240; 109- 10; 10; 495-496; 178; and 539.

  Ibid., 2:249-250; 539-540; 178-180; and 189. Under cross-examination,
Kingsbury repeatedly stated that he was unsure how long it took him to copy the
revelation or how many sheets of paper it filled. Finally, after incessant
questioning, he stated that he estimated it took an hour to copy and filled an
estimated two sheets of foolscap. In later years Joseph Smith III made much of
these statements, arguing that the revelation was so lengthy that no one could
have copied it on so little paper in so short a time.

 Ibid., 2:495-497; 528-529; and 584-585.

 Complainant's Abstract, pp. 428-446.

 Ibid., pp. 393-407.

   SH 39 (June 25, 1892):412. The writer of the untitled editorial
presumably  ,vas Joseph Smith III. The following issue contained a letter from
Alexander H. Smith, dated June 14, 1892, Salt Lake City, which gave details of
Briggs' testimony, and calling him "a good witness for the True Church
Reorganized." SH 39 (July 2, 1892):424.

     Complainant's Abstract, pp. 407-411. Cf. E. L. Kelley's acerbic
comments in SH 39 July 23, 1892 :477.

    Complainant's Abstract, pp. 473-478, 484-501.

     See "Opinion of Judge Phillips [sic], in Temple Lot Case," SH 41 (March
(4, 1894):161-162. The complete text of the decision is found in Reorganized
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Church of Christ et al., 60 Fed.
937 ( 1894).

      See In the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District
  Missouri: Western Division at Kansas City. he Reorganized Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints, Complainant, vs. The Church of Christ, at
Independence, Missouri, Richard Hill, et al., Defendants. Brief and Argument by
G. Edmunds on Behalf of Complainant One of Its Solicitors (Lamoni, Iowa:
Herald  Publishing House and Bindery, 1893).

      Reimann, The Reorganized Church and the Civil Courts, pp. 114-127,
marshalls overwhelming evidence to show that the 1839 deed was spurious. Israel
A. Smith, "Temple Litigation," SH 90 (July 3, 1943):10, reprints the arguments of
S. A. Burgess in support of the genuineness of the deed, but the arguments build
upon too many conjectures and suppositions to be credible.
     Launius, "And There Came Prophets in the Land Again," pp. 392-393,
contains a misstatement concerning the 1839 deed. He correctly points out that
the defense presented serious evidence impeaching the legitimacy of the deed.
He says that the defense asked the judge to throw out the case, but the judge
decided to continue the trial. According to Launius, after the "complete
discrediting of the Reorganization's deed to the property," Joseph Smith III "told
his lawyers to forget the deeds, and to claim the property solely on the ground
that the Reorganization was the legal continuation of the original Mormon church
and had been forcibly driven from the land it held in 1833." In actuality, Joseph
Smith III never told the RLDS attorneys to "forget the deeds." George Edmunds
appealed to the 1839 deed in his closing argument (In the Circuit Court, p. 7). The
amended Bill of Complaint appealed to it (Complainants Abstract, pp. 6-7).
Judge Philips based part of his decision upon acceptance of it. And the later
reversal of Judge Philips by the Court of Appeals was based, in part, upon the
RLDS claim to legal title via the 1839 deed.

     The Articles of Faith first appeared in a letter of Joseph Smith to John
Wentworth in 1842. See HC 4:535-541, especially 540-541. The RLDS Church
republished the articles under the title, "Epitome of Faith," with some slight
modifications, including an article condemning polygamy. See Complainant's
Abstract, pp. 41 -44.

      Laches means undue delay in asserting a legal right or privilege,
resulting in the expiration of the statute of limitations.

     Memoirs, p. 312.

      "Temple Lot Suit Decision," SH 41 (March 14, 1894):164.

     In the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western Division Of
the Western District of Missouri: Decision of John F. Philips, Judge in Temple
Lot Case: The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints versus
the Church of Christ, et al. (Lamoni, Iowa: Published by the Reorganized Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, n.d.), p.5.


       "Abstract of Evidence Temple Lot Suit," SH 41 (July 4, 1894),
advertisement appearing on rear cover.

       SH 41 (March 21, 1894):177.

    228 "Deseret News on the Temple Lot Suit," SH 41 (September 19,
1894):597; "Disclaimer of Interest in Temple Lot Suit," SH 42 (February 20,
1895): 114.

     Memoirs, p. 312.

      "The Temple Lot Suit," SH 41 (June 27, 1894):409.

      Joseph Smith III, Journal, January 22-25, 1 895, RLDS Archives;
Memoirs, p. 327; "Temple Lot Suit before United States Court of Appeals, in St.
Lovis," SH 42 (February 6, 1895):83-84.
      The RLDS case is set forth in Respondent's Abstract of Pleadings and
Evidence. United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, December
Term, 1894. No. 516. The Church of Christ at Independence, Missouri, et al.,
Appellants, vs. The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,
Appellee. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western
District of Missouri (Kansas City, Missouri: Sidney F. Woody Printing Co., 1894).

 See n. 192. See also Joseph Smith III to E. L. Kelly, June 14, 1887,
RLDS Archives; and Joseph Smith III to P. P. Kelly, March 20, 1894, LB #5, p.157.

      Church of Christ at Independence, Mo., et al. v. Reorganized Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 70 Fed. 179 ( 1895).

      Ibid., pp. 187-188.

      "Temple Lot Suit Reversed," SH 42 (November 6, 1895):71 I gave a brief
notice of the reversal.

      Church of Christ at Independence, Mo., et al. v. Reorganized Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 71 Fed. 250 (1895). "Editorial Items," SH 42
(December 18, 1895):808 briefly noticed this development.

      "Temple Lot Suit," SH 43 (January 29, 1896):69; also SH 43 (February 5,
1896):85.

     Memoirs, p. 327. Cf. Joseph Smith to E. L. Kelley, June 14, 1887,
RLDS Archives.

     RLDS apologists have made considerable use of Judge Philips' decision
as proof of being the true church in succession. The reversal of the decision, such
apologists have reasoned, was on technical grounds and did not affect the judge's
factual findings concerning succession. See Koury, The Truth and the Evidence,
pp. 108-109; Elbert A. Smith, The Church in Court, pp. 8-9 Reimann, The
Reorganized Church and the Civil Courts, argues at great length that the reversal
of Judge Philips' decision overturned all the findings of fact and conclusions of
law on which his decree was predicated (pp. 149-187). Reimann correctly shows
that RLDS apologists err who claim that the suit was dismissed solely on grounds
of laches, but he misleads his readers when he states that the suit also was
overturned on grounds that the RLDS Church lacked sufficient title to maintain
an action. The court of appeals ruled that the RLDS bill of complaint was drawn
in such a way as to place the Hedrickites in the position of mere squatters, and,
therefore, there was no basis for a suit in chancery. Someone reading only
Reimann's book would never understand this, just as someone reading only one of
the RLDS apologists would never understand that something more than laches was
involved in the reversal.

     Memoirs, pp. 313-314.

     SH 39 (April 130, 1892):274.

     "Baptism for the Dead," SH 40 (February 25, 1893):115; "Adoption," SH
41 (May 2, 1894):274; "Building Temples," SH 41 (July 4, 1894):421; "Joseph
Smith's Charge to the Twelve," SH 42 (August 14, 1895):518; "Are They Untrue?,"
SH 43 (January 22, 1896):49; "That Prophecy of the Seer Concerning the
Settlement of the Saints in the Rocky Mountains," SH 43 (January 29, 1896):65-66.

      Memoirs, p. 317.

      "Utah and Statehood," SH 40 (February 18, 1893):100-101; "Utah and
Statehood," SH 39 (January 23, 1892:49-50.

     "Utah Now a State," SH 43 (January 15, 1896):33. For background see
Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, pp. 283-304.

     Quotation from Joseph Smith III to W. W. Blair, January 9, 1896, LB #6,
p. 314.
     The first edition of Roberts' Succession in Church Presidency was published
in Salt Lake City by Deseret News Publishing Co., 1894. second edition was
published in 1900.
     Joseph Smith III's opinion of Roberts' work is given in a letter to L. D.
Hickey, April 30, 1894, LB #5, p. 216, in which he states that the book "is not a
strong work, only in its assumptions." In a letter to Heman C. Smith, November 1,
1894, LB #5, pp. 433-434, he gave advice concerning how to answer Roberts.
     Heman C. Smith's series of articles entitled "True Succession in Church
Presidency" ran in the Herald  in 1898. These articles were then gathered together
into a book, True Succession in Church Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter Day Saints Being a Reply to Elder B. H. Roberts on "Succession in the
 Presidency of the Church " (Lamoni, Iowa: Board of Publication of the
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 1898). A second edition
appeared in 1900.

     Memoirs, pp. 330-332.

      A copy of Spencer's account, taken from a journal or pocket
memorandum book, is in the LDS Archives. See "Interview with Jos. Smith," Ms d
6708, LDS Archives (photocopy).

     Joseph Smith III to James M. Stubbart, May 19, 1896, LB #6, pp. 458-
471; Joseph Smith III to James M. Stubbart, May 20, 1896, LB #6, pp. 472-473;
Joseph Smith III to Columbus Scott, June 16, 1896, LB #7, pp. 76-77; Joseph Smith
III to Viennia [sic] Jackson, July 1, 1896, LB #7, p. 156; Joseph Smith III to Karl
S. Fackrell, July 20, 1896, LB #7, pp. 195-197; Joseph Smith III to James M.
Stubbart, July 22, 1896, LB #7, p. 215; Joseph Smith III to Joseph Dewsnup,
August 18, 1896, LB #7, p. 255; and Joseph Smith III to Gilbert J. Waller, August
27, 1896, LB #7, pp. 281-284.

     Joseph Smith III to W. E. Criddle, May 20, 1896, LB #6, pp. 474-475;
Joseph Smith III to Samuel G. Spencer, May 20, 1896, LB #6, pp. 476-477; Joseph
Smith III to W. E. Criddle, June 1, 1896, LB #7, pp. 60-61.

      Joseph Smith III to Publishers, Deseret News, July 9, 1896, LB 4 #7, pp.
170-171; Joseph Smith III to John Q. Cannon, July 25, 1896, LB #7, pp. 213-214.
This was in response to the News of July 1st.

      "A Statement and a Correction of It," SH 43 (July 29, 1896):497-500;
Joseph Smith III, A Statement and a Correction of It (Lamoni, Iowa: Herald 
Publishing House, Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, n.d.).
Cf. "The Joseph Smith Interview," SH 45 (September 14, 1898):592-593.

      Memoirs, pp. 58-59; 335-336. Joseph Smith III, Journal, September 8
through November 2, 1896, RLDS Archives.

     Joseph Smith III, Journal, September 23, 1897, RLDS Archives.

     Memoirs, pp. 60-61, 349-351; Joseph Smith III, Journal, October 3, 1897
through January 12, 1898, RLDS Archives.

      HRC 4:287, 643. Typical examples of Joseph Smith III's correspondence
with editors are: Joseph Smith III to Editors of the Salt Lake Tribune, March 20,
1 877, LB #1, p. 118; to "Messrs Editors," June 21, 1877, LB #1, pp. 170- 172; to
Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser, March 10, 1879, LB #2, pp. 133-135; to
Editors of Manford's Magazine, December 23, 1879, LB #2, pp. 419-422; to
Publishers of the Western Rural, March 17, 1880, LB #3, pp. 45-46; to Publishers
of Lippincott's Monthly, November 16, 1880, LB #3, p. 222.

       Joseph Smith III and Heman C. Smith, History of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints, 4 vols. (Lamoni, Iowa: Board of Publication of the
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 1897-1903).

       Alma Blair, "Historical Models of the Reorganization," Commission
Magazine, September 1979, pp. 21-22.

       Victor W. Jorgensen and B. Carmon Hardy, "The Taylor-Cowley Affair
and the Watershed of Mormon History," Utah Historical Quarterly 48 (Winter
1980): 10.

  "Is Polygamy Suppressed in Utah?," SH 43 (October 21, 1896):689-690;
"Not Dead," SH 44 (December 15, 1897):789; "Polygamy Still Practiced in Utah,"
SH 45 (November 2, 1898):694-695.

 Jorgensen and Hardy, "The Taylor-Cowley Affair," p. 15.

 Stanley S. Ivins, The Moses Thatcher Case (Salt Lake City: Modern
Microfilm Co., n.d.).

  "Shall It Rule Utah?," SH 42 (October 23, 1895):679-680; "Church and
State in Utah," SH 43 (June 17, 1896):385-386; "Moses Thatcher, and the Right of
Opinion," SH 43 (December 30, 1896):849; "Apostle Thatcher Is Ousted," SH 43
(November 25, 1896):770-771; "Moses Thatcher Deposed," SH 43 (December 2,
1896):785-787; "Still Persuing Thatcher," SH 44 (March 10, 1897):145-146; and
"Moses Thatcher on Trial," SH 44 (August 25, 1897):533.

   Joseph Smith III to Moses Thatcher, December 18, 1896, LB #7, pp. 355-
356. Earlier he offered Thatcher a chance to speak at Lamoni, when traveling to
or from the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Joseph Smith III to
Moses Thatcher, June 20, 1896, LB #7, pp. 116-117.

   See Roberts own account in CHC 6:363-374. See
Leonard, The Story of the Latter-day Saints, pp. 438-439, and
"The B. H. Roberts Case of 1898-1900," Utah Historical Quarterly 25 (January
1957):27-46.

  "Is Remonstrance Available?," SH 45 (December 7, 1898):773-774; "A
Striking Contrast and Argument; Roberts vs. the Saloon," SH 46 (January (8,
1899):33; "Governor Wells on the Roberts Case," SH 46 (January 25, 1899):50-51;
"A Seat in Congress for B. H. Roberts," SH 46 (February 1, 1899):65-69; "Congress
and B. H. Roberts," SH 46 (December 6, 1899):777-779.

   HRC 5:474; "Terry Opposed to Roberts," SH 46 (February 22, 1899):1 15;
"Conference Minutes: Decatur," SH 46 (February 22, 1899):126; untitled editorial
remarks, SH 46 (March 1, 1899):130 "Resolutions on B. H. Roberts," SH 45 (March
8, 1899):147; "Congress and Petitions to It," SH 46 (May 10, 1899):289-290.

  "An Effort in Behalf of Polygamy," SH 48 (March 20, 1901):222-223.
Technically the bill did not repeal the law. It simply emasculated it by changing
the rules of evidence in such cases. The new law would have required the
complaint to be from the wife or alleged plural wife of an accused polygamist.

 The RLDS General Conferences of 1902 and 1903 passed the following
resolution:
  "WHEREAS, it is currently reported that polygamy is still practiced in 
Utah and adjacent States and Territories, in defiance of the laws of God and the 
laws of the land; and
  "WHEREAS, the laws enacted by State by State legislation seem to be inadequate to
prevent or prohibit the practice of polygamy without the intervention of Federal
enactment; therefore be it
     "RESOLVED, that we, the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints, in General Conference assembled, favor the enactment of an
amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibiting the practice of
polygamy in all the States and Territories under the jurisdiction of the Republic."
     The RLDS First Presidency--Joseph Smith III, Frederick Madison Smith,
and R. C. Evans--prepared a flier announcing the church's support of such an
amendment. It was entitled The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints and the Proposed Constitutional Amendment Prohibiting Polygamy
(N.p.: n.p., 1903?).  See also HRC 5:579; 6:53.

      The hearings are reported in U.S., Congress, Senate, Proceedings before
the Committee on Privileges and Elections of the United States Senate in the 
Matter of the Protests against the Right of Hon. Reed Smoot, a Senator from the
State of Utah, to Hold His Seat, 59th Cong., 1st sess., Doc. No. 486, 4 vols., 1906.

      Allen and Leonard, The Story of the Latter-day Saints, p. 441.

     Jorgensen and Hardy, "The Taylor-Cowley Affair," pp. 21-22.

     "Men and Things," SH 50 (November 4, 1903):1026; "Opposition to the
Seating of Mr. Smoot as a United States Senator," SH 50 (February 25, 1903):169-
170; "Smoot, the Mormon," SH 50 (February 25, 1903) 170-172.

      Jorgensen and Hardy, "The Taylor-Cowley Affair," pp. 22-23.

      "Laws of the Land vs. Joseph F. Smith--and Others," SH 51 (March 16,
1904):243-245; "Inconsistent Teaching--or Practice.--Which?," SH 51 (March 30,
1904):289-290.

     "The General Conference," SH 51 (April 13, 1904):344-345.

      Joseph Smith III, "Origin of American Polygamy," The Arena 28 (August
1902):160-167. Quotation from p. 167.

      Joseph F. Smith, "Real Origin of American Polygamy. A Reply," The
Arena 28 (November 1902):490-498.

      Joseph F. Smith, "The 'Mormonism' of To-day," The Arena 29 (May
1903):449-456; Joseph Smith III, "Plural Marriage in America," The Arena (May
1903):456-465; and John T. Bridwell, "Origin of American Polygamy," The Arena
29 (May 1903):466-472.

     Joseph Smith III, Plural Marriage in America (N.p.: n.d.). This was a
tract of eight pages which reprinted the article in The Arena of May 1903.
     A greatly expanded version of the article was published as a thirty-nine
page tract in 1903 or 1904. Entitled Plural Marriage in America. A Critical
Examination (Lamoni, Iowa: Herald  Publishing House, n. . , it was one of Joseph
Smith III's most comprehensive briefs directed against the witnesses who testified
to his father's involvement in plural marriage.

      Joseph Smith III, "Polygamy in the United States--Has It Political
Significance?," North American Review 176 (March 1903):450-458.
     The concluding paragraphs of this article were reprinted in Public Opinion
with minor editorial changes. See "Polygamy as a Political Issue," Public Opinion
34 (March 12, 1903):327.


  Memoirs, pp. 383-409. Most numbers of the Saints' Herald  from June 17
through October 28, 1903 contain details of Joseph Smith III's trip overseas.

   Larry E. Hunt, F. M. Smith: Saint as Reformer 1874-1946
(Independence, Missouri: Herald  Publishing House, 1982, 1:35-40. RLDS D&C
126:8; 127:8.

 RLDS D&C 124:2a, 129:5, 126:7b, 130:3a.

 "Editorial Items," SH 51 (February 10, 1904):123; "In the Tabernacle,
Salt Lake City," SH 51 (February 24, 1904):169-170; "Our Utah Trip," SH 51 (April
6, 1904):313-315.

  "President Frederick M. Smith Protests," SH 52 (July 19, 1905):699-700;
"President F. M. Smith Sounds a Note of Warning," SH 52 (August 9, 1905):771-
772.

 Frederick Madison Smith to Joseph Smith, August 21, 1905, and
Joseph F. Smith to Frederick Madison Smith, August 24, 1905, as a reprint in
[Frederick M. Smith and Joseph F. Smith,]  Appeal of Frederick M. Smith One of
 the Presidency of the "Reorganized Church" to Pres. Joseph F. Smith for the
Unlimited Use of the Meeting Houses of the Latter-day saints and His Reply 
(N.p.: n.d.). This pamphlet bears no publication data. From the prefatory
remarks it may be inferred that is was  issued upon the authority of Joseph F.
Smith.

 "Obey Counsel," SH 53 (January 3, 1906):4-7.

  Joseph Smith III made one other trip to Utah not elsewhere noted in this
dissertation. On September 12, 1902, on his way home from California, he
stopped briefly at Salt Lake City. Memoirs, p. 373.

  "The Editor at Home," SH 52 (November 15, 1905):1089; quotation from
SH 52 (October 4, 1905):950; "A Warning to the Mormon People," SH 52 (October
11, 1905):971.

 "President of Reorganized Church Visits Salt Lake City," SH 52
(October 4, 1905):948-950.

 Memoirs, pp. 425-426. Cf. Joseph Smith III, Journal, October 8, 1905,
RLDS Archives.

  Joseph Smith III, Journal, October 20 through October 31; November 8
and 9, 1905.

  Joseph Smith III to Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, October 10, 1905,
RLDS Archives.

  Joseph Smith III to Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, October 17, 1905,
RLDS Archives.

     Joseph Smith III to Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, October 17, 1905.

     Memoirs, pp. 425-429.

     The Cannons were one of the most powerful families in the Mormon
Church and in Utah society. See the entries for George W. Cannon, A. H. Cannon,
and A. M. Cannon in Jenson's Latter-day Saint Biographical Encyclopedia, 1:42,
167, 292.

     There are three sources for this interview: Memoirs, p. 428; Angus
Munn Cannon, Journal, October 12, 1905, F435, Reels 5 & 6, LDS Archives; and
Angus Munn Cannon, Statement of an Interview with Joseph Smith Ill, LDS
Archives. This interview is important for two reasons. First, it has intrinsic
merit. Second, of all Joseph Smith III's interviews in Utah, this is the best
documented from the other participant's side. Comparison of the two
participants' accounts demonstrates that Joseph Smith III was highly selective in
his recollections of what transpired in such interviews. Those points which were
damaging or embarrassing to his apologetic position rarely found their way into
his Memoirs. Similarly, Angus Cannon omitted from his account certain
concessions which Joseph Smith III elicited from him.

     Cannon, Statement, pp. 4-5.

     Ibid., pp. 6-8.

      Ibid., p. 9.

      Memoirs, p. 428.

     Cannon, Statement, p. 11.

     Ibid.

     Ibid., pp. 12- 13.

     Ibid., pp. 15-16. Cannon's memory failed him in some details here. He
misnamed the Whitmerite "Smith," rather than "Schweick." And he reported
Joseph Smith III claiming, "My mother did sign that affidavit." In fact, Joseph
Smith III never claimed that his mother signed or swore to the "Last Testimony."

       Cannon, Statement, pp. 16- 17. Cf. Cannon's Journal.

      Cannon, Statement, pp. 23-24.

     Ibid., pp. 17, 19-20.

      Ibid., pp. 18-19.

       Ibid., pp. 20-24. Cf. Cannon's Journal.

      Joseph Smith III to Israel A. Smith, September 27, 1905, RLDS
Archives.

      Memoirs, pp. 423-424; Poll, Utah's History, p. 417.

      On Joseph Smith III's interaction with his relatives see Memoirs, pp.
424-425 and "The Editor Abroad;' SH 52 (November 15, 1905):1089-1090.

      "Editor at Home," SH 52 (December 13, 1905):1187; Memoirs, p. 429.

       "Overzealousness about the Smoot Inquiry," SH 52 (January 4, 1905):1-2;
"That Visit to Washington," SH 53 (February 28, 1906):193. Cf. earlier "A Word to
the Saints about Utah," SH 51 (March 30, 1904):292-293.
      A telegram from some RLDS elders to the Senate Committee on Privileges
and Elections alleged that Joseph Smith did not promulgate or practice plural
marriage. This was the immediate occasion for a splenetic pamphlet from Mormon
elder A. Milton Musser, entitled "Race Suicide," Infanticide, Prolicide, Leprocide
vs. Children. Letters to Messrs. Joseph Smith and Wm. H. Kelley, Aggressively
Defensive (N.p.: n.d.). Musser was still smarting from an incorrect allegation in
the Herald  in 1901 that polygamy was still being practiced in the Musser family.
Wm. H. Kelley’s A Defense of Monogamic Marriage (N.p.: n.d.) Is a reply to
Musser. It contains additional information about Musser’s umbrage at the article
in the Herald .

       Burrows' role in the hearings is treated in M. Paul Holsinger, "J. C.
Burrows and the Fight against Mormonism: 1903-1907," Michigan History 52 (Fall
1968): 181-195.

       Unless otherwise noted, material concerning Joseph Smith III's trip to
Washington is drawn from Memoirs, pp. 127-129, 430-431; HRC 6:163-165; and
"That Visit to Washington," SH 53 (February 28, 1906):193-195.

       J. F. Mintun, "Presidents of Seventy: Biography of Francis M. Sheehy,"
Journal of History 10 (January 1917):78.

      Memoirs, p. 128.

    Joseph Smith III to Israel A. Smith, February 10, 1906, RLDS Archives.

      Joseph Smith III to Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, February 12, 1906,
RLDS Archives.

    "That Visit to Washington," SH 53 (February 28, 1906):194.

      HRC 6:163-165.

     Jorgensen and Hardy, "The Taylor-Cowley Affair," passim. Quotation
from pp. 35-36.