118
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
MR. BRADEN'S ELEVENTH SPEECH.
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: --
I will notice first a misstatement made by my oponent Saturday night. I said on Friday night, after reading a series of questions, that I would have them copied in type-writing and give them to my opponent. I did so before noon on Saturday, and he had them in his possession eight or nine hours before the debate began on Saturday right. He has had them in his possession ever since, and has them now. Yet he said Saturday night that he did not have them. If he claims that he referred to another portion of my speeches, I remaind him that he has had everything that he has asked of me. I think that after giving him my speeches to examine at his leisure, and prepare himself to reply to them -- a thing no other opponent would do -- I deserve at least fair treatment, and should not have false statements made about me. When the reader reads in Kelley's speeches that I did not give names, and that I gave persons' testimony in my own words; and then turns back and reads the names of the 29 witnesses and their testimony in different type from the rest of the matter, and in their own words verbatim, he will see to what desperate straits my opponent must be driven, when he will make such reckless assertions. His desperation can be seen in his pettyfogging and misrepresentation
He repeats the statements that we have exposed several times, that the manuscript of Spaulding's Manuscript Found was brought to Howe. He says that Howe and Hulburt skulked over to Conneaut and got witnesses to sign what they wrote. The truth is, a Mormon preacher visited Conneaut and preached his first sermon and read extracts from the Book of Mormon. John Spaulding and others arose and exposed the theft of the Manuscript Found. It was in a meeting of citizens of Conneaut and not in a Mormon church meeting. It was a Mormon preacher, and not a woman preacher. That is a misprint in Schmucker's book -- as other books, that I have, show. This detection of the theft was published in the papers. Hulburt heard of it. He went to Conneaut, and such men as Judge Wright, Lake, a leading business man, and others of the best citizens of Conneaut wrote out their statements and gave them to him. There never was a number of affidavits more marked with independence and individuality. Contrast them with the joint statements of the witnesses to the Book of Mormon written out by Impostor Joe and signed by his confederates. Contrast their courteous testimony with Rigdon's blackguardism, the worst of which Kelley dared not read.
He says they never mentioned the Roman manuscript until Hulburt brought it from
|
Hartwick. No, nor did they mention Spaulding's sermons, and the stories he wrote for his children. There was no occasion for so doing until it was presented to them. He assails Miller's recollection of names. Readers of the debate will decide whether Miller's clear, rational and straightforward story is reasonable or not. I asked him whether he impeached the character of witnesses for truth and veracity, and he affected a holy horror of the thought, that is ridiculous, after his assaults on Howe and Hulburt. He, with a silliness that is idiotic, denies that Spaulding wrote the manuscript of the Manuscript Found, in the face of the clear testimony of 17 witnesses, one of whom is Rigdon himself. He blunders over Smith's working for Sabine. He says Mrs. Spaulding and her daughter left Sabine's in 1820, and that the trunk was taken from Sabine's in 1820. In 1820 Mrs. Spaulding left Sabine's, leaving her daughter with the trunk in her care at Sabine's, and went to Connecticut. Some time afterwards she married Mr. Davidson in Pomfret, Connecticut. Some time after this she returned to Hartwick, N. Y., to live. Some time after this she sent for the trunk. It was years after 1820, and it may not have been until near the marriage of her daughter to Dr. McKinstry in 1828, that she sent for the trunk. Miss Spaulding was married at her uncle's in 1828, and afterwards went to Munson, Mass. Mrs. McKinstry positively says that Smith worked for her uncle while she was there with the trunk in her care; and that ends all Kelley's impudent denials.
He reads Rigdon's denial. Of course a man who would steal would lie in order to lie out of it. Criminals are
not allowed to swear themselves clear. The same is true of Pratt his confederate. Kelley deliberately falsifies
my statements. I did not say that Smith stole the manuscript and brought it to Rigdon in Ohio. I said Rigdon
stole the manuscript Spaulding prepared for press, remodeled it to suit his purpose and took it to Smith in New
York. Then Smith informed Rigdon of the rest of the manuscripts in the possession of one who had been Spaulding's
wife, and stole all of them that he could, to prevent detection of the fraud, and exposure of the cheat. He says
that Tucker did not see Willard Chase before publishing his statements. Wonderful! Tucker used an affidavit that
Chase had sworn to, when the events were fresh in his memory, and I quoted the same affidavit, and not from Tucker.
I will attend to David Whitmer's testimony in good time. What bearing has his attack on Howe's analysis of the
Book of Mormon, on the truthfulness of the testimony of the witnesses and other parts of Howe's book. He reads
an affidavit from Mrs. Salisbury, Joe Smith's sister. In order
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
119
to make out that she must have known it, if Rigdon visited Smith, she said that Joe lived at their father's from 1827 to 1830, and while he was translating the plates, and translated them at their father's. Lucy Smith, her mother, Joe Smith, David Whitmer, P. P. Pratt and others say that Joe moved to Pennsylvania, over one hundred miles away, in the fall of 1827; and Lucy Smith says that Joe took the horse and wagon of one who came to move him to Pennsylvania, to get the plates. He went right after finding the plates and before any translation, to Pennsylvania. Mrs. Smith and Whitmer and Joe and others say that he returned to New York after wheat sowing in 1828. He was in Pennsylvania a year. Whitmer says he returned to Whitmer's father's and finished the translation. Mrs. Smith says he lived away from home, and that the plates were shown to the three witnesses away in another neighborhood. None of the translating was done at Joe's father's. Joe was not at his father's, but over one hundred miles away, for over a year, and was in another neighborhood, and not at his father's during the rest of the time. If Mrs. Salisbury lied, as we have proved she did, in saying that Joe was at their father's, when he was not there, she would have lied in saying Rigdon was not there, when he was. Tucker, Mrs. Eaton, McAuley, Chase and Saunders say that he was there, and some say at least eighteen months before the Book appeared. Finally we have a long reading from the Saint's Herald of June 1881. In the Weekly News, of Cadilac, Mich., of April 6th, 1880, the Rev. C. C. Thorn, of Manchester, N.Y., published an article asserting that old acquaintences of Joe Smith, in Manchester, N.Y., made these statements:
"I knew Joe Smith, personally to some extent, saw him frequently, knew well his reputation, he was a lazy drinking fellow, and loose in his habits in every way." Danford Booth -- "Smith's reputation was bad. I was acquainted with Oliver Cowdery. He was a low pettifogger, the cat's paw of the Smiths to do their dirty work." Orrin Reed -- "I knew the Smiths but did not associate with them for they were too low to associate with. There was no truth in them. Their aim was to get in where they could get property. They broke up homes in that way. Smith had no regular business. He had frequent revelations." Wm. Bryant.
In the spring of 1881, one quiet Lord's day morning, several old people in Manchester were interviewed by a couple of Danites. They did not tell their names or business; said it was no matter. They asked questions about the Smiths, and treated these old people as an impudent lawyer treats witnesses he wants to bull-doze. Several of these old people indignantly refused to talk to them after they had insulted them.
June 1st, 1881, an article appeared in the Saints' Herald, signed by one of these Danites. It was read to
you by the other Danite Saturday night. It asserts that Mr. Thorne did not talk with some of the parties he
mentioned in his article, and lied about what others said. Mr. Thorne had taken and placed on file in Canandaigua,
|
Ontario Co., N. Y., in the County Clerk's office, these affidavits:
"Danford Booth, of the town of Manchester and county of Ontario, N. Y., being duly affirmed deposes. He has read
the article in the Cadillac Weekly News of April 6th, 18[8]0, respecting 'Cowdery and the Smith family,'
over the signature of C. C. Thorne. The interview therein mentioned between deponent and Thorne did take place.
The matters therein set forth, alleged to have been stated by the deponent to Thorne, were so stated by depenent
to Thorne. He has read also in a paper called the Saints' Herald, of June 1st, 1881, an article purporting
to give what was said in an interview between W. H. Kelley and another party and the deponent, in which it is
stated that depenent informed said parties that deponent and Thorne never had an interview as alleged by Thorne.
Deponent declares that he did not so inform said parties, and that he has no recollection of such a question
being asked him by them.
(Signed) Danford Booth.
Sworn and subscribed before me, July 1st. 1881.
(Signed) N. K. Cole, J. P."
Orrin Reed, of the township of Manchester, county of Ontario, N. Y., being duly affirmed, deposes: His age is 77.
He was born in the town of Farmington, about four miles from what is called "Mormon Hill." During the last 46 years
he has resided in the town of Manchester, and in the same school distruct in which Joseph Smith and family, of
Mormon notoriety, resided and three-fourths of a mile from 'Mormon Hill.' He has read an article published in the
Cadillac News of April 6th, 1880, respecting 'Cowdery and the Smith family,' over the signature of C. C.
Thorne. The matters therein set forth and alleged to have been stated by deponents to Thorne were so stated by
deponent, at the time and in the manner stated in said published article.
(Signed) Orrin Reed.
Affirmed and subscribed before me, June 29th. 1881.
(Signed) N. K. Cole, J. P."
Amanda Reed, being duly affirmed, deposes: She id the wife of Orrin Reed. She heard the conversation 'tween her
husband and C. C. Thorne. The statement made in the article published by Thorne in the Cadillac News of
April 6th, 1880, respecting 'Cowdery and the Smith family,' were in fact so made. The language employed by her
husband was substantially as therein stated.
(Signed) Amanda Reed.
Affirmed and subscribed as above
John H. Gilbert, of the town of Palmyra, Wayne county, N. Y., being duly sworn, deposes: That in the article
published in the Saints' Herald, at Plano, Ill., June 1st, 1881, over the signature of W. H. Kelley,
purporting to give an interview with the deponent on Mormonism, the deponent is grossly misrepresented in almost
every particular. Words are put in the mouth of the deponent that he never uttered. The pretended answers to
questions to questions that the deponent did answer, are totally at variance with the answers that the deponent
really gave. The deponent believes that such misrepresentation was done designedly
(Signed) John H.Gilbert.
Sworn and subscribed before me, July 12th. 1881.
M. C. Finley, J. P."
The originals are on file in the Clerk's office in Canandaigua, Ontario County, New York. I object to Mr. Kelley's
playing pettifogger and witness any more in this case. I hace impeached the witness. When we come to introduce
witnesses on the character of the Smiths, I shall not allow the impeached witness to testify. Readers can see how
much dependence can be placed on his statements concerning what Howe and Mrs. McKinstry said. I could read a letter
from Howe, if necessary, denying his statements.
We will now resume our analysis of the Book of Mormon. Nephi follows Lehi, quoting 13 chapters of Isaiah, and he
explains its fulfillment in the ministry of Christ, as only Sidney Rigdon, with the New Testament open before him,
could do it. He uses the exact language of Christ and his apostles 600 years before they
|
120
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
uttered it. We have 20 pages of Rigdon's preaching and in it he tells us that these plates shall be hid up and found by "an unlearned man," and shown to "three witnesses;" not thirteen, remember as Mormons tell us, and then hid up again. Rigdon' Nephites know all about the Gospel and obey it, and still obey the law of Moses, while they are trampling it under foot, and are blessed of God, above all that have ever lived, while violating his law; and he would fain have us believe that God revealed the entire Gospel to them, in violation of every principle of the Bible. This adsurd, unscriptural, blundering fraud is the "Fulness of the Gospel."
On page 118 King Jacob tells us that a hundreth part of the wars, contentions and exploits of the Nephites could not be engraved on his plates. About forty years before this, six women left Jerusalem -- but one was then married. Their posterity, in about forty years, have divided into two nations, and one nation has built a temple like Solomon's, built cities, and even the inspired Jacob can not engrave one hundreth part of their exploits on his plates. Sidney never did things by halves when he mounted King Ahasuerus' horse.
On page 119 King Jacob, alias Sidney Rigdon, preaches, and has a perfect knowledge of the atonement and modern theological speculations concerning it, and the resurrection and the world to come. The Apostle Paul declares that these things were mysteries, hidden from even the angels, until revealed to the world by the apostles of Christ. Poor Paul did not know what the Lord had done for the ancestors of Impostor Joe, and manuscript-stealing Sidney in the wilds of America, 600 years before his day; although they habitually trampled under foot nearly every precept of his law. King Jacob, alias Sidney, now gives a parable from the Mormon prophet Zenos. The terse, beautiful parables of our Savior concerning the unfruitful tree, the husbandman and his vinyard, and Paul's parable of the olive tree, that would not cover a page of the Book of Mormon, are diluted, caricatured, and mixed and spread over eight pages, as only hifaluting Sidney could do it. In his awkward attempts to imitate the authorized version in style, he begins thirty sentences on these 8 pages with "and it came to pass," thirty-one with "Behold." "Beheld" and "Beholdest" occur nearly a score of times each. "Whereby" and "thereof" nearly as many times. These cant words of the writer compose a large portion of the parable from Zenos. An eccentric, illiterate character, popularly called Lord Timothy Dexter, wrote a book and compelled the printer to print it exactly as he wrote it. There is not a capital letter, nor a mark of punctuation, nor any division of matter into paragraphs or sentences in it. The book was eagerly bought up as a curiosity. In printing a second edition Dexter stated in an appendix that some had found fault with his book, because there were no capitals or punctuation marks in it; and for
|
page 120 still under construction
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
121
the general judgment, hundreds of years before it was revealed by Christ and his apostles. What a consistent metaphor is the expression "the pleasing bar of God which strikes with awful dread and fear." King Ahasuerus' horse got away with Sidney's good sense that time. In the next chapter we have a debate between Jacob and a Deist, in which the mediatorship of Christ, the atonement, and kindred New Testament ideas and modern theological speculations are discussed, very much after the manner they were in controversies between Rigdon and a sceptical Justice of the Peace in Beaver County, Pa., to which my father listened about sixty years ago. There is an awkward caricature of the miracle of Paul's striking Elymas blind, and there is more talk about "plates" and how they were to be kept, so that no reader of the Book of Mormon could have any doubt about Impostor Joe's plates
page 121 still under construction
|
page 121 still under construction
... He standeth to judge the world."
Did Isaiah, who stands among the prophets of the Old Testament, as the prophet of the Messiah, ever utter such prophecies as these? Rigdon interpolated the history of Christ, as he took it from the New Testament, into Spaulding's romance, when he was remodelling it so that he could make a "big thing out of it" as a new revelation.
Benjamin, alias Rigdon, proceeds. Remember Benjaminis an Israelite. living under the Law, 150 years before the birth of Jesus
"Salvation cometh to none except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ. There shall be no other name given under heaven, nor any other means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only through the name of Christ. Except they humble themselves, and become as little children, and believe that salvation was and is, and is to come (a Disciple idea) in and through the atoning blood of Christ (One of Rigdon's revival expressions). For the natural man is enmity against God and has been since the fall of Adam (more modern theology). But if he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit (one of Rigdon's revival isms) and putteth off the natural man and becomes a Saint, through the atonement of Christ our Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, humble, meek, patient, full of love, willing to submit to the things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."
Seriously, now, as persons of sense, shall we believe that an Israelite, under the law of Moses, preached in that way, 150 years before the birth of Christ? Or that Rigdon interpolated these sentences from the New Testament, these phrases from modern theology, the revivalisms of his own, into the MS he stole from Spaulding -- when he was fixing it up to make "a big thing" out of it as a new revelation?
In the sermon of a prophet, Abinadi, which is as much like one of Rigdon's sermons as [are] the sermons of King
Benjamin, Rigdon completely "gives himself away," as the slang expression has it. Page 174.: "If Christ had not
risen from the dead, or have broken the bonds of death (Shades of Murray, what grammar), that the grave should
have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection. But there is a
resurrection from the dead, therefore the grave hath no victory, and the sting of death is swallowed up in Christ."
Rigdon forgot that he was trying to put the resurrection of Christ into the mouth of an Israelite before
|
122
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
it occurred, which demands the future tense, and used such language as the real speaker, Rigdon, should use, and spoke of it as a past event, saying. "had risen, [and] "has broken." On page 277 we have doctrine taught that is as clearly the work of Rigdon as is his blackguard letter to the "Boston Journal," or his glorification of King Ahasuerus' horse. Immersion for the remission of sins is preached over 100 years before John the Baptist, and in the name of Christ, more than 150 years before the days of Pentacost, just as Disciple preachers preach it; and to clinch the matter, that it is Rigdon, immersion in the name of Christ is for the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit, what Rigdon believed and brought from the Baptists, and the Disciples do not believe. Observe the teachings agrees with the Disciples as far as Rigdon agreed with them, and disagrees with them, just where he differed from them. Converts were added to the church, which was completely organized before Jesus said, "I will build my church," proving that it did not then exist. Here again we have an instance in which Rigdon differed from the Disciples. On pages 192, 193, 194 and 195 we have descriptions of the churches of Christ, Church discipline, all in accordance with Rigdon's ideas of what these things should be. A wicked son of a preacher is converted, just as men were converted under Rigdon's preaching,
|
a regular miraculous Baptist "experience." This was followed by a regular series of Rigdonish revivals, under preachers preaching like Rigdon, the gospel in all of its fullness, according to Rigdon's notions. On page 233 we have a long extract from one of Rigdon's sermons:
"ye must repent and be born again, for the spirit saith (where except in John III in the exact words of Jesus) If ye are not born again, ye cannot enter the Kingdom of God; therefore come and be baptized unto repentance, that ye may be washed from your sins, that ye may have faith on the Son of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, who is mighty to save and to cleanse from all unrighteousness. Yea, I say unto you, come and fear not; lay to one side every sin, which doth so easily beset you, which doth bind you down to destruction; yea, come and go forth, and show unto your God that you are
willing to repent of your sins, and enter into a covenant with him to keep His commandments, and manifest it unto Him this day, by going down into the waters of baptism, and whosoever doeth this, and keepeth the commandments of God from this time forth, the same will remember that I have said unto him, yea, he will remember that I have said unto him, that he shall have eternal life, according to the Holy Spirit, which testifieth in me."
Let me ask any person of common sense which do you believe, that an Israelite, under the law of Moses, preached in
that way, in the exact words of Christ and his apostles, more than 100 years before Christ? Or has
Rigdon interpolated one of his exhortations into the manuscript he stole from Spaulding
when he was making "a big thing," in the shape of a new revelation out of it? Old acquaintances
of Rigdon in this audience can almost hear hifalutin, spread eagle Sidney in one of his revival exhortations, as
they hear that language.
|
MR. KELLEY'S TWELFTH SPEECH.
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: --
Before entering upon my main argument I will notice one or two objections that have been made by my opponent
First, with regard to the purported affidavits he read. -- Take and read the statement showing the manner of
interviewing the witnesses I introduced, -- when the language was taken down at the time -- the parties own words
-- and compare it with the manner of running around and getting up an affidavit when the other side is not there
and you will soon discover who has the truth.
Mr. Braden: Was Mr. Thorn present when you interviewed those parties?
Mr. Kelley: I have not presented any affidavits, sir. I have given their exact language taken at the time; written
in their presence. That is the manner of getting
|
page 122 still under construction
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
123
|
Page 123 is not fully transcribed.
Was it in that he said he had a way out of the difficulty now he thought; that he had spoken to Saunders to testify that Rigdon was there, and afterwards had written him. but Saunders had not received it? Was it in that he is reported as disbelieving in the Bible? He has the only witness whose testimony I read before you, who has said he was misrepresented. The majority have stood by their evidence as published in the interview. The others I could say something about, but I will not at this time.
Here I will refer to one or two other matters and then proceed with my argument. First, with regard to the "woman preacher" referred to in Mrs. Spaulding's letter, as found in Smucker's History. Does he not know that that is the original statement from which all the rest of these
|
histories of Mormonism go to for their material, and yet the rest of them have struck out the word "woman," What right had they to do that?
Mr Braden: "When was Smucker's book copyrighted?"
Mr. Kelley: "I do not care when Smucker's book was copyrighted.
Mr. Braden: "In 1878?"
Mr. Kelley: I did not get it from Mr. Smucker. I got it from a book that was published long before Smucker. Mackey's History of the Mormons, published in England. I will hand you the book any time you may wish to examine. It is a book published long before Smucker, and it has the words 'a woman preacher;' and it is the oldest work that I have seen that contained the letter. These others have taken it out of the letter because it killed them so easily. You quoted from works that had deliberately garbled the letter and have used such before this audience
It was, in a former speech, speaking of these purported statements of John and Martha Spaulding, as set out by Howe, showing that they are quotations from something and not the original. He does not give any date to these statements; -- no time or place, or party by whom they were taken. They are put in quotations in the book, and they do not, in any sense, amount to statements. If they did, they are so contradictory to what Mrs. Spaulding herself states, that they could not possibly be relied upon. This is the testimony he so triumphantly threw into my face the other evening -- the best he has. How do you like to swallow it down? The publication by Howe of these purported statements and the garbled extracts from our works in his "History of the Mormons, or Mormonism Unveiled," shows that the enemies of the Book of Mormon had nothing of truth to sustain their wicked attacks and overthrow it, or they would have used it.
All of the statements which he has produed have now been examined, except that of Mr. Campbell and Adamson Bentley,
the last of these the one whom Rigdon referred to in the letter that I read to you last evening. I did expect to
refer to Mr. Campbell's this evening. I guess I shall, as I am in this connection -- also Mr. Bentley's.
Mr. Campbell, you remember, mentioned in his statement that he was not positive with regard to this; that is, that
he thought that he would like to see what brother Bentley had to say about it before he gave his testimony. It is
not independent evidence by either of these parties. This Adamson Bentley is the same party who was referred to by
Sidney Rigdon; who from the outset (1831) undertook to destroy him; and Mr. Campbell says, as you will find by
reading his letter, "that the conversation alluded to in Bro. Bentley's letter, in 1841, was in my presence as well
as in his. My recollection of it led me, some two or three years ago, to interrogate Bro. Bentley concerning his
recollection of it."
|
124
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
But I will produce the article and statements of the parties in full, so that all may properly judge them: --
Mr. Campbell heads these articles as follows: -- "MISTAKES TOUCHING THE BOOK OF MORMON." He then publishes an article entitled "Mormon" -- The means by which it stole the 'True Gospel," taken from the Evangelist, one of their own papers, then edited by Mr. Scott.
The article is as follows: --
"It is well known that the Mormons preach the true gospel and plead for immediate obedience to it on the part of the hearers, as the advocates of original Christianity. This was not on original measure of Mormonism for, indeed, baptism for the remission of sins is a phrase not found in their book. A few of their leaders took it from Rigdon, at Euclid, on the Western Reserve, as may be learned from Brother Jones' account of their first visit to Kirtland, published in a preceding volume of the Evangelist. Rigdon, we were perfectly aware, had possessed himself of our analysis, and the plea for obedience raised thereupon, but not, choosing to rely on my own recollection of the means by, and the times at which they were imparted to him, we wrote to Mr. Bentley, who is his brother-in-law, for the necessary information. Mr. Bentley's letter shows not only whence he received his knowledge of the true gospel, but also that, coward that he was, he had not the independence necessary to preach it in his own vicinity after he had received it. Thus the knowledge of ordering and pleading the elements of the true gospel by that people, is seen to arise near the same time and from the same source as that of our own reformation. Mr. Bentley's letter is as follows: --
Solon, January 22, 1841.
"Dear Brother Scott --
Your favor of the 7th December is received. I returned from Philadelphia, Pa., on the 10th, and the answer to your acceptable letter has been deferred. I was much gratified to hear from you and family, but would be much more so to see you once more in the flesh, and talk over our toils and anxieties in the cause of our blest Redeemer.
You request that I should give you all the information I am in possession of respecting Mormonism. I know that Sidney Rigdon told me there was a book coming out (the manuscript of which has been found engraved on gold plates) as much as two years before the Mormon book made its appearance in this country or had been heard of by me. The same I communicated to brother A Campbell. The Mormon book has nothing of baptism for the remission of sins in it; and of course at the time Rigdon got Solomon Spaulding's manuscript he did not understand the scriptures on that subject." (Of course he did not. He was in the Campbellite Church then and they never understood the Scriptures as they ought to have done)." I cannot say he learned it from me, as he had been about a week with you in Nelson and Windham, before he came to my house. I, however, returned with him to Mentor. He stated to me that he did not feel himself capable of introducing the subject in Mentor, and would not return without me if he had to stay two weeks with us to induce me to go. This is about all I can say. I have no doubt but the account given in Mormonism Unmasked (this is Howe's book "Mormonism Unveiled," which he refers to. They all go back to that for their information) is about the truth. It was got up to deceive the people and obtain their property, and was a wicked contrivance with Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith, Jr. May God have mercy on the wicked men, and may they repent of this their wickedness! May the Lord bless you, brother Scott, and family!
Yours most affectionately,
ADAMSON BENTLEY."
This is a genuine Campbellite letter, as it has all of the ear-marks. He wants to tell something, when it is evident without the least comment that he knows nothing at all. He is Sidney Rigdon's brother-in-law, and since Rigdon has left his church wants
|
to give him a dab, and he does not care how, so that he is nit caught. He had been intimate with Rigdon all along during the years 1823, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30: the two working together, preaching together; and Bentley knew perfectly well that Rigdon could have had no more to do in getting up the Book of Mormon than he had.; and yet because Rigdon held united with the Saints he was mad and wanted to destroy him. He indorses Howe's book as no doubt being "about the truth." This is the book which I showed you so perverted, misquoted, garbled, and wickedly falsified our works in order to write down something against them. Bentley drinks it down. And the "May the Lord bless you, brother Scott." That was the spirit that marked the career of this man, at the time, to a dot. Never mind anybody else. No difference what their claims. Hound them down because they do not follow us. But the Lord bless us! me and my wife, my son John and his wife, brother Scott and his wife, us poor, and no more.
I reserve comment upon this statement of Scott's and letter of Bentley till after presenting the review of it, and the evidence, as Mr. Braden has termed it, of Mr. Campbell. You will observe it at once that this letter of Bentley's was too brazenly absurd for Campbell to swallow for a moment.
Mr. Campbell says:
Brethren Scott and Bentley are both mistaken as to the fact of baptism for the remission of sins not having been found in the Book of Mormon; and one of them in the inference contained in the note appended to Elder Bentley's letter.
The conversation alluded to in brother Bentley's letter of 1841, was in my presence as well as in his, and my recollection of it led me some two or three years ago to interrogate brother Bentley touching his recollections of it, which accord with mine in every particular, except the year in which it occurred -- he placing it in the summer of 1827 -- I, in the summer of 1826 -- Rigdon at the time observing that in the plates due up in New York there was an account not only of the Aborigines of this country but also it was stated that the Christian religion had been preached in this country during the first century just as we were preaching it on the Western Reserve."
Here is the sixth: and a very essential difference. Mr. Campbell says that Rigdon was telling them about an account that was contained upon plates dug up in New York, but Mr. Bentley puts it in his letter "the manuscript of which had been found engraved on gold plates." Here Bentley is convicted deliberately lying in order, if possible, to make a show of connection between the "Spaulding Manuscript," which at this time was in the possession of Howe, and the Book of Mormon: and so he wickedly puts the word "manuscript" into his letter to mislead.
Mr. Campbell proceeds: --
Now as the Book of Mormon was being manufactured at that time, for the copyright was taken out in June, 1829,
two years according to Elder Bentley, and three years according to me, after said conversation, (and certainly
it was not less than two years,) the
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
125
inference of brother Scott touching the person upon whom the theft was committed would be plausible, if it was a fact that baptism for remission of sins is no part of the Book, but something superadded since from the practice in Ohio in the end of 1827 and beginning of 1828, a year or more after Rigdon made the aforesaid statement."
Mr. Campbell proceeded then to make quotations from the Book of Mormon, to show that Messrs. Scott and Bentley were wrong and over conclusive, quoting from pages 240, 470, 581 and 582 of the book, and then says:--
Certainly this is testimony enough, without further readings. The note on the text of brother Bentley's letter shows how easily men may reason wrong from false facts, or from assumed premises. If the Editor of the Evangelist were not above the imputation of ambition, envy, jealousy, or vanity, the whole affair might be construed disadvantageously, but as it is, it seems to show the necessity of a scrupulous examination of the premises before we presume on such grave conclusions."
Just so. There are a great many earmarks visible to the naked eye about this alleged conversation with Mr. Rigdon, showing "the necessity of a scrupulous examination of the premises before we presume on such grave conclusions." Mr. Campbell undoubtedly, made a large number of his followers wince when he struck these two conclusionists that little blow; and had he on this occasion heeded the advice tendered to others, another erroneous, yet "grave conclusion" would not have been arrived at.
The only remarkable thing about this statement of Campbell's at all, is the fact that any man can be so blind as
not to see that there is not a shadow of proof in it that in the least points to Sidney Rigdon as a party having
any connection with the origin of the Book of Mormon.Suppose the memory of Mr. Campbell to be entirely correct in
giving this conversation at least ten years after the time fixed for its occurrence (and he shows it is not, by
himself stating that he first askrd Mr. Bentley about it to see if he had it right), and what have we?
Simply that Sidney Rigdon stated in his presence in the year 1826 or
'27 that there was a claim made by some person in New York State, not even the name of the party then known to
him it seems, that some plates of gold had been dug up in that State, giving an account of the aborigines of this
country and stating that the Christian religion had been preached in this country just as we (Campbell,
Rigdon, Scott and Bentley) were preaching it on the Western Reserve. This same claim (with
the exception of the words "just as we were doing upon the Western Reserve"), doubtless, to this time had been
repeated by more than ten thousand people in the United States; for the claim was in the public press before this,
the announcement being made as early as 1823, and the plates were obtained in September, 1827; and
would it be a strange thing or proof of guilt for Sidney Rigdon to also talk about it with
others? Indeed, when you turn the thought over, the strength of the evidence is the other way, for had Rigdon
been connected with this in
|
any wise he would not have spoken of it to Mr. Campbell and Mr. Bentley. But says one, why did he use the
words "just as we were doing on the Western Reserve?"
When Joseph Smith first announced that the angel said to him that there was a record of the ancient inhabitants
of this continent written upon gold plates and deposited, to be brought forth in the own due time of the Lord,
immediately all the good old deacons and pious preachers of Manchester and Palmyra, New York, started the story
of a "Gold Bible." It was published over the country; and since Campbell and Bentley can not agree within a year
of the time when they say Rigdon spoke of the notice, who will dare to say the conversation was not in 1828, or
even 1830, instead of 1826 or 1827. They can not agree within one year of the time themselves; yet they pretend
to give certain testimony, as they would have you believe, although your salvation may be shadowed in the grand
hereafter by it, for having rejected the truth...
page 125 still under construction
|
126
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 126 is not fully transcribed.
I have shown by the falsity of the statements upon which his questions are based, struck his foundation down, and what care I now for the twists he takes in the debris?
If he has anything to offer in support of his foundation, or any new evidence, I shall gladly take the time to examine it. I have already examined all of his testimony, except, possibly, a few of the parties referred to by Patterson in his pamphlet. Should I find the statements of any others than whom I have examined I shall refer to them hereafter.
Now I will proceed to the argument upon the main question, taking up first and answering objections made.
My opponent, on the last evening of the discussion said that all the good there was in the Book of Mormon Smith
and Rigdon stole from the Disciples, alias the Campbellites, but this is a thing to be proven, if true. I confess,
viewing the matter from one standpoint, that it seems as though there might have been some tampering with the
Campbellite faith, some time, if there was ever any special good in it, as it seems to be quite varren of any good
thing now; but whether it was stolen from them by the Latter-Day Saints remains to be shown.
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
127
Page 127 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
128
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 128 has not been fully transcribed.
|
Page 128 has not been fully transcribed.
... While he was in the world he was the especial light of the people. That is the way it was, Mr. Braden. There
is no clash here with the Book of Mormon. The Holy Ghost and the gospel were enjoyed before the Savior's ministry
on earth, and they kept the law of Moses, also.
(Time expired.)
|
MR. BRADEN'S TWELFTH SPEECH.
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: --
On page 234 we have a description of many kinds of coin, and some of them were very large. Why have we never found
any of these coins in America? In ruins in the old world millions of coins have been found. Why not on this
continent?
On page 235 a Nephite preacher solves all the disputes of modern theology concerning the resurrection, and 100
years before Christ. Men may differ in their interpretations of the general truths taught by Christ and his apostles,
but there can be no sure dispute over the minute, dogmatical revelations of the Nephite prophet, who, strange to
say,
|
given by inspiration the exact ideas of Rigdon 1800 years before Rigdon lived to preach them.
"Now there is a death which is called a temporal death; and the death of
Christ shall loose the bands of this temporal death, that all shall be raised from this temporal death. The spirit
and the body shall be re-united again in its perfect form, both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper
frame, even as they now are at this time, and shall be brought to stand before the bar of God, knowing as we now
know."
There, that settles the vexed question in favor of a literal resurrection. God inspired the Nephite Amalek,
long before the birth of Christ, to explain the resurrection and temporal death and spiritual death, just as
Rigdon believed.
On page 238 a soul-sleeper is silenced with
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
129
Rigdon's ideas on eschatology. On page 289 we have the modern term "Dissenter" -- a word never used until men dissented from the creed and practice of the Church of England. On the page we have a description of Episcopalians. and the Lord's day is mentioned. This is followed by pages of preaching in which nearly every idea of modern theology, even the most abstruse, is discussed and settled in a manner that utterly eclipses the general teachings of Christ and his apostles; and what is more miraculous, these Nephites always agree exactly with Rigdon's theology in their revelations. On page 280 we have the Church of God described, and it is described as having perfect Christian teaching concerning topics the New Testament declares were mysterious until revealed by Christ and his apostles. On page 326 we read:
"He prayed for blessings of Christ to rest on his brethren so long as there should a band of Christians to possess the land, for thus were all true
believers of Christ, who belonged to the church of God called by those who did not belong to the Church. And those who belonged to the Church were faithful, yea, all those who were true believers of Christ, took upon them, gladly the name of Christ or Christians as they were called, because of their
belief in Christ."
The New Testament declares that the disciples of Christ were first called "Christians" at Antioch over one hundred years after the Book of Mormon declares they were called Christians universally in America.
I wish now to call attention to one of those little things that speak volumes. There was a difference of opinion among the co-adjutors of Campbell concerning what should be the name of the followers of Christ. Campbell, Sheppard and others insisted that they should be called "Disciples of Christ." Walter Scott and others insisted that they should be called "Christians," and that the Church should be called "the Church of God" or "Church of Christ." Rigdon agreed with Scott. Observe that his ideas are repeated several times in the above extract. By inserting into his stolen manuscript his ideas, he contradicted the New Testament concerning the time the name Christian was first given and made his "big thing" a tissue of absurdities. According to the Book of Mormon there were great numbers of Churches of God and multitudes of Christians hundreds of years before Christ came. They had a perfect knowledge of his Gospel and the most abstruse ideas of modern theology, all settled by revelation, long before Christ; and the most singular fact is that the Lord agreed with Rigdon in all of these revelations that he gave these highly favored Nephites. How highly favored these old prophets were in receiving, by inspiration from God, all of Rigdon's theology 1800 years before the advent of Sidney.
We come now to another of those little things that speak volumes. Rigdon as a regular Baptist preacher, had a
bitter prejudice against all secret societies. In the
|
days of thee anti-Masonic excitement of the time extending from 1824-5 to 1834-5 Rigdon was a rabid anti-Mason.
On page 382 he gives the Masons a dig and airs his anti-Masonic ideas. Gadianton and a band of robbers have a
Masonic lodge and act just as anti-Masons said Masons acted. Again on pages 365-6 he airs his anti-Masonic ideas.
A band of cutthroats have a secret society with oaths, grips, signs, pass-words, and swear to protect each other
in crime. On page 399 and on several pages following we have a repetition of Rigdon's anti-Masonic ideas. Seriously,
is this the work of a Nephite before Christ, or is it the work of the anti-masons, Spaulding, Rigdon, or Smith --
one or all of them? Page 474 a prophet tells the Nephites that on the night our Savior is born it will be as light
as day all night. The sun will set and rise, but the light will not be diminished in the least. The Bible flatly
contradicts such stuff
page 129 still under construction
|
130
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
used the first and last letters of the Cherokee alphabet.
After this our Savior, who has been resurrected at Jerusalem, appears on this continent and preaches one of Sidney
Rigdon's discourses to them, and commands them to use Sidney Rigdon's baptismal formula, "Having authority given me
of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." By the way,
Sidney dropped the Disciple peculiarity of saying "Spirit" instead of "Ghost," and went back
to his old Baptist formula. Who is such a simpleton as to believe that our Savior visited America after his
ascention into heaven, in violation of the New Testament that declares his next coming after his ascention will be
at the end of his dispensation; that his mission was to preach one of Sidney Rigdon's sermons to the aborigines of
America, and to give as the law of heaven, by solemn revelation of the glorified Son of God, that they must use
Rigdon's baptismal formula. On page 444 we have one of Rigdon's idiotic extravaganzas...
page 130 still under construction
|
page 130 still under construction
... Our Saviour says three shall remain instead of one. He bestowes a boon he did not bestow upon his beloved disciple John. Impostor Joe and Oliver Cowdery have a revelation, on parchment, from John that he did not die, and did remain on earth, in flat contradiction of God's word. Just such silly wonders as these are what Mormonism feeds on. The book closes with a prophecy on the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, and denounces fearful woes on all who do not receive the tomfooleries of Sidney Rigdon, Solomon Spaulding, and Impostor Joe.
The Book of Nephi, the son of Nephi, is an unimportant one. It tells us on page 481 that masonry revived, and that Satan was let loose and iniquity did fearfully abound. Sidney must have been exceedingly malignant against the Masons. Moroni takes up Mormon's work and he informs us that Masonry shall be prevalent when the Book of Mormon appears; and that churches shall be worldly and proud and that it will be a time of unmeasured apostacy. Above all men shall deny that miracles and revelations are possible. Then Sidney goes for the Disciples who would not accept the Baptist idea of a direct and miraculous influence of the Holy Spirit. We have Sidney's ideas for several pages and one of his exhortations in his most approved camp meeting style.
We find another of these incidental matters that expose the fraud in this Book of Mormon. We have proved that
Spaulding wrote several manuscripts. To his second Mormon manuscript he added the emigration of the Zarahemlaites,
closing his manuscript with the book called the "Book of Mormon." He very appropriately has Moroni declare that
he finishes the record of his father; and that he has only a few things to write, a few things that his father
has commanded him to write on the few
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
131
pages left on the plates. He declares his father made the record and declares its intent. He then says he would
write more if he had room on the plates but he cannot for the plates are full and he has no ore to make any more
and is alone. He then adds the few pages he declared he would and the book appropriately closes.
When Spaulding went to Pittsburg, at Patterson's request, he rewrote the romance, writing Mormon Manuscript
No. III and adding the Jaredite portion. He overlooked this language of Moroni with which he had appropriately
closed the Manuscript No. II and as the Book of Mormon now stands, Moroni wrote 56 pages -- the whole of the
Jaredite portion [on] nothing, for his plates were full, and he could write no more. That one blunder is enough
to condemn this fraud.
In this Jaredite Portion, written on nothing, and with nothing as a basis for it, we have a wonderful series of
stories...
page 131 still under construction
|
.
|
132
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
page 132 still under construction
... The Lord is not a Mason, "for the Lord worketh not in secret combinations." "Neither doeth he will that man
should shed blood, but in all things hath forbidden it from the beginning of men." Lord is an anti-Mason, and don't
you forget it.
"And I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations." He is not a Morgan, then, "for it hath
been made known unto me they are among all people and they are had among the Lamanites, and they have caused the
destruction of this people of whom I am writing, and also the destruction of the Nephites." What an awful thing
this Masonry has been, and now listen: "Whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations to get power and
gain, until they spread over the land, behold they shall be destroyed, for the Lord will not suffer the blood of
his saints shall be shed by them; they shall always cry unto them from the ground for vengeance upon them, and yet
he avenge them not." Now listen, Masons: "Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things shall
be shown unto you and that thereby ye may repent of your sins and suffer not that these muderous combinations
shall get above you which are built up to get power and gain, and the work, even the work of destruction shall come
upon you, even the sword of Justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you." Won't they catch it, though!! "To your
overthrow and destruction if you shall suffer these things to be, wherefore God commandeth you when you shall see
these things come among you that you shall awake to a sense of your awful condition" --
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
133
one of Rigdon's revival expressions -- "because of this secret combination which shall be among you all. Woe be
unto it, because the blood of them that hath been slain, for they cry for vengeance upon it, and also upon those
who built it up, for it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands,
nations and countries." The anti-Mason rant of 1825 to 1830. "And it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people,
for it is built up by the devil." There, Masons, you have it -- the devil is the founder of Masonry, and Cain was
the first Mason! "Who is the father of all lies." There, Masons, that cooks the Masonic goat to a cinder!!
Page 517: King Heth turns Mason, and of course, plots to murder some one. Page 522: Masonry breaks out in a new
spot and
|
Satan is let loose of course. In all there were over a score of stabs at Masonry, covering several pages. Every charge made against Masonry in the years 1825 to 1830 is reiterated several times. When we learn from Mrs. Spaulding that Spaulding was a rabid anti-Mason, and remember that Rigdon, a regular Baptist preacher, was fanatically opposed to secret societies and was a ranting anti-Mason, all this rant and abuse is just what is to be expected. But who is such a sodden fool as to believe that Israelites, in the wilds of America, 1400 years before the anti-Masonic excitement in the United States, uttered repeatedly all the anti-Masonic abuse of Masonry?
This one feature is enough to condemn the claim of the Book of Mormon and to expose it as a transparent fraud.
|
MR. KELLEY'S THIRTEENTH SPEECH.
|
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: --
The Spaulding story upon examination has been fully shown to be a story; --
a wonderfully large one, too, for its time. That thing was thoroughly answered and put to shame by Sidney Rigdon
as early as January, 1836. His slaughter of that through a published article in the Messenger and
Advocate, a paper printed here in Kirtland, was sufficient to put all honest men at the time upon
their guard. Mr. Rigdon showed that there was not only no truth in the general statement connecting him with
Joseph Smith and the publication of the Book of Mormon, but further, that each and every one of the statements
and allegations said to have been made by the parties (the very same ones Braden has brought up and cited as
his witnesses in this discussion) were false. This was long prior to the death of Mr. Patterson, the Presbyterian
preacher, in Pittsburg, whom Mr. Rigdon, in his letter of 1839, refers to as not lending himself "to the infamous
plot to blacken his (Rigdon's) character." A man of no sympathies in common with the Latter Day Saints, and whom
Rigdon's enemies had held out as the one to whom Spaulding delivered his manuscript for publication in Pittsburg,
and as knowing certain things connecting Rigdon with the romance manuscript. But these persons never get his
(Patterson's) statement, although he lived twenty years after they started the story and eighteen years after
it had been publicly challenged and put to shame
|
by the Saints. However, Wm. Small, of Camden, N.J., in the meantime goes to this same
Patterson in Pittsburg, and he makes affidavit to the fact that he never knew anything about such a
manuscript as these parties had told about. But this don't in the least dash these story-tellers;
they lie low for a time till Patterson dies; and then, like them of old who said to the soldiers, "Say that
his disciples came and stole him away by night while we slept," they revive and start other theories in order
to carry out their nefarious work.
If it was so easy in the first century to get the guard to lie with reference to the resurrection of Jesus
after they had beheld the heavenly messenger and had fallen back as dead men, would it be remarkable that in
the nineteenth century men would be able to get parties to spin falsehoods, to fill up
the measure of crime as to this Spaulding tale?
But these fair and full denials of this story were made when the professed "first, and only sufficient evidence they ever had for such a story, if ever such a story had existed
in fact; and with the challenge of the truth of the story in their very faces, and demand made for the proof,
by one of the men assailed, too, with others, and in the very midst of the parties who claimed to know, Hulburt
and Howe and these men, (said to be witnesses),
|
134
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
fail to put forth a single statement that can be in any view of the claim looked upon as evidence, burned the
manuscript they had received of Spaulding, so admitted by themselves and began in an underhanded and insidious
manner to publish their stories through the ready newspapers for such things, and in 1840, after the Saints were
far away from this part of the country, in the States of Missouri, Illinois, and Iowa, Howe gets out his slanderous
and disreputable work of "Mormonism Unveiled," or "History of the Mormons."
This was four years after Sidney Rigdon through the Kirtland publication had showed the falsity of the story; one year after his letter in the "Boston Journal," which played such havoc among the despoilers of his good name; one year after the full and clear examination and plain contradiction of the story by Parley P. Pratt, in the New Era, a New York paper; and five years after the story had been publicly met and put to shame in various parts of the United States and Canada, by the elders of the Saints, and notwithstanding all of this, Howe and Robert Patterson, this last a little fellow now living over here at Pittsburg (who would like to do something to destroy the faith of the Saints, if he only could rake up something to do,) brazenly put out for the truth, the statement that their story was never denied till just lately. Men who will deliberately or ignorantly make such false claims as these, and ask you to believe them, cannoy be relied upon in any features of the case by honest men. Before a person publishes a thing as true, he should know it to be such, and he cannot justify himself afterwards upon the ground, or plea of ignorance.
Another point not to forget. All the time, from 1834 to 1840, this same Howe had the Spaulding manuscript in his hands, and at the same time he had it in his hands, Mesdames Davidson and McKinstry, the widow and daughter of Solomon Spaulding, were claiming it was in fact, the genuine article that Spaulding wrote; the "Manuscript Found." And Howe writes Mrs. Davidson a letter in the meantime saying, "It did not read as we expected, and we did not use it:" but never once hints that it was the wrong manuscript, or not the "Manuscript Found," as claimed by these parties, who were the only persons under the sun who could possibly tell whether it was the "Manuscript Found" or not.
He never once in his letter to them asks if they did not have another manuscript some where of Spaulding's, or if they had any means of telling whether he had the right one; or whether Hulbert had played off on him and given him the wrong one. No; Howe knew he had the Spaulding Manuscript in his possession, and that story in his control, with all advantage in his favor; and as the coward that strikes down his innocent victim at the time he thinks no whisper of the deed can ever fall upon mortal ear, so, brooding in jealousy and incited
|
through the lies and tales which had been poured into his ready mind, he puts forth his hand to consign to the
past the first and only evidence of this Spaulding tale, while, with the weapons of false statements and
stories hawked about by the vile and depraved, he essays to destroy an innocent and noble people.
He knew at the time of his writing that he ought to have a different class of evidence to meet these things with and make good his assertions than that which he had, and he states in his book that he will furnish despositions for this purpose, and which, he says, "will sink these people." Oh! yes; sink them; that was the object of Howe and Hulburt; but he fails, however, to publish, or give in all of his writings or works, a single desposition of any person whatever, notwithstanding this boast.
But what does he do? Answer:
1. He publishes spurious, garbled, perverted and false things under the claim he was making quotations from the works of the Saints.
2. He publishes the questionable statements of a few persons, the quoted statements of two others; all of which are positively contradicted by Mrs. (Solomon Spaulding) Davidson, Solomon Spaulding's daughter, Mrs. McKinstry, Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt, and Patterson, the Presbyterian preacher at Pittsburgh; besides the fact that they so clearly and unmistakably bear upon the face the stamp of inconsistency and falsehood. They hold the idea throughout that these testifiers, who did not pretend that they had heard of or seen Spaulding's writings for more than twenty years, were so familiar with a manuscript, (which, to have been what they claim for it, must have contained from fifteen hundred to two thousand pages,) that they could, after twenty years' lapse of time, give names that were at the time strange and new to them; and never spoken by them for all of this time; and other little things which it is plain the copiers of the pretended statements must have taken from the Book of Mormon, as this was four years after its publication, and done when they have the book before them, this last fact being clearly disclosed in the statements themselves.
The absurdity, however, does not rest alone upon all of these things; but their statements were emphatically, directly and flatly contradicted by the manuscript then in Howe's possession, and which claimed for itself to be the one Spaulding said was found in a cave, and which was truly the "Manuscript Found."
These statements so directly contradicted, together with a few fraudulent affidavits which Hurlbut got up in
New York, and which I have fully shown were fraudulent, is the entire stock in trade of Mr. Howe to form his
basis of belief and cause him to so severely and viciously attack the faith of the Saints and make them appear
odious, except the bare disbelief of himself in God, the Scriptures, abd the fact that
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
135
there was any such thing in the universe of God, or history of man, as the Holy Spirit, in which the Saints believed and claimed to rejoice. Ah! The secret is unfolded in his own words: -- "I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than Joe Smith saw an angel." And so he wrote as Voltaire, Hume and Thomas Paine from the standpoint of his unbelief, without the honesty of these others. I might introduce here as cumulative evidence on this question the additional statement of Mrs. McKinstry, who had a better opportunity of knowing and did know the manuscript of her father better, than either John or Martha Spaulding, and who as late as the year 1880, published, (so stated by the compiler, Mrs. Dickenson), an affidavit in the Scribner Monthly, still claiming and reaffirming that this Hulburt did get the "Manuscript Found." The statement of this Robert Patterson, of Pittsburgh, who is trying to find some terrible thing against the Saints, to Hulburt 4 years ago, in the presence of Mrs. Hulburt, "that his father, (Mr. Patterson, the preacher,) always claimed that he did not believe there was ever such a manuscript as the parties claimed the 'Manuscript Found' to be, about their printing office in Pittsburgh." And notwithstanding this, this same Robert Patterson, in 1882, suppresses in his publication this claim of his father, and gives the purported statement as obtained from one, Rev. (?) Samuel Williams who wrote up a list of stories for publication against the Saints, when the first three lines of the statement clearly show that it is a fraud, and that Patterson never had anything to do with it whatever. It is as follows: -- "R. Patterson had in his employment Silas Engles at the time, a foreman printer," etc., then signed at the bottom, "Robert Patterson." This is certainly enough on this.
The statement of Mrs. Hulburt, made on Tuesday, February 5th, 1884, I now submit to you: -- She said that,
"Mr. Hurlbut never obtained but one manuscript from Mrs. Davison. That one he let E. D. Howe have. When Mrs. (Spaulding) Davison let him have it, he said he promised to return it; and when he let Howe have it, Howe promised to restore it to Mrs. Spaulding, but he never did. Hulburt spent about six months time and a good deal of money looking up the Spaulding manuscript and other evidence, but he was disappointed in not finding what he wanted. This was the reason he turned the whole thing over to Howe. He never was satisfied with what he found, and while on his death-bed he would have given everything he had in the world could he have been certain there was ever a "Manuscript Found," as claimed, similar to the Book of Mormon."
This is overwhelming proof, showing there was never any such manuscript as they claimed Spaulding wrote, and that
they got the quire of paper upon which he did write. It is the confirming proof, too, of Howe's guilt. Why did he
not do as he agreed, send the manuscript which he got back to Mrs. Davidson? The reason is too plain to be
concealed for a moment. He is so anxious to have it destroyed that he violates his agreement to return "as soon
as used." Why did he not return it when "it
|
did not read as they expected," at the time he wrote to Mrs. Davidson?
Shame on such trickery!
I might also introduce the emphatic statement of Mrs. Emma Smith, wife of Joseph Smith the
Seer. She positively states: "That no acquaintance was formed between Sidney Rigdon and the Smith family till after
the church was organized in the year 1830. That neither (her husband nor herself) ever saw Sidney Rigdon until long
after the Book of Mormon was in print." This is the statement of one of the most honored and esteemed ladies
in Illinois, and who, after the murder of her husband, continued a resident of the State, raising her family, and
departing this life but a short time ago in a ripe age, loved by all who knew her. Also the positive declaration
of David Whitmer, made at Richmond, Mo., April 1882, in answer to a question asked him in the presence of a number
of persons, by President Joseph Smith of Lamoni, Ia, to which he gave this answer: "That the
Book of Mormon was published long before Sidney Rigdon was known to our (the witnesses') family, or the Smiths;
that I know that the story told of the Spaulding romance in connection with the Book of Mormon is false."
I will, in this connection, again call your attention to the affidavit of Mrs. Salisbury, to which Braden was so
hasty to speak of last evening as being a lie, and therefore the witness could not be believed. Let us examine it
and see who lied. She says, "That at the time of the publication of said book, my brother Joseph Smith, Jr., lived
in the family of my brother in the town of Manchester, Ontario county, N.Y."
That you will not certainly say, is contradicted. Now look at the next:
"That he had, all of his life to this time, made his home with his family."
Do you say this is contradicted? Where was his home to this time? Notice, she does not say he was at home all
the time, but "made it his home with his family." To the year 1827, he was a young man, and his home was with
the family, although he at times worked away from home. There are thousands of poor boys who have to do this,
and my observation of humanity tells me that they are just about as apt to be honorable and trustful as those
who stay at homw and don't have any work to do; or, if they do have, do not do it. In this year he gets married,
(steals his wife, Braden says,) although he was in his 22d year, and the lady he marries was in her 23d. Well, it
rather strikes my mind that she wanted to be stolen. Besides, it is a proof that their Campbellite preacher,
Rigdon, did not steal everything that came into Smith's possession.
But Mr. Smith says in his history, that after the marriage he went to his father's and remained, living in the
family a year and farmed with his father. Here is his home till 1828, certain, and without any contradiction of
any witness. And it is certain from all, that all the time during the year 1827 he was here in his father's
|
136
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 136 has not been fully transcribed.
|
decency by saying she lied, and is contradicted by all others? Or that she did not tell the truth and the whole truth? Bring forward some of your strong evidence, if you have so much that is contradictory and let us hear it read. This lady does not pretend that she was with her brother all of this time, every day or month. But that at her father's house was her brother's home and the place where he brought his friends; was there the greater part of the time himself, and she says, "that to the extent of her knowledge, no such person as Sidney Rigdon was known to the family or any member of the same."
Here then, is the positive and direct knowledge that there was no such person as Tucker tried by deception and inuendo to make the people believe of a "mysterious stranger," being at the residence of the old gentlemen Smith or an acquaintance of Joseph Smith.
Add to this the statement of Braden's witness, Gilbert, who said in my presence, that he had
tried for 50 years or near that long to find out something that would connect Rigdon and Smith together in some
way, he living at Palmyra, N.Y., all this time as shown in his testimony, and who stated at the same time,
that "they could not find out that Rigdon was ever about here or in this state until sometime
in the fall of 1830," and it makes a clear and positive case against his Spaulding story. Compare my
testimony upon this point now, with the loose statements got up by Howe and Hurlbut and peddled by Braden here,
and you have the actual status of the case.
These tales and stories when summed up are truly but tersely put by a writer who has lately convassed them as follows:
"Rev. Kirk says that Dr. Winters told him that Mr. Rigdon told him -- Dr. Winter's daughter says her father
said that Rigdon got Spaulding's manuscript --
Rev. Bonsall heard Dr. Winters say so and so -- And the inpression if these three is that Dr. Winters wrote out
his recollections -- and therefore of course he did.
Mrs. Amos Dunlap saw Rigdon reading a manuscript, therefore it was the Spaulding Romance.
Pomeroy Tucker says a mysterious stranger visits Joseph Smith, therefore Sidney Rigdon is the man.
Mrs. Horace Eaton makes use of a similar statement assuming it as a matter of course.
These, with what Tucker said some one else said, and all of which Hulburt and Howe got up, is Braden's stock
in trade, and the only things offered to prove this Spaulding Romance,
It seems to me that if there is anyone in this audience, or any person outside, who shall hereafter be found
with these facts in
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
137
their possession, still trying to gossip the Spaulding story down people's throats, it will be
because they are wholly given over to evil, and terribly addicted to that kind of
a business.
To such, I would advise in the language of the apostle Paul: "But refuse profane and old wive's fables, (gossip
of the 'old neighbors,' silly fables or falsehoods,) and exercise thyself rather unto Godliness." 1 Tim. 4:7.
Ladies and gentlemen, you have now found what there is in fact to this Spaulding tale. I have carefully examined
this thing, although I need not have noticed it in order to have maintained successfully the proposition. I have
successfully the propositions. I have done it, because I knew it to be the means by which satan sought to blind
the eyes of the people by gossip, and story, and tale and falsehood, to prevent them from honestly investigating
this book in the manner God wants them to investigate all things.
But what has he proven as a fact of this story?
Did he prove that Solomon Spaulding ever wrote such a manuscript as was that of the Book of Mormon?
Has he sustained the burden of proof, showing that Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith were ever qcauainted in any way
till after the publication of the Book of Mormon?
Has it been shown that Rigdon was ever known to Spaulding in Pittsburg?
Did he prove that Sidney Rigdon took the manuscript in order to start a church?
Has he proved that Rigdon, in fact, ever knew anything of what the Book of Mormon was,
till it was presented to him by P. P. Pratt, November, 1830?
You know all of these questions must be answered in the negative.
The only thing he has fairly proven with regard to this Spaulding story to my mind, is the fact, that he had no
evidence when he began
Page 137 is not fully transcribed.
|
.
|
138
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 138 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
139
|
work and answer me upon this, if he can. There is an issue here, and if he can show that I am wrong in my position
of Ephraim being "mixed among the people." and "scattered upon all the mountains of Israel; upon the face of the
whole earth," but to be revealed
|
in the last day by the light of revelation to inaugurate and "push to the ends of the earth" the work of salvation
among the people, let him do so.
(Time called.)
|
MR. BRADEN'S THIRTEENTH SPEECH.
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: My opponent quotes from the Book of Mormon the declaration that
men will say in regard to the Book of Mormon, "We have the Bible and that is sufficient" There is no prophesy
in that, for the Disciples had been saying that to Rigdon, the author of the book, for years, when he was trying
to prepare them to accept new revelations and his book. The word "Bible" was first applied to the scriptures in
the fourth century by Chrysostom. We have here a Nephite in America using it hundreds of years before -- another
miracle. As I have never read a word that Howe said, and have not made him a witness, Kelley's attacks on Howe's
analysis of the Book of Mormon is a nonsensical waste of time. As a lawyer will he tell me what effects his attacks
on Howe's analysis of the Book of Mormon has on the testimony of the witness recorded in another part of the book?
I have sent for legal evidence that T. P. Baldwin was Judge of one of the courts of Wayne county, N. Y., in 1833.
When it comes I will settle that cavil of my opponent. I have explained that Spaulding concealed from his wife and
daughter his purpose to publish his book, and that he told his creditors that he intended to publish it and day
his debts. Mrs. Eichbaum, clerk in the post office in Pittsburg, from 1812 to 1816 inclusive, testifies that
Rigdon was in Pittsburg in 1814-15, or during the time the Spaulding manuscript was taken to Patterson's office;
that he was learning the tanner's trade and was intimate with Lambdin, one of Patterson's printers, and was about
the office so much that Engles, the foreman, complained of it. That settles the matter.
My opponent said last night that Mrs. Davidson said there were passages of scripture in her husband's Manuscript
Found. She does not. She says the passages of scripture and religious talk were added to the romance to get up
the Mormon fraud. I have proved that Spaulding wrote several manuscripts, and my opponent's jabber on the assumption
that he wrote only one is absurd. His attack on the testimony I presented is absurd and puerile. My opponent
|
page 139 still under construction
|
140
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 140 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
141
Then the two contending parties arrayed themselves against each other, every last man, woman, and child, and
baby, with helmets, swords and breast-plates. What a heroic sight to see children and babies armed with helmets,
swords and breast plates, and what a slaughter they made, no doubt! Then they pitched in every last man, woman
and child and baby, and they "fit," and they "fit," and they "fit" and they "fit" and "fit," until nobody is left
but Ether. He is miraculously preserved to finish some plates for Impostor Joe. Ether does not know whether he
will be translated, which would be an easy job judging from his ethereal name, or stay and die out as did Moroni,
his copyist. Thus ends the history of these Jaredites who were not descendants of Adam or Noah, for the speech of
their descendants was confounded at Babel and the speech of the Jaredites was not confounded -- they were not
descendants of Noah.
Finally, after copying on nothing, for his plates were full before he began, and he could make none, and from
nothing, for Mormon had buried everything except the plates of Ether, which he never had; Moroni whiles away his
time in writing a liturgy for the followers of Impostor Joe. He then rehashes portions of the New Testament in a
sermon about faith, hope and love, repeating Paul's language in many places. It looks as if Rigdon was trying to
fix up his book so that he could set the New Testament as much in the background as the New sets the Old. Then
comes the miracle of miracles.
Mormon out in the wilds of America, "all his lone" as Paddy would say,
on pages 539, 540, 541, preaches Sidney Rigdon's sermon against infant
baptism and quotes scores of passages and phrases from the New Testament. What an insult to common sense
to ask us to believe that an Israelite, in the wilds of America, over one thousand years after his people had any
communication with the old continent or knew about its troubles over "infant baptism" just beginning, preached in
America, 1400 years before Rigdon was born, Rigdon's rant against infant baptism. Moroni, alias Rigdon, closes
with one of Rigdon's rhapsodies of exhortation in which Sidney mounts King Ahasuerus' horse for the last time
in the Book of Mormon, and he then lets his Pegasus rest until he joins Impostor Joe in Manchester, New York,
in December 1830. Such is a mere outline of the countless absurdities in the Book of Mormon, "The Fulness of
the Gospel."
We will now call attention to certain matters that require more space than we could give them in a running
criticism. The ancient Israelites believed that the earth was stationary and that the stars moved. They did not
know the difference between the planets and fixed stars. Inspiration among the Israelites never revealed to them
scientific facts. On page 286 of the Book of Mormon, Alma, a Nephite
|
.
|
142
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 142 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
143
are not comings direct from heaven in the flesh as he appeared to the Nephites -- the manner in which the angels
declared to the Apostles at his ascension he would come in his second coming.
On page 527, Moroni, a Nephite in America, who knew nothing of any Hebrew or Christian scriptures after Jeremiah,
writes: "These things bring to pass the scripture which saith, 'They who are first shall be last, and they who are
last shall be first.'" Where do the Scriptures say so? Matthew xix. 30, or Luke xiii. 30. Did
Moroni, a Nephite in America, who knew nothing of the New Testament Scriptures, write that? Or did Rigdon, when
he was revising the manuscript he stole from Spaulding to make a big thing out of it in the shape of a pretended
new revelation? Page 496, Moroni alias Rigdon, writes: "Do we not read that God is the same yesterday, to-day and
forever, and that in him is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." Yea, verily, Sidney, we you and your
readers do read such language in Heb. xiii. 8, and in James 1. 17, but no person in America 1,000 years
|
before Columbus ever so read. Page 539: The Holy Ghost says to Moroni "Listen to the words of Christ," and then
we have over twenty quotations of the sentences and phrases from the New Testament. No,
Sidney, the Holy Ghost never said that to Moroni. You used to say just such things to your hearers in your sermon
on infant baptism, and you have interpolated your sermon into the manuscript you stole from Spaulding.
Page 494, Jesus says to the three Nephites who were never to taste death: "When I come in my glory ye shall be
changed from mortality to immortality." Positively declares that they were mortal and would remain mortal until
he came in his glory. In the very next paragraph Nephi says that whether they were mortal or immortal from their
transfiguration he does not know. After reading the clear, positive declaration of Jesus that they were mortal
and would be till he came in his glory. Nephi coolly declares that he does not know whether Jesus lied or not!
|
MR. KELLEY'S FOURTEENTH SPEECH.
GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- I will first notice one or two things in the statements that my
opponent has just made. I suppose that if I should ask any person in this audience, now that they have just
listened to his argument, to state a single objection that he has made against the Book of Mormon, just to arise
and state one objection, you would not be able to do it. How many of you would? Why, he has read such a string here
that you cannot understand it, so far as making an objevtion is concerned...
page 143 still under construction
|
.
|
144
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 144 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
145
|
Page 145 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
146
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
|
Page 146 is not fully transcribed.
|
Page 146 is not fully transcribed.
Book of Mormon, page 427: "And it came to pass in the latter end of the eighteenth year, those armies of robbers
had prepared for battle, and began to come down, and to sally forth from the hills and out of the mountains, and
the wilderness, and their strongholds, and secret places, and beggan to take possession of the lands."
This is what my friend calls Masonry. This account is confirmed by recent explorations. On the Lookout Mountain,
lying between the Genessee and Cass rivers, there is a strong fortification built upon the brow of the great
ledge of stone. It includes about two acres of ground. Within thirty feet of the top of this rock are five rooms
made by dint of labor. The entrance to these rooms is very small. Mr. Ferguson thinks them to have been constructed
during some dreadful wars and those who constructed them acted on the defensive; and believes that if it was so
formidable, that
|
THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.
147
|
Page 147 has not been transcribed.
|
.
|
|
Elder Edmund L. Kelley