Clark Braden's 1884 book: Part 5

SPALDING STUDIES LIBRARY -- SPECIAL COLLECTIONS

Sp. Col. Index | Mormon Classics | Bookshelf | Newspaper Articles | History Vault

Clark Braden (1831- c.1915)
Braden-Kelley Debate
(1st edition: Cincinnatti, 1884)
Part 5 of 7 pages 175-219

Title Page Preface

Proposition 1:

pp. 003-035 pp. 078-112
pp. 113-174 pp. 175-219

Proposition 2: pp. 220-301

Proposition 3: pp. 302-381

Appendices: pp. 382-396

The original text contains no proper contents page. -- Tabulated Links (in lieu of a Contents Page)

Prop. One Speeches: 1-3 | 4-7 | 8-10 | 11-16 | 17K 17B 18K 18B 19K 19B 20K 20B

This book will not be fully transcribed until mid-2007.

go back to: page 174

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 175

MR. KELLEY'S SEVENTEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- Last Saturday evening Mr. Braden made the statement that not one of the Smith family ever belonged to the Presbyterian or any church, except as he says, the Mormon. I have intended to correct it a number of evenings, but each time it has escaped my mind, so I will do so now. The history is as follows"...

page 175 still under construction

176 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 176 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 177

page 177 still under construction

178 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 178 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 179

page 179 still under construction

180 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

MR. BRADEN'S SEVENTEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- The question has often been asked: Did Joe Smith have any plates? Some think that Joe found some glyphs, like those said to be found in Kinderhook, Ill., while pretending to hunt for buried money. Some think that Rigdon obtained some glyphs and furnished them to Joe. Some think that Rigdon or Joe had some manufactured, and exhibited them to the witnesses> I assert positively that Joe never had a plate, and never showed one to anybody: that Joe and his witnesses deliberately lied from beginning to end...

page 180 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 181

page 181 still under construction

182 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 182 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 183

page 183 still under construction

184 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 184 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 185

MR. KELLEY'S EIGHTEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- I will first call your attention to one or two things that have been mentioned by the negative, and then proceed to finish my argument, and take up afterwards and more fully examine the objections that have been made.

It seems to me that the difficulty with my opponent is that he is not himself conversant with what is in the books. For instance, he makes considerable sport of the fact that glass should be referred to so far back as the time when the Book of Mormon places it. Why, I took up Dr. Smith's Bible Dictionary to-day and opened at the word glass, and he put it at the time of Joseph in Egypt the first, thing, and said that doubtless it went back farther than that; but to that time they were positive having discovered the means that were used as far back as that for blowing glass. And yet, Mr. Braden is making objections here. It seems to me that if he will be a little more critical and inform himself better on some of these points, it will be more to the satisfaction and edification of the audience.

Again, he estimates that a book written closely, (after the manner of the English language, of course), would comprise two thousand pages of manuscript. He forgets to tell you that the plates did not pretend to be written in the English language, and that it was a phonetic system of writing used. Now to contain all of the books, all of the words, that were upon those plates in the phonetic system that the Reporter before me is using, or some other phonetic system, it would not take two thousand pages nor any thing like two thousand pages. Yet, that is the way he gets his mule's load. But how about Spaulding's 48 sheets, if it would take two thousand pages? I asked him to explain this before by showing the inconsistency in the Spaulding claim, but he has never noticed it. I have showed clearly from Howe's own words that this 48-page manuscript which came into Howe's hands, was the "Manuscript found." It purported to have been found. I did not misrepresent the language of either Howe or Hulburt. Braden misrepresented me that is all there is to that. Another way he gets his mule's load is this: He estimates a chunk of solid gold to be so much. Well were the thin leaves of the plates solid gold? And would a book of gold leaves weigh like solid gold? In order to et his 250 pounds he stretches everything. Then he starts out with his mule's load, (250 pounds) and wonders if there is any man in the world that could have done as Joseph Smith says he did. At the same time he takes up the Bible and reads where Samson carried off the gates of Gaza, where he slew his thousands and tens of thousands, where he leaned against the pillar and the whole edifice in which they were came down; and he swallows that down easily, and that is certainly a thousand times bigger thing than the 250 pounds load. But he says, there has been so many stories told about this: Well here is the trouble with Mr. Braden. He hunts up these stories that have been told about how they got the plates, and how the plates were translated; goes to all the persons he can find who will tell stories, (but who know nothing) instead of opening the standard works and accepting the statements of those who do know something about it. I could go around and hunt up stories enough that have been told by one people or denomination against others in this country when there has been a conflict, to sink anybody; because when a person gets a little miffed at somebody, it is quite natural to begin to tell stories about him. I remember meeting a gentleman a short time ago, as I was going to Willoughby, (there was also, in the company a Baptist and a Congregationalist Minister,) who was berating Alexander Campbell, and telling all kinds of stories about him; and in order to prove that Campbell was bad, he said that when he went back to Scotland to visit his own home, they would not even allow him to preach in their churches. I said to them, "That is no evidence to me against Mr. Campbell, for as good men as ever lived have been traduced and prohibited from preaching to old neighbors when there was nothing against them." But can find men who will tell stories about this one and about that one, and often persons who prefer to believe them to the truth, and there are right here persons who have told me since last evening, that some of the parties to whom he referred last evening as knowing certain things against the Saints, they would not believe on oath; but is that any reason that I shall drag their characters before this audience and begin to berate them in that way? That is not the manner to discuss questions properly. Neither is it proper to even make attacks upon the character of parties from stories; because, as you have been shown time and again, the facts of history are such as to show that as soon as you assume that position you destroy the foundation of the Bible which is the agreed standard of truth in this controversy. Now there were and are now, just as many different stories told with regard to the resurrection of Jesus, and the way that the Disciples moved along in their work as ministers after his resurrection, as there is about the plates and the angel that visited Mr. Smith. There were many different stories told about what Paul said when he was converted, and we have two different stories as to some things which occurred then handed down in the Bible. And yet

186 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

he wants one straight forward story with regard to the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, notwithstanding the fact that the same evil power is in the world to make stories to-day as in the first century. I could take up the seventh chapter of Kings and read to you a story from that single ch'apter, which is in fact bigger than any in any two chapters in the Book of Mormon. It states that Elisha died and after he was dead he prophesied to the king and got mad because the king did not do to suit him. There was more power in his bones after he was dead than there was when he was alive, because they let a dead man down into his grave, and the corpse touched the bones of Elisha, and the man arose and stood upon his feet as soon as the bones of Elisha touched him. It makes Elisha out to have died twice. Makes him talk after he did die to the king who came to visit him. Gives to his dead bones more power than it did to them while alive. And yet we have "stories." That is no argument, no way to debate. The things that I cite are in the standard the Bible. I am yet with that. If Mr. Braden's style of telling stories aud asserting is the way that this question is to be tried, I might as well go away from my argument and the clear proofs that I have brought, because all the answer he makes to them is, why there is not a prophecy that says anything about it, right in the face of the fact that I have cited more than 40 prophecies that are directly in point, and he has not shown that I have misapplied a single one of them. Another thing: He says that David Whitmer told different stories. I deny that he ever did. I know persons say that he did tell different stories, but they are the same kind of persons who told different stories about Joseph Smith. They believed that he was an impostor, and in order to put it down they believed that anything that they could do against him would be proper; and they were ready to lie or even steal, and willing to hatch and tell stories to put the impostor as they called him down, or to do anything else to put him down, no difference how or what it was. I will now read you the statement of David Whitmer made quite recently, and you will see that the statement that he once denied his testimony is entirely false.

The statement that Oliver Cowdery denied his testimony and he did not confirm it upon his deathbed too, is wholly false. The statement that Martin Harris had denied his testimony at some time was false. Martin Harris ever stood by his testimony, and confirmed it the last act and speech of his life. David Whitmer's statement September 15th, 1882, to Wm. H. Kelley, G. A. Blakeslee, of Gallen, Michigan, and others is as follows:

"Elder Whitmer remarked that he did not feel much like talking as he had not been feeling well for some time. He appeared feeble. He is now upwards of seventy-six years of age, havinig been born January 7th, 1805. He is of medium height, and rather of a slender build; but this appearance may be on account of age and recent illness. He has darkish brown eyes, and his hair is white and thin. Has a good head and honest face. He talks with ease and seemed at home with every subject suggested; and without an effort, seemingly went on to amplify upon it, so that we had nothing to do but question, suggest and listen. His intellect is far more vigorous and retentive than we expected to find. He is careful in his speech, for he studies to express himself in such a way as not to be misrepresented. A reporter called to see him some time ago, asked a few questions and went off and published that he had denied his testimony concerning the truth of the Book of Mormon. This hurt him so that he is very careful now to have some known friends present when strangers call to see him. This accounts for the presence of others when we were there."

Speaking of Joseph Smith the Seer, he said, and this is very nearly his wording:

"It makes no difference what others say. I know Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and he translated the Book of Mormon by the inspiration of God from the plates of the Nephites."

Let me say in this connection that all these assertions that there was a curtain between these parties, and that he was secluded, are false in all their particulars, and the statements that one told this thing to a certain one, and that thing to a certain one, are simply the lies that were conjured up against these parties in New York by those who wished to injure them. The parties never told any such thing as that themselves. And yet that is what we have before this audience. He further said:

"Some people think if they can only make it appear that Joseph's life and character were not perfect, and that he had human weaknesses, that it would prove that he was not a prophet, yet the same persons will believe that Moses who killed the Egyptian, and David who had Uriah killed, and who took a multitude of wives, and Solomon who was a polygamist and idolator; and Peter who lied and cursed, etc., were all prophets, and should be honored and respected. What the individual life of Joseph Smith was after he translated the Book of Mormon, has nothing to do with the question as to whether he was, or was not inspired to bring that book forth."

"Do you know anything against his character?"

"I know nothing against him. I have heard some things, these I know nothing about. I have nothing to say about the character of any one only as I know. It is not my mission to talk about the character of any. My mission is to testify concerning the truth of the coming forth of the work of God."

"What kind of a man was he when yom knew him personally?"

"He was a religious and straitforward man. He had to be; for he was illiterate and he could do nothing of himself. He had to trust in God. He could not translate unless he was humble and possessed the right feelings towards every one. To illustrate so you can see. One morning when he was getting ready to continue the translation, something went wrong about the house and he was put out about it. Something that Emma, his wife had done. Oliver and I went up stairs and Joseph came up soon after to continue the translation, but he could not do anything. He could not translate a sinule syllable. He went down stairs, out into the orchard, and made supplication to the Lord; was gone about an hour -- came back to the house, asked Emma's forgivness and then came upstairs where we were and then the translation went on all right. He could do nothing save he was humble and faithful."

He could do nothing save he was humble and faithful as reputable a man as there is in the United States to-day David Whitmer as I shall show you by the statement of more than twenty-five witnesses, a Judge of the Courts of the State of Missouri, and men living where he lives ia Richmond, Ray county, Mo.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 187

His statement concerning the vision they had of the plates and the angel was as follows:

"I was plowing In the field one morning, and Joesph and Oliver came along with a revelation, stating that I was to be one of the witnesses to the Book of Mormon. I got over the fence and we went out into the woods, near by and sat down on a log and talked awhile. We then knelt down and prayed. Joseph prayed. We then got up and sat on the log and were talking, when all at once a light came down from above us and encircled us for quite a little distance around; and the angel stood before us."

This was in the day time. No jugglery, no slight of hand about this. Martin Harris was not present at this time, and he was not present when the other two saw what they declare here. Now he describes the angel.

"He was dressed In white, and spoke and called me by name, and said: 'Blessed is he that keepeth his commandments.' This is all that I heard the angel say. A table was set before us, and on it the records were placed. The records of the Nephites from which the Book of Mormon was translated, the brass plates, the ball of directors, the sword of Laban, and other Plates. While we were viewing them, the voice of God spoke out of heaven saying the book was true and the translation correct."

I now offer you the irrefutable testimony of David Whitmer as published in the Chicago Times in the year 1881, which will fully refute the false and slanderous stories which so many have sought to circulate against him, and which my opponent deals so largely in. Also what the first men of the county in which he lives say about him. It is headed "A Proclamation," and reads as follows:

"Unto all Nations, Kindred, Tongues and People unto whom these presents shall come:

It having been represented by one John Murphy, of Polo, Caldwell county, Missouri, that I in a conversation with him last summer, denied my testimony as one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon.

To the end, therefore, that he may understand me now, if he did not then, and that the world may know the truth, I wish now, standing as it were in the very sunset of life, and in the fear of God, once for all, to make this public statement:

That I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof, which has so long since been published with that book, as one of the three witnesses. Those who know me best, well know that I have always adhered to that testimony And that no man may be misled or doubt my present views in regard to the same, I do again affirm the trut,h of all my statements as then made and published.

"He that hath an ear to hear let him hear; It was no delusion! What Is written is written, and he that readeth let him understand.

And that no one may be decieved or misled by this statement, I wish here to state that I do not endorse polygamy or spiritual wifeism. It is a great evil, shocking to the moral sense, and the more so because practiced in ihe name of religion. It is of man and not of God, and is especially forbidden in the Book of Mormon itself.

And if any man doubt, should he not carefully and honestly read and understand the same, before presuming to sit In judgment and condemning the light which shineth in darkness, and showeth the way of eternal life as pointed out by the unerring hand of God.

In the Spirit of Christ who hath said: "Follow thou me, for I am the life, the light, and the way," I submit this statement to the world. God in whom I trust being my judge, as to the sincerity of my motives and the faith and hope that is in me of eternal life.

My sincere desire is that the world may be benefited by this plain and simple statement of the truth.

And all the honor be to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.
DAVID WHITMER, SR.
RICHMOND, MO., March 19th, 1881.

TESTIMONIAL OF CITIZENS.

We, the undersigned citizens of Richmond, Ray county, Missouri, where David Whitmer, Sr., has resided since the year 1838, certify that we have been long and intimately acquainted with him and know him to be a man of the highest integrity, and of undoubted truth and veracity: A. W. Doniphan.
G. W. Dunn, Judge of the Fifth Judicial Circuit.
T. D. Woodson, President of Ray Co. Savings Bank.
J. T. Child. Editor of Conservator.
H. C. Garner, Cashier of Ray Co. Savings Bank,
W. A. Holman. County Treasurer.
J. S. Hughes, Banker, Rickmond.
James Hughes, Banker, Ricomond.
D. P. Whitmer, Attorney at Law.
Jas. W. Black, Attorney at Law.
L. C. Cantwell, Postmaster, Richmond.
George I. Wasson, Mayor.
Jas. A. Davis, County Collector.
C. J. Hughes, Probate Judge and Presiding Justice of Ray County Court.
George W. Trigg, County Clerk.
W. W. Mosby, M. D.
Thomas McGinnis, ex-Sheriff, Ray County.
J. P. Quesenbery. Merchant.
W. R. Holman, Furniture Merchant.
Louis Slaughter, Recorder of Deeds.
Geo. W. Buchanan, M. D.
A. K. Reyburn.
Given at Richmond, Mo., this March 19th, 1881."

Also the following terse statement from the Conservator, a newspaper published in the State of Missouri, and opposed to the religion of Mr. Whitmer:

AN EXPLANATION.

"Elsewhere we publish a letter from David Whitmer, Sr., an old and well known citizen of Ray, as well as an indorsement of his standing as a man, signed by a number of leading citizens of this community, in reply to some unwarranted aspersions made upon him.

"There is no doubt that Mr. Whitmer, who was one of the three witnesses to the authenticity of the gold plates from which he asserts that Joe Smith translated the Book of Mormon (a fac-simile of the characters he has now in his possession with the original records), is firmly convined of its divine origin, and while he makes no efforts to obtrude his views or beliefs, he simply wants the world to know that so far as he is concerned there is no variableness or shadow of turning. Having resided here for nearly a half a century it is with no little pride that he points to his past record with the consciousness that he has done nothing derogatory to his character as a citizen and a believer of the son of Mary, to warrant such an attack upon him, come from what source it may, and now with the lillies of seventy-five winters crowning him like an aureole and his pilgrimage on earth well nigh ended, he reiterates his former statements, and will leave futurity to solve the problem that he was but a passing witness of its fulfillment. His attacks on the vileness that has sprung up with the Utah Church must have a salutary effect upon those bigamists who have made adultery the corner stone in the edifice of their belief." -- Conservator,
March 24, 1881.

Let me call your attention now to another thing that has been stated with regard to the manuscript of this book, as it was when carried to the printer, and it was Major Gilbert's statement, so Mr. Braden said. I snowed you what Major Gilbert's statement was as it was published two years ago. Yesterday I telegraphed to David Whitmer, who has in his possession the original manuscript from which the Book of Mormon was printed, and asked him to examime that manuscript and telegraph to me whether in it the proper names and the sentences began with capital letters, and whether there was any punctuation marks; and this is his answer:

RICHMOND, MO., FEBRUARY 20.
"E. L. Kelley, Kirtland, Ohio: There are capital letters beginning proper names and sentences and all necessary punctuation marks in the original manuscript. (Signed) DAVID WHITMER."

188 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 188 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 189

Page 189 has not been transcribed.

190 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 190 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 191

he makes the argument that there has been copying. Remember the conclusion itself is in dispute, and under controversy here, and he has only wasted his time in that supposable, logical argument.

When he shall have proven that God never spoke to anybody but the people called Jews, on the other continent, no one will ask him to take up his valuable time comparing to see if there has been copying or quotations made. Such a course of making assertions without a particle of evidence, as he has done, may be argument to Messrs. Hulburt and Howe, or to some one who does not know, nor does not want to

know how to reason; but it will hardly do for this audience. It is to be presumed that if there was inspiration on this continent, the same God speaking here as upon the other, and by the same Spirit, there would be like wordings and sentiments in the communications; and it would have been a proof that the Book of Mormon was not inspired had it claimed to have has the same Holy Spirit through which its inspiration was committed as the Bible, and there had been found therein no resemblance in language, sentiment and phraseology. (Time expired.)

MR. BRADEN'S EIGHTEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- Kelley gives the statement of Joseph III, of what Emma Smith said. We have Whitmer's statement. We have Mrs. Salisbury nee Smith's statement, in regard to Rigdon's presence at Smith's in New York. Would it not be well to introduce some one not interested in the fraud? Give us somebody besides Smiths and Whitmers, for if what these two gangs tell of each other be true, as we shall show by reading their statements, the testimony of all the Smiths and Whitmers would not establish a claim to a "yellar dog." Their testimony that they did not see Rigdon, will not set to one side the statements of Chase and Sanders [sic] that they did. Mrs. Salisbury, to show that she had means of knowing whether Rigdon visited Smith or not, says that Smith was at his father's all the time he was translating, and did the translating there. That is a lie, if her mother, Joe himself, P. P. Pratt and Whotmer tell the truth. Lucy Smith says he went to Pennsylvania in the fall of 1827 and before he began his translation, so say Pratt and Whitmer; Lucy Smith and Whitmer says that he went back to New York after wheat-sowing in 1828 or one year afterwards. Whitmer says he brought Smith to Whitmer's father's. Mrs. Smith says to Waterloo, and that Whitmer lived in Waterloo. She says that Joe finished the translation in Waterloo and showed the plates to the witnesses there. Joe did not translate a word at his father's. He did not live there while translating, but miles away, part of the time over one hundred miles away. If Mrs. Salisbury lied, as we have proved, in saying Joe was where he was not, she would lie in saying Rigdon was not where he was.

Impostor Joe gave Martin Harris a scrawl that he said was a facsimilie of some of the

writing on the plates. Harris carried it to Prof. Anthon of New York City. Prof. Anthon describes it: "It was indeed a singular scrawl...

page 191 still under construction

192 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 192 still under construction

My opponent says the Book of Mormon does speak of rivers, lands and seas. Does it gave the name of a river, sea, mountain, or city that is found in ancient geography or describe them so that they can be indentified?

The Bible says, as a fact, that the speech of all was confounded at Babel. The Book of Mormon says that the speech of part was not confounded. A flat contradiction. My opponent says that the statements and affidavits in Howe are mere quotations. On the contrary, the affidavits and statements

of Palmyra and Manchester witnesses are in the first person and signed in due form, and not a quotation mark. The Conneaut statements are in full, in the first person, and signed by the parties. The printer by mistake has put quotation marks to the statements of John Spaulding, Martha Spaulding and Artemus Cunningham. The statements of the other four have none. All the statements are in the first person and signed separately and by the person making the statement. What does my opponent hope to accomplish by such reckless misstatements? My opponent gave us what Joseph the Third says, his mother said. Can not Mrs. Irvin tell what her father said? -- Rev. Bonsall tell what his stepfather said, as well as Joseph the Third tell what his mother and stepfather said? Or Kelley tell what Gilbert or Howe or Mrs. McKinstry said?

A man may be illiterate and a talker. Tecumseh did not know a letter, yet he was not only a talker far better than Rigdon, but he was a reasoner which Rigdon never was. Rigdon's letter to the Boston Journal showed, in misspelled words, grammatical blunders, lack of capitals and punctuation, that he was illiterate. That Rigdon preached the peculiarities of Mormonism for two or more years before he joined them is notorious. Darwin Atwater mentions it. So does Campbell, Bentley, Zeb Rudolph, John Rudolph, and A.B. Green and Dille. He advocated community of goods, and especially the idea that a restoration of the apostolic church must include spiritual gifts, miracles and revelations, the pet hobby of Mormonism. My opponent himself has stated that Rigdon had a contest with Campbell over these peculiar doctrines of the Book of Mormon before he joined the Mormons, nearly eighteen months before that time if my opponent be correct in the time. These facts are as notorious as that Rigdon was a Baptist preacher, before he joined the Disciples. My opponent undertakes to excuse the tomfoolery of the assembling of the Jaredites, and afterwards of Nephites from all over No.rth America, for a Kilkenny Cat fight, so as to leave plates in the right place for Impostor Joe, by reading about military works found in North America. Does that prove that the people who built them ever did such an idiotic thing as Nephites and Jaredites are said to have done.

The prophecies that my opponent quoted, have no more reference to Ne[hites in America than to New Zealanders. His fanciful farfetched references, would apply as well to the man in the moon.

We will now review his archaeological argument.

We remind the reader that the Book of Mormon consists of two parts.

1. An assumption of certain general ideas common to all lands and people. That the continent has been peopled in former ages by civilized peoples. That there have been two civilizations, only two, for the Nephites and Zarahemlites are substantially one.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 193

page 193 still under construction

We showed by an appeal to Priest and scores of witnesses who lived long before the Book of Mormon, that it was known that there were ruins of prehistoric races to be found all over North America. That a civilized people inhabited the land before the Indians. This assumption that civilized people inhabited the continent before the Indians, was an old idea, before the Book appeared. We showed that Cortez found a civilized people in Mexico, and that the Aztec Empire extended from the Isthmus of Darien to what now is the Soujtwestern portion of the United States. They had great cities, temples and public buildings. We have proved that the Mexicans declared that their country had been inhabited by Aztecs, who were in possession when Cortez conquered it, by the Chicemas, who preceded the Aztecs, and by the Toltecs, who preceded the Chiemas, and that the Toltecs describe a prehistoric civilization before their occupation of the land. That Pizzaro found a civilized people in Peru, and that the civilization of the Incas had been preceded by other civilizations, some of which are prehistoric. All this was known to educated men hundreds of years before the Book of Mormon. All this Spaulding knew. It suggested the assumptions of his romance.

We have proved that Cortez conquered Yucatan; that it was inhabited by a civilized people, with great cities; that his companions and other Spaniards, such as Diaz and Herrera, describe great cities that were inhabited at the time of the conquest of Yucatan; that educated men who had read the history of the conquest of Mexico and Peru knew these facts; that Spaulding knew them. He had his people come to America from Southwestern Asia, by sea. He had them land at the Isthmus of Darien, which he called the land of Zarahemla. This the witnesses prove. We have proved that all my opponent can cite in the

Book of Mormon, as sustained by research, is just what the witnesses say Spaulding knew and put into his romance. The witnesses are not witnesses that manufactured their evidence, as was the case with Mrs. Salisbury and the witnesses of my opponent, or they would have claimed to know more than they did. They repudiate the religious portion of the Book of Mormon as an addition to Spaulding's romance. They do not mention the Jaredite portion; but one mentions the Zarahemlite portion. They do not exaggerate their recollection of the historic part of the Nephite portion. If ever there were cautious, conscientious witnesses they are.

This explodes all his archaeological reading. He has sustained those general assumptions of the Book of Mormon that are common to all civilized people that need no proof, certain facts that were well known before the Book of Mormon appeared. But he has not furnished one particle of proof for those things that need proof -- the history, the historic statements in reference to persons, places, battles, etc. If necessary we could show, as Mr. Ward of Denver did in his controversy with Joseph III, that American archaeology flatly contradicts many statements in the Book of Mormon, but it is not needed.

page 193 still under construction

194 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 194 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 195

page 195 still under construction

196 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

MR. KELLEY'S NINETEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: I call your attention to a statement that was made by my opponent to the effect that I had stated in the debate at Wilber that some eighteen months before the Book of Mormon appeared, Sidney Rigdon and Alexander Campbell had a passage at arms over the religion of the Mormons. I stated no such thing. What I gave to the audience upon that, I read from their own book, "The History of the Disciples on the Western Reserve." I will read it to you. Instead of being eighteen months before, it was a passage of arms between them, as this says, two and one-half months before, just as I read it at Wilber.

What answer will Mr. Braden have to this misrepresentation of what was said, when it was said, and also who said it, at Wilber? The statement is as follows, p. 209:

"The discomfiture he experienced at the hands of Mr. Campbell, At Austintown, when seeking to introduce his common property scheme, turned him away mortified, chagrined and alienated. This was only two and one-half months before he received, in peace, the messengers of delusion."

The idea is carried here in their own history that Rigdon joined the Saints two and a half minths after this affair at Austintown because he got a back-set from Campbell and was mad. This alienated him. Well, if this did it, clearly then it was not because Rigdon was in any way mixed in with our faith before. This was only two and a half months before he "received, in peace, the messengers of delusion," -- Campbellite testimony.

Remember that they were not in controversy over any principle of what he calls the Mormon faith. There is no community plan or common property plan in the faith of the Latter Day Saints, nor in the Book of Mormon. That only exists in the minds of those who could not, or did not wish to understand our faith. It is not only not according to the faith of the church, but is contrary to its principles and the faith as the church believed in 1830. You will have to change, again, Mr. Braden, upon that, and find something else from which to make out your case.

page 196 still under construction

page 196 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 197

page 197 still under construction

198 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 198 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 199

page 199 still under construction

200 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

page 200 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 201

page 201 still under construction

202 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

MR. BRADEN'S NINETEENTH SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- Was Joe Smith the originator of Mormon polygamy? The last argument that we present in reference of our opponent's claim that Joe Smith was a true prophet of God, and that the Book of Mormon that he gave to the world is of Divine origin, and worthy to be accepted as a revelation, is the damning fact that Smith was the originator of the abomination Mormon polygamy, and the author of that blasphemy entitled, "A Revelation in Regard to Celestial Marriage." This damning fact that after wallowing in lewdness for years, without even the pretended sanction of that profanation of marriage, polygamy, he gave to the world that infamy, blasphemously entitled "A Revelation in Regard to Celestial Marriage," and was the originator of that adomination Mormon polygamy, is enough to sink him and every pretended revelation from him...

page 202 still under construction

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 203

page 203 still under construction

204 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 204 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 205

page 205 still under construction

206 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 206 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 207

have more than one. Joe had given the revelation in favor of polygamy, but he had not allowed it to be publicly taught yet. Persons could avail themselves of the license it gave, only as he, in person, allowed them to do so. Each are the facts in the case in regard to Smith's polygamy.

There is not as clear evidence in favor of any pretended revelation Joe ever gave, as in favor of this revelation in favor of polygamy. The Josephites have no more warrant to reject this, than any other revelation.

We defy the Josephites to present as clear evidence that Smith dictated any other revelation as we have presented for this. As clear evidence that he gave any other revelation, or as clear evidence that Smith practiced any other practice, as we have given that he practiced polygamy. Let

them select the revelation or practice and undertake it. As intelligent a Mormon as the writer ever met declared to him that she was disgusted with the duplicity of the Josephites in denying the palpable facts of history. The only true course was to acknowledge the truth that Smith was guilty of licentiousness and polygamy, and was the author of the revelation in its favor, and then claim that it no more affected the Book of Mormon than Solomon's polygamy affected his writings.

Will Joseph Smith and his followers cease to deny the plainest facts of history and own the truth in regard to Smith's connection with polygamy? They are lying for no purpose, for no one believes them, and the only result is to cover them with infamy for their impudent falsehood.

KELLEY'S CLOSING SPEECH ON FIRST PROPOSITION.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- It is with no little gratification and pleasure that I am again permitted to claim your attention in the consideration of the question, "Is the Book of Mormon of Divine origin, and are its teachings entitled to the respect and belief of all Christian people?"

This is also my last thirty minutes upon the proposition and after answering the objections and assertions last presented by my opponent, I shall pass to a review and general summary of the arguments and positions upon the questions by both disputants.

I am surprised to find my opponent at this late time in the discussion, telling the audience how much he can prove...

page 207 still under construction

208 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Suppose it to be true that Sidney Rigdon did take the position in 1826 , or 1827, that the Apostlic religion could not be introduced in full, unless it was with the gifts accompanying and following the believer in Christ, what of it? Was it not a truth readily ascertained from the reading of the New Testament?

He would not in this have been adverse to Charles Wesley. The same doctrine was taught by Mr. Wesley...

Page 208 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 209

Page 209 has not been transcribed.

210 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 210 is not fully transcribed.

To all of this what has been his answer?

1. That Joseph Smith could have gained this knowledge of the habitation. greatness and civilization from things already known to the world of the antiquities of America, and as a proof cited Priest's work that was published before the Book of Mormon, he said. I took his (Priest's) work, and showed that what he had cited you as a prior publication of Mr. Priest was not a work upon antiquities at all, but a book of tales entitled, "The Wonders of Nature and Providence." He made a great display of the names of authors Priest quoted from, mentioning Boudinot, Edwards, Elliot, Cotton Mather, et al; but failed to read to you a single thing these men had said upon the subject, and, imdeed, they had said nothing except as to enter their speculations upon the subject of whether the American Indians were the descendants of the "lost tribes of Israel." I had preceded him, however, in this, showing there were such speculations; but what had all this to do with the great civilizations, works of art, location of cities, skill and mechanism, towering

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 211

cliff dwellings and cities, and the grand, enlightened and populous nations described in the Book of Mormon and since verified by discovery? I asked him. And so far as answering is concerned he has sat dumb and speechless throughout the ten evenings. But he could talk about Solomon Spaulding, Mrs. Dunlap, Dr. Winters, Alexander Campbell and Pomeroy Tucker, and try to vilify Sidney Rigdon and others...

Page 211 is not fully transcribed.

Page 211 is not fully transcribed.

Now look at the kind of proof for the Spaulding story from this standpoint of the evidence. He first introduces his witnesses to make his prima facie case, viz: to show that Spaulding wrote a manuscript. That is all right; they can do that by mere statements or affidavits. But when he comes to his main case he has only these same statements -- only this and nothing more; and he introduces these same statements to show what was in the manuscript they say was written, and they burn the manuscript itself. Can you swallow their story, then? All of his statements and affidavits have first gone through the hands of Howe, who I have shown you so fully (that even Braden has not denied it), filched and garbled from our books to try to make his points. Were the statements clean then, after having passed through this sickening sewer? Who will say that they were? Then we were told that the Whitmers and Harris and Smith expected to make money out of the thing. The lie is given to it from the very first by the public writings. They were distinctly told as early as 1823 that they should not make money out of it, and that was published and of record from the first. Why should these plain, published facts be contradicted by his witnesses of easy reputations? And why should he continually harp on character? Is his faith so based upon frail humanity that he judges mine to be? He has examined into the private lives of these men as though he expected we were to be saved through or by their acts. What has their acts to do with our faith? Does he violate respect of Jesus' unblemished life by pretending to compare the wayward life

212 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

Page 212 has not been transcribed.

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 213

Page 213 has not been transcribed.

214 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

MR. BRADEN'S CLOSING SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: -- The proof that Impostor Joe was the author of Mormon polygamy seems to have completely unbalanced my opponent. He howled and ranted and talked against time till his chagrin, anger and evident consciousness of defeat were pitiable. The argument is this. The Re-organized denounce polygamy as from the devil. God would not give such a revelation. If Joe did give to the world such a pretended revelation, it was from the Devil and not the Almighty, according to the Re-organized themselves, and he was a prophet of the Devil and not of the Almighty. We take them on their own grounds. We presented the testimony of William Marks, intimate with Joe and high in authority under Joe, and one of the re-organizers of the Re-organized, one of their founders and teachers, one of the editors of their official organ, that when the power and influence of Joe Smith was omnipotent among the Mormons as their prophet, polygamy prevailed to so fearful an extent that Marks had a revelation that the only way to purify the church was to utterly dis-organize it. Also that even Joe himself, the author of the abomination, eas alarmed, and said that polygamy would be the ruin of Mormonism. This was while Smith was living and his influence was omnipotent. Will Kelley deny the statement of Marks, one of the founders of his re-prganized concern?

We read the declaration of Zenos H. Gurley, in the first number of the official organ of the "Re-organized" written by Gurley, one of the editors, and one who was intimate with Smith in Nauvoo and who was one of the re-organizers of the Re-organized, one of the founders of Kelley's organization, who declares, positively, that the Mormons wanted to go into polygamy, and that Joe gave them the revelation, and that he repented of the iniquity of giving this revelation and was punished for it by a violent death. Will my opponent deny this statement? We presented the positive statement of Isaac Sheen, one who was intimate with Smith and knew all that transpired behind the scenes in Nauvoo, one of the re-organizers of the Re-organized, one of the editors of their official organ, one of the founders of the organization, that Smith was the author of that abominable, so-called revelation, that he declared himself that he was the author of it, and that, if it had not been for the practice and teaching of polygamy in which he had indulged, he would not have been involved in the troubles that cost him his life. Will my opponent deny this positive restimony of three of the re-organizers of the Re-organized, the three

editors of the official organ of his organization, three of the founders of his so-called church? Does he dare attempt it?

His appeals to the Book of Mormon and Book of Doctrines and Covenants amount to nothing. The Book of Mormon is full of the anti-Masonic rant of the times of its origin. Yet Rigdon and Smith afterwards became Masons. Joe never had a pretended revelation that he could not contradict by another pretended revelation. We have proved that from infancy he was a notorious liar. We have proved that he and his confederates repeatedly lied in denying the most palpable facts. Mormons lied for years in denying that spiritual wifery and polygamy were practiced and taught among them, when the testimony of hundreds of persons who saw and heard it, proved that they were lying.

The facts we have proved, that Smith advocated polygamy before he left New York, that he tried to practice it in Pennsylvania, and said adultry was no sin, the declarations of Mormons who were behind the scenes in Kirtland, that he practiced it secretly in Kirtland, that he practiced it in Missouri, that he declared in Kirtland that it would be the practice of Mormons, his declarations to his confederates in Missouri that he had such a revelation, his practice of it in Nauvoo, teaching it extensively in private, his taking plural wives, as the affidavits of such wives and witnesses prove, his performing the ceremony for others; the testimony of men to whom he dictated the the revelation, of the one who took a copy from this original, of apostles who passed on the revelation in high council, and the editors, re-organizers, founders of the Re-organized, in the first number of their official organ, render Kelley's attempted denial brazen in effrontery, and idiotic in its worthlessness.

In his attempt to reconcile the gross contradictions in the Book of Mormon, that we exposed, he falsifies its statements. The plates�of Ether which Limhi found, were not the plates of Jared's brother, which were not to go forth until after the Gentiles were converted. He did not explain how any Jaredite plates could be in the keeping of King Benjamin, when Mosiah, Benjamin's son and successor, did not obtain the plates until after Benjamin's death, and the Nephites did not know of the existence of the plates, or the people who had them, until after Benjamin's death. The Book of Mormon does say, in so many words that Coriantumr died among the subjects of King Zarahemla, who reigned 250 years before Christ, or 350 years after the Nephites reached America, and 340 years after

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 215

the Zarahemlites reached America; or at least 350 years after all the Jaredites, except Coriantumr were slain. Moroni did say he could write no more for his plates were full, and he could make no more plates. In representing that he afterwards wrote the Jaredite portion, the Book of Mormon does make him write on nothing, 57 pages of the Book of Mormon. Unfortunately for my opponent's gabble about the sticks of Ephraim and Juda, the same Hebrew word means "rod," "staff," "stick" "scepter." In not one instance are rolls or books called sticks. Ezekiel wrote on a literal stick as Aaron wrote on a literal stick. We have several times proved from the context that his long string of prophecies can refer only to Israelites on the old continent, and not to Israelites in America, for there never were any such, and the speakers knew nothing of America. We have several times exploded his archaeological stuff

If any one will compare the characters on real glyphs with Joe Smith's lying pretended facsimile of what was on his pretended plates, he can see the difference between real glyphs and a clumsy fraud gotten up by an ignoramus.

The contradictions to Mormon statements that I have exposed, I quoted from Mormon books themselves. I showed that Mormon statements are contradictory. By quoting Smith from Mormon books we proved that Smith, Harris, Whitmer, Cowdery and others flatly contradicted themselves. In the same statement of Whitmer that Kelley read a portion of, are silly yarns about angels plowing seven acres of land, sowing eleven acres of plaster, old Maroni trudging along the side of Whitmer's wagon, lugging the plates, and sweating like an old tramp. The silly lies of Whitmer, Harris, Smith and Moroni destroy their testimony. Kelly says Whitmer is a most estimable man. I read from his own copy of the Mormon official organ, the "Times and Seasons," the statement of Smith that he was an ass braying out cursings, and was cut off from the church for lying, slander and plotting robbery and murder. We read an official document issued by Rigdon and 82 Mormon officials, their highest officials, that he was guilty of lying, stealing, counterfeiting, and was a blackleg of the blackest dye.

The Book of Mormon declares that the plates were engraved by divine command, by the gift of God, translated by the gift of God, and the witnesses declare that God told them the translation was correct, yet the Mormon Deity had to correct 5000 blunders!!

CONCLUDING SUMMARY

The issues in this debate have been: I, did mankind need new revelations in addition to those in the Scriptures, when Joseph Smith pretended, in the Book of Mormon and other pretended revelations, to give to the world new revelations, in addition to those in the Bible? II. Was Joseph Smith a true prophet of God? III. Did Joseph Smith, in the Book of Mormon and other professed revelations, give to the world new

revelations, in addition to those in the Bible? We have been agreed: 1. That man needs a revelation of religion and morals. 2. That it should be given by inspiration of chosen men. 3. That inspiration and revelation should be attended and attested by signs, wonders and superhuman powers. 4. That the Bible is a revelation given by inspiration, attended by signs, superhuman powers. 5. That these superhuman powers did benevolent work for man while attesting inspiration and revelation. 8. That they committed evil superhuman powers, and enabled man to overcome them. 7. That they aided and directed man in matters incidently connected with the development of the revelations of truth recorded in the Bible. 8. That they deceloped and cultivated his spiritual nature. We have agreed in this concerning the Bible and superhuman power connected with it.

The issues have been: 1. Has man received inspiration, superguman power, and new revelations since the apostles of Christ completed their work? Or more particularly, did he need inspiration, superhuman power, new revelations, when Joseph Smith pretended to be inspired, possessed of superhuman power, and to give new revelations in addition to those in the Bible? 3. Does the Bible teach that inspiration, superhuman power and new revelations are possible? That they were and are to continue, as an essential consitituent element in the church? 4. Or does it teach that they are to cease? That they perfected their work when the New Testament was perfected? That the law of God was and is, that they should cease, when the New Testament was completed, having accomplished their work? Our position has been that, just as, in the analogous cases, of exercise of miraculous power in creation, as in the growth of each individual existence in the animal and vegetable world, or in the work of framing a constitution, and organizing a government under it, so in the exercise of miraculous power, and the influence of inspiration, in the giving of revelation there was an end, a purpose to be accomplished, and that that purpose determined the time of its continuance, and that it ceased, when it had accomplished its purpose, and was succeeded by a higher and more perfect condition, for which it had prepared the way.

We explained that there have been two influences of the Holy Spirit. 1. The direct and miraculous, seen in inspiration, revelation, and miracle. 2. The ordinary through the truth. The first is not a moral influence, produces no moral change. Left the person influenced just as it found him. That the only moral influence the Holy Spirit has exerted on men has been through truth. Conversion and sanctification can be accomplished only through the truth. The Bible speaks of these manifestations of the Holy Spirit: 1. The inspiration enjoyed by the inspired men of the Old Testament, and until the ascension of Christ. 2. Ba ptism in the Holy Spirit. 3. Spiritual gifts

216 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

imparted by the hands of an apostle. We proved that promises of Joel, John the Baptist, and Jesus, in regard to the Holy Spirit, all had reference to the miraculous influence of the Holy Spirit. That the promise of the Comforter was to the apostles alone, and was miraculous. That Jesus limited the promise of Joel "to all flesh." to believers; and that his language in Mark 16, logically does not extend beyond the apostles; such apostles as would preach believing his promise to be with them; for it concludes "they" the apostles "went" everywhere preaching, and the Lord was with "them" the apostles "attesting their work," the work of the apostles, with the signs he had promised to the apostles.

We proved that Peter limited the promise of Joel to such believers as "the Lord should call," to the exercise of the spiritual powers that Joel promised. We proved that the Lord called by the imposition of an apostle's hands, that none but an apostle could impart these gifts. That they never descended to a third person. We proved that there never were but two instances of baptism in the Holy Spirit, and that, as there is one baptism, only water baptism is in the church. Baptism in the Spirit has ceased. We proved by an appeal to Eph. 4, that spiritual gifts were to remain until the church was completed, or become a perfect man, and the faith was completed in the New Testament. By an appeal to 1. Cor. 12-18, that there is a more excellent way than the exercise of the best spiritual gifts. That prophecy, all speaking by inspiration, knowledge, all revelations, tongues, all mere signs, were to cease; when the church was completed in organization, and the New Testament, the perfect law of liberty, that which makes perfect, was completed. We proved by our appeal to Daniel's prophecy that all vision and prophecy were to cease about 105 years after Christ. That as miraculous work in creation ceased, and gave way to the higher, the operation of natural law, so miraculous work in revelation ceased, and gave way to the higher, the moral power of truth. We next stated the forty cardinal ideas of religion and showed that Christianity contains all of them, expresses each perfectly as a universally applicable truth, and that it is an absolute religion of universal and eternal truths, perfectly expressed, and can not be outgrown.

We demanded of our opponent, what single truth had been given to the world by Mormon pretended revelations, not in Christianity. What idea that was not better expressed in Christianity, than in Mormonism? He has utterly failed to meet this question. We proved that all Bible writers and speakers speak of the work of Jesus and the apostles, as perfect, the last, the final. They never speak of any thing that is to succeed it. They declare that Christ came in the fullness of the times. That in Christ dwells the fullness of the Godhead, in him was all fullness. They say that all fullness is in his church. That the Gospel is the fullness, the completeness

of God's word. That the church is perfect in organization and faith or doctrine. That God gave to the apostles all things pertaining to life and godliness. This utterly forbids all ideas of Mormon revelation. They are needless, for the perfect, that which is complete, the fullness, all things have been given in Christianity.

We then presented the history of the Book of Mormon and proved that it had a base human origin, and was fabricated as a fraud to deceive. We proved by the concurrent testimony of seventeen witnesses, one of them Rigdon himself, that Solomon Spaulding wrote a romance called the "Manuscript Found;" that he wrote three drafts or manuscripts of this romance and part of another before his death. We have proved that the "Manuscript Found" had in it these features found in the Book of Mormon, and found in no other books but the Book of Mormon and the "Manuscript Found": 1. The plot of the "Manuscript Found," as witnesses describe it, was just what Mormons give when describing the Book of Mormon. 2. It purported to be a veritable history of the aborigines of America. So does the Book of Mormon. 3. It attempted to account for the antiquities of America by giving an account of their construction. So does the Book of Mormon. 4. It assumed that Israelites were the aborigines of America and ancestors of the Indians. So does the Book of Mormon. 5. It said the Israelites left Jerusalem. So does the Book of Mormon. 6. They left to escape divine judgments about to fall on these people. So does the Book of Mormon. 7. That they journeyed through and from Southern Asia by land and sea. So does the Book of Mormon. 8. Their leaders were Nephi and Lehi. So does the Book of Mormon. 9. One Laban was murdered to obtain records. So declares the Book of Mormon. 10. They quarreled and divided into two nations, called Nephites and Lamanites. So says the Book of Mormon. 11. There were terrible wars between the two nations and the parties into which they were divided, with awful slaughter. So declares the Book of Mormon. 12. They buried their dead after these slaughters in great heaps, that caused the mounds. So declares the Book of Mormon. 13. In two instances the end of these wars was the total annihilation of all but one who escaped to make a record of the final catastrophe. So declares the Book of Mormon. 14. These sole survivors finished the record of the people and buried it. So declares the Book of Mormon. 15. The "Manuscript Found" gave an historical account of the civilization, laws, customs, arts and sciences of those peoples, So does the Book of Mormon. 16. One party of these peoples were the ancestors of our American Indians. So declares the Book of Mormon. 17. The names Nephi, Lehi, Laban, Laman, Nephite, Lamanite, Mormon, Moroni, Amlicite, Zarahemla, etc. were in the "Manuscript Found." So they are in the Book of Mormon. 18. The use and characteristics of these names in the Manuscript

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 217

Found were precisely the same as in the Book of Mormon. 19. The Manuscript Found was written in scriptural style -- that is, the style of King James' Version. So is the Book of Mormon. 20. "Now it came to pass" occurred so frequently as to render the language ridiculous. Such is true of the Book of Mormon. 21. This ridiculous peculiarity got for the author of the "Manuscript Found" the nickname of "Old Come to Pass." The Book of Mormon is just such a book. 22. The original from which the story was translated was taken from the earth. The same is claimed by the Book of Mormon. 23. One party of emigrants landed near the Isthmus of Panama, and migrated across the continent in a northeastern direction. So declares the Book of Mormon, 24. The land near the Isthmus was called the land of Zarahemla. So declares the Book of Mormon. 25. In a battle between Amlicites and Lamanites, one party marked their foreheads with a red cross to distinguish them from their enemies. So declares the Book of Mormon. 26. The destruction of the nations exterminated took place near a hill called Cumorah. So declares the Book of` Mormon. 27. The Manuscript Found could have been used as a fraud, an imitation of the Bible, a pretended revelation. The Book of Mormon is just such a fraud. Now, then, the reader must do one of two things, believe that Solomon Spaulding, during a period of from twenty-two to fourteen years before the Book of Mormon appeared, by a miracle wrote a romance that contained these twenty-seven great features of the Book of Mormon -- features that no other book except the Manuscript Found and the Book of Mormon ever contained in common -- or that Rigdon stole the manuscript of the Manuscript Found and remodeled it into the Book of Mormon.

We proved that the third manuscript of Manuscript Found was taken to Patterson's printing office. That Rigdon was learning the tanner's trade in Pittsburg at that time. That he was very intimate with Lambdin, one of Patterson's printers. That the Spaulding Manuscript Found attracted much curiosity in the printing office. That Rigdon was much interested in it. That he hung around the office, till Engles, the foreman complained of it. That the manuscript was stolen. That Rigdon was charged with stealing it. That he afterwards showed it to Dr. Winters, saying that it was a Bible romance, written by a Presbyterian preacher named Spaulding, giving a history of the Indians, and that it had been taken to a printing office for publication, and that he borrowed it as a curiosity. We proved that he spent so much time over it that his wife threatened to burn it. That he retorted: "Indeed you will not: this will be a great thing some day." We proved by Jeffries that Rigdon told him that he took the manuscript from the printing office and gave it to Smith to publish. We proved by Tucker, Mrs. Eaton, McAuly, Chase and Saunders that Rigdon was seen at Smith's

in New York, from the spring of 1827 to the fall of 1830. We proved that he was absent from Mentor for weeks at a time, during these years, and no one knew where. We proved by Bentley, Campbell and Atwater, that he announced years before it appeared such a book as the Book of Mormon, translated from Gold plates, dug up in New York, giving the origin of American antiquities, a history of the aborigines of America, and telling that the gospel had been preached in America just as the Disciples were then preaching it on the Reserve. We proved by Atwater, Dille, Z. Rudolph, John Rudolph, Green, and by Kelley himself, that Rigdon preached and advocated the doctrines in which the Book of Mormon differs from the Disciples, the peculiar ideas of the Book. That he so indoctrinated all his hearers, where he could, that every Rigdonite became a Mormon, when he became one. He had prepared then for the slight change, chiefly a change of name. We showed that when a Mormon preacher read to a Conneaut audience, for the first time they had ever heard it, the Book of Mormon, Spaulding's old acquaintances, who had heard him read his Manuscript Found, denounced the fraud, Squire Wright shouting: "Old come-to-pass has come to life." His brother, John Spaulding, denounced it on the spot

We have shown that the witness after reading the Book of Mormon, declares that the historic portions, in all of the twenty-seven great features we have enumerated, is identical with the Manuscript Found of Solomon Spaulding. They reject the religious portion. That accords with the idea that Rigdon stole the Manuscript Found, and remodeled it to the use if a pretended revelation, interpolating the religious portion. The testimony showing that Spaulding wrote several manuscripts explains away the trouble over Rigdon's copying it.

He stole it. It explains the size of the Manuscript Martha Spaulding read. She read her father's first brief draft, or the portion he wrote in Amity after Rigdon stole what he had sent to Patterson's office to be published. It explains away all trouble over the discrepancy, the difference between Spaulding's sentiments and the teaching of the Book of Mormon.

We then gave a chronology of Mormonism showing that our history of the book accorded exactly with every demand of history. We then proved by the Rigdonisms in the Book of Mormon that Rigdon is its author. We found that no one but a Disciple preacher of the time when it appeared, could have been its author, used its language, and uttered its teachings. We showed that where Rigdon agreed with the Disciples, the Book agreed with them. Where he disagreed it disagreed and very bitterly too. That it advocates Rigdon's ideas on community of goods, restoration of spiritual gifts, new revelations, his fall-down power to which he was subject. His anti-Masonry. His name for believers and for the church. His sermon against infant

218 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE.

baptism. That it contains his baptismal formula, his revival expressions, his rant, bombast, fustian and spread-eagle. That it has every mark of being arranged by one mind, not many, as Mormons claim. The style is a unit, not diverse as is the case in the Bible. That one mind is Rigdon.

We took up the testimony of Smith, the three witnesses, the eight. We proved that Smith was notorious for his frauds and lies. We exposed his almost countless lies and contradictory stories about the matter. We proved that he never made a statement that he did not at some time, contradict. We proved by the declarations of those who had been his neighbors, associates, and by Mormons themselves that he was notorious for his falsehoods and frauds. We took up the three witnesses. We proved Martin Harris to have been utterly unreliable in his stories about Mormonism. He lied about his interview with Anthon. He told most idiotic lies. He said he never saw the plates with his natural sight. He saw them by faith. We read Joe's warning against adultry and murder, in a revelation addressed to Harris. Joe's denunciation of him as being beneath the notice of a gentleman. That he had been a vile character before he joined the Mormon Church, and he gave his testimony one year before he joined the church. We showed by his ridiculous, idiotic tales, that he was utterly unworthy of belief. We proved by Cowdery's old neighbors that he was worthless and unworthy of belief. By a revelation uttered by Smith that he was not to be trusted. By Hiram Smith that he was a thief and a robber and forger. By Joe that he had been cut off from the church for crime, and was engaged in lying against the Saints, and plotting their murder and robbery. That he died a drunken sot with delirum tremens.

We proved by David Whitmer's yarns that his tertimony was worthless. Angels sowing plaster, plowing land, and all such tomfoolery. We proved that Joe said he was cut off with Cowdery from crime, and was engaged with him in circulating lies and plotting the murder and robbery of the Saints. We showed that Rigdon and 83 other Mormons, their leaders, denounced Cowdery and Whitmer as slanderers, liars, thieves, counterfeitors, connected with a gang of blacklegs of the blackest dye. Such are the three witnesses according to Mormons themselves -- Joe Smith, Hyram Smith, Rigdon, and leading Mormons. We showed that the testimony of the eight witnesses was a lie, for they testify to what they could not know. We showed by comparing the revelation announcing to the witnesses they should see the plates with the two testimonials, that Joe wrote all three. He wrote the lie and the confederates in the fraud swore to it. We proved by appeals to their stories in Mormon books that the persons who claim to have seen the plates and their associates in the fraud, tell contradictory stories on every point concerning [ ------- ]. That there is not a statement

of one that is not contradicted by others and that the witnesses contradict themselves, every statement they make. On such testimony as this is the Book of Mormon based.

We proved that Joe had for years before going into Rigdon's book fraud, been engaged in lying frauds, witching for water, peeping for money with the peep stone he stole from Chase's children, digging for money, lying about it, swindling every dupe he could find, and stealing in connection with it, and that all the witnesses were connected with this money digging, thieving, lying gang, who had been lying to get money by fraud, and a living withouut work. If Joe's peep-stone , stolen from Chase's children, his witching for water, his digging for money, his seeing buried money with his stolen peep-stone were frauds, so was his tale about finding plates, and his tale about translating them. The Book of Mormon is as much a fraud as his digging for pots of money. We showed that his translation of the papyrus was a transparent fraud. So was his Book of Mormon. It was as great a fraud as his Book of Abraham. We showed that the pretended facsimile sent to Anthon and the one in Utah were lying frauds. So was the lie he told about having plates from which he copied these frauds. All these are frauds, one as transparent as the other, and as palpable as the noonday sun to all, except fanatics or dupes.

We proved that the Book of Mormon is based on two assumptions: 1. An angel gave a pile of plates to Joe Smith. 2. The Lord gave the translation of the plates to Joe, word by word, by miracle. Of this we have not one iota of proof, except the naked assertions of Joe Smith. We have already exposed his character and frauds. His assertions are no better in regard to this than in regard to witching for water, peeping for money, or his translation of papyrus rolls or his lying facsimile. The Book of Mormon has not one particle of proof that an uninspired book should have. No inter-locking with history, geography, literature and customs. No more than Vernet's "Trip to the moon." It has every feature of a fraud. It avoids all tests like all hands. It lacks every feature that sustains the Bible. It does not interlock with other history, geography, literature and customs. It is not attested by national customs, history; by monumental institutions, by prophecies; by a vast literature based on it; by growing up in the midst of histile criticism and attacks. It does not form the most wonderful part of the world's history, as does the Bible. It is as isolated from all these tests as Gulliver's Travels. It is as monstrous a fabrication and infinitely more improbable.

We examined the book itself. We exposed its contradictions of common sense, its monstrous fabrications, its hundreds of contradictions of itself, its contradictions of the Bible, in history, in doxtrine; its contradictions of the inspired translation of Joe

THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 219

Smith, its contradictions of science, of history. We exposed its literary character, its grammatical blunders, its atrocious style, its silly expressions. We show that Mormons admit its ridiculous inaccuracies and atrocities by revising out of it over 5,000 blunders, many of which are perfect monstrosities. Yet it was written by inspiration by the Almighty. The Almighty revising himself! The Almighty learning grammar and composition!! We exposed its quotations from King James' translation, quoting its blunders in text, in transition, in grammar, its obsolete words, its ridiculous copying of the brogue of that translation; showing that it was written by a person who used that translation alone. We exposed its adaptations from modern history and the Bible, its anachronisms, its speaking of things hundreds of years before they existed, its quotations from the New Testament hundreds of years before it existed, its ridiculous quotations from modern authors, proving that it was written after their day.

Finally we proved that Joe Smith was the author of Mormon polygamy and the infamy blasphemously called "The Revelation on Celestial Marriage." This alone damns with infamy all claim that he was a prophet, or that a book that emanated from him is of divine origin. In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, will you believe that Spaulding's miracle in writing a fictitious history of the aborigines of America wrote a book that agreed with a revelation of that history of the aborigines of America in all important features and names, events and even of persons and nations, twenty years before such pretended revelations appeared? Or will you believe that the pretended revelation is a plagiarism from Spaulding's

manuscript written twenty years before it appeared? There are twenty-seven great features of the Manuscript Found in the Book of Mormon. The Manuscript Found is twenty years the oldest. They were stolen from the Manuscript Found by the Book of Mormon. Will you believe that Nephites, in America, quoted whole chapters of the Bible written after they left Asia, quoted chapters and hundreds of verses before they were uttered, that they quoted modern authors, quoted the brogue of King James' translators, its grammatical blunders, its obsolete words, quoted Rigdon's baptismal formula, his rant on infant baptism. his revivalisms, his peculiar ideas in every particular, all of which existed before it appeared? Or will you believe as we have proved, that Rigdon stole Spaulding's manuscript and remolded it into a pretended revelation. "to make a big thing out of it." as he declared he would?

You can act for yourselves, but common sense says this fraud was started by a backslidden, skeptical man, once a preacher. Another skeptical preacher stole and remolded it. A third infidel gave it to the world with his stolen peep-stone. As it was the work of infidelity, there is a fitness of things in its being defended here by infidel attacks on the Bible. As infidels got it up, an infidel should defend it with infidel sophistries. It was begotten by Spaulding, a skeptical, back-slider, in sin; conceived by Rigdon, another skeptical back-slider in iniquity; and brought forth by Joe Smith, a skeptical admirer of Paine, and an advocate of his sentiments, in depravity and pollution; and has flourished in fraud and fanaticism until it has culminated in Utah in what would make devils blush.

got to: page 220: The Second Proposition.

Return to top of the page

Return to: Special Collections Index | New Spalding Studies Library

last revised: Apr. 23, 2009