Minutes, 28–29 August 1834

  • Source Note
Page 62
image
between himself and brother Joseph, and that the other charges indirectly preferred as grievances of others, were also without a foundation. Brother concurred in the above. Brother C. Durfee, said that he considered that brother J. was acquitted, as being guilty of any misdemeanor before the on the 11th. Brother said that he accompanied brother Joseph to , from Mansfield in this State, except leaving him for a short time to visit the of . He was present when brother [JS] reproved , concerning a certain difficulty, arising from a complaint, concerning a certain dog.— That he considered brother Josephs reproofs were just at the time, as <he> well recollects stating the same in substance to . He did not consider this reproof had any tendency to lessen the esteem of the brethren for , but if they had, in consequence of a confession in general terms, from , about that time, he thought that sufficient to heal every hard feeling then existing against him, or that might exist. He further said, that during his journey to the West, he could not say that he had seen any thing in brother Joseph’s conduct, contrary to the true principles of his profession as a man of God. Brother said that he fell in company with brother J. at Ohio, and accompanied him the most of the way to , and that during the whole course of the journey, he did not see any thing in his conduct to lessen his esteem of him as a man of God. But he said he heard brother Joseph reprove concerning a certain something, respecting some bread, he did not hear the whole, and thought at the time the reproofs were rather severe, but had learned since, they were not any more severe than were just. Brother Joseph was then called upon to make a statement, concerning the transactions as they trans [p. 62]
between himself and brother Joseph, and that the other charges indirectly preferred as grievances of others, were also without a foundation. Brother concurred in the above. Brother C. Durfee, said that he considered that brother J. was acquitted, as being guilty of any misdemeanor before the on the 11th. Brother said that he accompanied brother Joseph to , from Mansfield in this State, except leaving him for a short time to visit the of . He was present when brother [JS] reproved , concerning a certain difficulty, arising from a complaint, concerning a certain dog.— That he considered brother Josephs reproofs were just at the time, as he well recollects stating the same in substance to . He did not consider this reproof had any tendency to lessen the esteem of the brethren for , but if they had, in consequence of a confession in general terms, from , about that time, he thought that sufficient to heal every hard feeling then existing against him, or that might exist. He further said, that during his journey to the West, he could not say that he had seen any thing in brother Joseph’s conduct, contrary to the true principles of his profession as a man of God. Brother said that he fell in company with brother J. at Ohio, and accompanied him the most of the way to , and that during the whole course of the journey, he did not see any thing in his conduct to lessen his esteem of him as a man of God. But he said he heard brother Joseph reprove concerning a certain something, respecting some bread, he did not hear the whole, and thought at the time the reproofs were rather severe, but had learned since, they were not any more severe than were just. Brother Joseph was then called upon to make a statement, concerning the transactions as they trans [p. 62]
Page 62