Minutes, , Geauga Co., OH, 28–29 Aug. 1834. Featured version copied [not before 25 Feb. 1836] in Minute Book 1, pp. 58–72, 73; handwriting of ; CHL. For more complete source information, see the source note for Minute Book 1.
Historical Introduction
On 28 August 1834, , in , Ohio, convened the Kirtland to try for “violating the laws of the church of the latter day saints.” Smith, a participant, had accused JS of “criminal conduct” on the expedition, but the Kirtland council that investigated the charges on 11 August 1834 found JS innocent of any wrongdoing. The council required Sylvester Smith to recant his charges publicly, which he agreed to do, and appointed a committee to write an article clearing JS’s name, to be published in The Evening and the Morning Star. On 23 August 1834, another council approved the article for publication, but Sylvester Smith then “objected against abiding by the decision of the former council, and proceeded to Justify himself in his former conduct.” The council decided that Sylvester Smith was “guilty of a misdemeanor unbecoming a man in his high station” and “disqualified” him from acting in his church office until “a trial before the bishop assisted by twelve [could] be had.”
That same day, made formal charges against and requested to call the high council to investigate the charges. Whitney did so on 28 August, and the council met for the next two days, hearing testimony about what had transpired at the 11 August council and on the Camp of Israel expedition. The high council ultimately mandated that Sylvester Smith publish a confession in order to remain a member of the church, stating that he “willfully and maliciously lied” in making his accusations against JS. The confession was published in the October 1834 issue of the Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, and Sylvester Smith retained his membership and his high priest office, though he was removed from the high council in September 1834. However, Smith may not have been satisfied with the decision of the council. Although he signed a statement acknowledging the justness of the council’s decisions, someone—likely Sylvester Smith himself, as the handwriting resembles his—later crossed out his name and wrote under it, “The above was signed for fear of punishment.” This may have occurred in 1836 when Smith was temporarily serving as JS’s scribe.
The high council, which tried , was established in February 1834 in part to adjudicate difficult issues in the church. According to the constitution of the high council, the president of the high council, JS, was supposed to preside, assisted by two other presidents—at the time, and . However, Bishop actually presided over the high council at this 28–29 August meeting. Since JS was the subject of Smith’s charges, he may have recused himself from the presiding role. If so, it is unclear why Rigdon or Williams did not then act as the presiding authority, especially since guidelines for the high council clearly state that in the absence of the president, “the other presidents have power to preside in his stead, both or either of them.” It may have been because Whitney had already presided over the 11 August council that originally investigated Smith’s charges. Or perhaps it was because the 23 August council specifically stated that Smith needed to be tried by “the bishop assisted by twelve high priests,” or a . However, the minutes themselves specifically refer to the body addressing these charges as the high council, not as a bishop’s court. A third possibility is that the council was functioning in accordance with instructions in a November 1831 revelation that stated if the was in transgression, the president (JS) should be tried before a court chaired by the bishop, or common judge, assisted by “twelve counsellors of the .” Even though JS was not on trial, the high council did address Smith’s charges against JS, which, as Rigdon stated in his complaint, meant that the case “affect[ed] the presidency” of the church. Whatever the reason, Whitney assumed the same roles that the president of the high council typically filled, serving as moderator throughout the trial, delivering the decision in the case, and calling on the high counselors for their sanction of the decision.
and served as clerks of the meeting and kept the minutes. The minutes featured here include ’s formal complaint against , ’s notification to Smith of the charges, and Smith’s statement acknowledging the decision of the council. later copied these documents and the minutes into Minute Book 1.
Sylvester Smith to Oliver Cowdery, Kirtland, OH, 28 Oct. 1834, in LDS Messenger and Advocate, Oct. 1834, 1:10–11; Minutes, 24 Sept. 1834. In February 1835, Smith was called as one of the initial members of the Seventy, an ecclesiastical body established by JS. (Minutes and Blessings, 28 Feb.–1 Mar. 1835.)
Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate. Kirtland, OH. Oct. 1834–Sept. 1837.
profession as a man of God. Question by . Did you not think that my character was injured in the minds of the weaker part of the camp, in consequence of those reproffs and chastisements which were given me by brother Joseph? Answer. I did not. further said, in relation to a certain difficulty which took place relative to a dog,— that on a certain evening after crossing the , came up with the remaining part of the camp, when the dog came out and insulted him. he knew not whether he touched him or not. The next morning after hearing considerable complaint and murmuring concerning the dog. Brother Joseph spake to several brethren present and said, I will descend to the spirit that is in the camp, to show you the spirit you are of for I want to drive it from the camp. “The first man that kills that dog, (or my dog) I will whip him!” He thought about this time, that came up, who said “If that dog bites me I will kill him.” If you do said brother Joseph “I will whip you” If you do said , I shall defend myself the best way that I can! Brother Joseph then said that he could in the name of the Lord. He, (brother Joseph) asked the brethren if they were not ashamed of such a spirit? Said he, I am. He then proceeded to reprove them for condescending to that spirit,— that they ought to be above it, that it was the spirit of a dog, and men ought never to place themselves on a level with beasts. but be possessed of a more noble disposition. He then said he had decended to that spirit in order to show the spirit which was among them. He further said that this explanation gave general satisfaction, and the most of them saw that he had only made these remarks for the purpose of instructing them, and warning them against such a spirit or disposition. Brethern & concurred. Brother said he was not present when these reproofs were given in the mor [p. 67]