Brian Hales Polygamy, Temple Lot Trial & Helen Mar Kimball

[_grindael]

Because you are ignorant.

for doubting what Lewis wrote about Helen words?

I will ask again, do you have peer-reviewed studies or a prominent historian that agrees?

Just quoted them. Again, you are not just "doubting", you are claiming she is unreliable. She is not. Therefore, you doubting it, has no merit. You cannot show why anyone should reasonably doubt her words. I've showed how Compton was wrong to call what she said, "seemingly unreliable".

[_DoubtingThomas]

The same evidence I used, Compton used. Compton has the exact same opinion that I do, that evidence of sex in the marriage is ambiguous. But that doesn't mean that it didn't happen, wasn't expected in the "marriage", or that the "marriage" was only a "ceremony". It wasn't.

LOL I agree with that! So where is the disagreement? I agree it is plausible that Joseph Smith had sex with Helen, I never said he didn't. However, ambiguous evidence is not good evidence. Just because Joseph Smith had sex with other teenage wives doesn't mean he had sex with Helen. In my opinion it is best to be agnostic about this issue.

and I am not convinced that " anything more than ceremony" are the exact words of Helen. Why? because human memory is not very reliable.

[_grindael]

In speaking of the Endowment, Catherine Lewis wrote in 1848:

This is called “the Sealing;” the Order of the Celestial Kingdom. In this part, the Twelve are commanded to take a plurality of wives; but lay members are only allowed to take to themselves wives with the consent of the Twelve. Here they seal up men, women and children to eternal life, as they term it. Men with their wives and families are sealed up to the Twelve as children, and are bound by solemn Oaths to obey their Parents (the Twelve) in all things, forever. They never become of age, but are subject to the Apostles, as Christ is to the Father. At Nauvoo, I repeatedly heard it said, “When we arrive in the wilderness, where the law of the Lord can be executed, then the children who will not obey their parents, will be taken out of the Camp, and stoned to death. Did the people know under what bonds and penalties they brought themselves, by this sealing, very few, if any, but the most vicious and depraved, would consent to be sealed. But it is wrapt so much in mystery, that many submit to its obligations from motives of curiosity, who afterward view them with abhorrence. I saw the sealing ceremony performed on Kimball’s lawful family, but should not be allowed to see the sealing of his adopted wives or children. (Catherine Lewis, Narrative, pg. 19)

Catherine Lewis is describing the Law of Adoption, which was practiced in the Church from the time of Joseph Smith until Wilford Woodruff discontinued the practice in 1894. A few years earlier in his Temple Lot Testimony, Lorenzo Snow lied that it was ever practiced in the Church.

Some of the following is a synopsis of Connell O’Donovan’s biography of Catherine Lewis and Augusta Cobb that appears in his work, “Boston Mormons”:

Born Catherine Ramsdell on March 17, 1799, she was the daughter of William Ramsdell and Salley Richards who hailed from Lynn, Massachusetts. Lewis claimed in a letter she wrote to Brigham Young that she had some kind of important spiritual experience around the year 1818 or 1819. Her first husband was named Nathaniel Parrott, who died in 1832. It is not known if she divorced him before his death, but she married Joseph Lewis Jr. in 1831 in Lynn’s First Congregational Church. Catherine Lewis converted to Mormonism in 1841, the year that her second husband Joseph died. Her husband’s children did not approve of her joining the church and so they expelled her from the Lewis home in Lynn and sold it, keeping the money for themselves. She wrote to Brigham Young in November of 1844,

I have noot bean without trials sense you [Brigham Young] was here I have had the hous that I was living in when you was here tacken from me --- by my Husband’s Children and and sold they have sold it and tacken the pay and have not alowed me one cent so you see tha I am turned out into the world without hous or home and all this they say because I am a Mormon I will --- prais the Lord I --- can tacke the spoiling of my goods joyfuley with the exception of this, I would be glad to have gotten something for the building of the Tempel and the caus of Zion … (Letter to Brigham Young, November 17, 1844)

Catherine Lewis attended the Boston and Salem branches of the Church, and became friends with Augusta Adams Cobb, who had an affair with Brigham Young and later “married” him. Catherine worked with fabrics and donated over 50 yards of material for use in the Nauvoo Temple. The material was taken to Nauvoo by “Elder Snow” in the fall of 1843 and when Catherine wrote to Brigham Young a year she asked about her gift to the temple and if it was properly recorded in the Book of the Law of the Lord.

On October 25th 1843 there is an entry in the Book of the Law of the Lord for Lorenzo Snow donating 35 3/4 yards of cloth for his tithing (receiving a credit of $49.12) We could not find any entries for Catherine Lewis for this timeframe but we may have overlooked it if it is there.

At the time Joseph Smith was murdered in June of 1844 many of his Apostles had gathered at Boston where a Conference and a Convention about Smith’s upcoming Presidential run was held. It was at this time that Heber C. Kimball approached Catherine Lewis and asked her if Augusta Cobb [one of Brigham Young’s secret wives) had spoken to her about the spiritual wife doctrine. Catherine acknowledged that Cobb had spoken to her, but that she was reluctant to accept the doctrine. Kimball gave her until July 5, to “think it over.” Connell O’Donovan writes that,

… it was at this same convention that Parley P. Pratt obtained the already-married Belinda Marden Hilton as a plural wife, by having Brigham Young and Lyman Wight convince her to lie to her husband (Benjamin Abbott Hilton) about visiting relatives in the country but she really abandoned him to move to Nauvoo. (ibid., 56)

From Kimball’s diary, July 5, 1844:

5 Friday. At 12 Oc took cars to Linn [Lynn, Massachusetts], to the House of Sister Lewis. Stade all night. Elder B. Young was with. We had rest to our bodies. I inquired [of the] Lord if my family was well, my wife [Vilate] on hur way to the East. I meet hur at Ph – [Philadelphia] when I returned from Boltimore, had much rest. (On The Potter’s Wheel, 72)
During Kimball’s stay at Catherine Lewis’ house he asked her again about becoming his spiritual wife and she again balked at the idea. He then told her he would bring Vilate to speak with her and that she would the “say all is right” (O’Donnell, op. cited).

On July 9, the news of the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith reached the 12 in Massachusetts where Kimball was attending a Conference in Salem. Kimball and his wife then left for Nauvoo. Brigham Young was beginning to have problems with the husband of Augusta Cobb:

…left in the evening for Boston found my self in Boston on Sunday morning stayed with the Saints through the day had a good meeting. on monday I went to Lynn on monday saw Vilate on tusday She came up to Sister Lewis with Sister Cobb She is in good helth and sperits. she is going to school. Sister Cobbs children think much of her and due all they can to make her happy She will come home with me this seson. sister Cobb is well all things goes well with hir, as far as I can fined out. Mr Cobb tried to get a bill of devose [divorce] from hir but could not, and she is in peasable? possesion of hir famely and hir house. I stayed and visited with vilate through day, went to Salem in the evening stayd for 3 days with the Saints and returned to Boston and went to Lowel to visite the Bretherin stayed over the sabath with them. I have jenerly had a good time with the saints. But the time at present seems to be big with events it seems as though judgements hung over the people and would soon be pord out upon them, but judgement belongs to the Lord. (O’Donnell, 58)

Like many Mormons at the time, Catherine Lewis was affected deeply by the murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith and wrote this poem which was published in the September 28, 1844 edition of The Prophet,

On the Death of the Prophet and Patriarch of The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Shall they live again?
Rest from your labors here ye honored ones;
For scenes more glorious now
Attend your labors there:
And when those who have gone before
Shall see you enter as their head, on earth
To lead the prisoners forth –

A shout of joy will then be heard,
Behold the Prophet of the Lord!
Joseph, by name, he comes their souls to claim;
Who shall be heirs to God,
And joint heirs with His Son –
His work on earth is done;
He hath laid the great foundation here,
And now hath passed
Thro’ blood; within the veil
A greater work to do.
But soon he will burst those prison doors,
And in fully glory shine,
With all his glorious train on earth to stand,
And meet King Jesus from on high
With all his heavenly band;
While Saints on earth shall join the throng
And far on high ascend to wait the redemption
Of the earth, and then again return.
Ye weeping Saints shake off your fears,
God’s promises are sure;
though’ heaven and earth shall pass away,
His word will still endure;
This earth shall be as Eden fair,
When all things are restore;
The Saints shall then in peace abide
Without corroding toil.
The earth shall yield her fruit again
As at Creation’s morn;
And man be placed back again
The garden to adorn;
While angels from on high
Shall mingle with the Saints,
And Christ their Lord shall be their
To heighten all their joys.

(CATHERINE LEWIS.)

In November Catherine who was staying with her sisters on Common Street in Lynn, Massachusetts, wrote a long letter to Brigham Young and mentioned to him that his oldest daughter Vilate was staying with Augusta Cobb and had visited her. She also passed along some personal information and news about what was going on in the surrounding country.

Lewis left the Boston area and headed for Nauvoo in the fall of 1845 and likely reached the city by late November. She was endowed as a single woman on December 22, 1845. She was washed by Sarah Crosby and anointed by Vilate Kimball. She was also a member of the second endowment company and she was taken through the veil by Heber C. Kimball, though he was not her husband. (O’Donnell, 62)

Heber C. Kimball was still courting Catherine Lewis as an additional wife at the end of 1845. William Clayton records a celebration that she was part of that took place in the Temple:

The labors of the day having been brought to a close at so early an hour viz; half past 8, it was thought proper to have a little season of recreation, accordingly, Brother Hans Hanson was invited to produce his violin. He did so, and played several lively airs, among the rest some very good lively dancing tunes. This was too much for the gravity of Brother Joseph Young, who indulged in a hornpipe, and was soon joined by several others, and before the dance was over several French fours were indulged in. The first was opened by President B. Young with Sister [Elizabeth] Whitney and Elder H. C. Kimball with Sister [Catherine] Lewis. The spirit of dancing increased until the whole floor was covered with dancers. After this had continued about an hour, several excellent songs were sung, in which several of the brethren and sisters joined. The Upper California was sung by Erastus Snow. After which Sister Whitney being invited by President Young, stood up and invoking the gift of tongues, sung one of the most beautiful songs in tongues, that ever was heard. The interpretation was given by her husband, Bishop Whitney, it related to our efforts to build this House, and to the privilege we now have of meeting together in it, of our departure shortly to the country of the Lamanites, and their rejoicing when they hear the gospel, and of the ingathering of Israel. Altogether, it was one of the most touching and beautiful exhibitions of the power of the Spirit in the gift of tongues which was ever seen. (So it appeared to the writer of this.) After a little conversation of a general nature, the exercises of the evening were closed by prayer by President B. Young, and soon after most of the persons present left the Temple for their homes . . . (George D. Smith, An Intimate Chronicle; The Journals of William Clayton, 244, December 30, 1845)

It was after this that Catherine came to her crisis, because she could not accept the spiritual wife doctrine was being pressured to become the polygamous wife of Heber C. Kimball, and if not him, some other like Brigham Young. She claims in her 1848 expose,

From the time Mrs. Cobb first introduced the subject of Plurality of Wives, until the time of which I am now writing, my mind was unsettled about it; for they had so much Scripture intermixed, and interpreted in such manner to make it appear right, it was almost impossible to refute their arguments; besides they professed immediate revelation from Heaven, and a commandment from God to take wives. But there was an article in the doctrines of the Church, that every person should have an evidence for him or herself, which article I ever claimed as my right; and when any thing was said to me on this subject, my answer was— “I have not the evidence that it is right for me.” But things were approaching to a crisis. I was troubled in mind, because I must soon say yea or nay to Kimball or some of his myrmidons. Had they not claimed what is before stated: an immediate revelation, and that by an Angel, I should not have hesitated to have said as I did at first, “It is the doctrine of the Devil.” My spirits became depressed, lest these things should be as they represented them; and if I said nay, I might be found raising my voice against the Lord’s Anointed, which to my mind was no small thing. (Lewis, Narrative, Page 11)

The pressure by Augusta Cobb and others like Heber C. Kimball was too much for Catherine Lewis, and in her mind the admonitions to not “resist counsel,” took on a threatening connotation. She prepared to leave Nauvoo being fearful that they would not let her leave with what she knew. Since there was no preparation for those that first experienced the Endowment, she was disturbed by the blood oaths and having to be “bound to obey the Heads of the Church; avenge the blood of your brethren every way possible, and strive to build up the Kingdom; if you do not, you must suffer the penalties before mentioned.” (Lewis, page 11)

The fact that Catherine was also single at the time she received her Endowment may also have played a part in her having qualms about the whole experience, since she was not there to be married for all eternity (which some women probably looked forward to) but to have her fears and doubts alleviated by what she thought she could learn from the Endowment Ceremony. After all, she claimed that

The Elders taught publicly, “Whoever went to Nauvoo and received an endowment in the Temple would witness such a manifestation of the power of God which could not be doubted. The keys of the priesthood would be given, and things which had been hidden from the foundation of the world would then be revealed and made known,” &c. Under such representations, (which at the time I believed), I felt anxious to obtain information for good, and accordingly made ready. (Lewis, op. cited, 7)

Unlike many of the women who did submit and accept it, Catherine Lewis was repulsed by the Endowment Ceremony and the pressure to become a polygamous wife. She later claimed that she was “shocked at the conversation of Kimball and others, although their language was studiously guarded in my presence; and I feared to show my displeasure openly, lest evil come of it.” (ibid., 10)

Soon after this experience Catherine Lewis left Nauvoo for St. Louis and,

“after staying there less than a month, Mrs. [Augusta] Cobb made her appearance at my house. She said to me, “you missed a good chance; one of the Brethren and his wife were going to Warsaw to take the Boat [to St. Louis], they would have carried you for nothing, and saved expense; but you went away so privately, they did not know you were going until the night before you left.” (ibid., 12-13)

This seemed to develop feelings of paranoia in Catherine who later claimed,

I have no doubt, this was a plan and a snare to entrap me; because these persons of whom she spoke, remained in Nauvoo for some length of time after I left. Her language opened my eyes, to see what a wonderful and narrow escape I had made; and I could look back and see many times, my life had been in danger—for some things seemed mysterious. When Mrs. Cobb called to see me, in St. Louis, she brought another woman with her, and I did not care to say much. They talked of those glorious things, (the spiritual wife doctrine.) The woman thought it was Spiritual, nothing literal but the ceremony, &c. After hearing them some time, I said, “In my opinion, it is damnable heresy and the doctrine of Devils.” They were both speechless for some time. News was brought to me at St. Louis, stating a letter had been received at Boston from Nauvoo in which I was called an apostate. This was done to prevent any influence I might have had amongst them, on my return. They threatened to excommunicate any member who visited, talked, or listened to, or with an apostate; because such, they say, are unworthy of belief. (ibid, 12-13, italics in original).

Catherine Lewis eventually returned to the east and remarried. The rest of Catherine’s Narrative is filled with what she had discovered in Nauvoo about the Endowment, the move to the West and polygamy, along with information about the Danites and the Mormon’s views about the American Nation. Much of her narrative can be corroborated by other evidence, but we will not undertake that here, though one example may suffice. On page 14 she writes that in an extract of a letter from J. C. Phelps of Boston he wrote,

In conversation with Parley P. Pratt, one of the Twelve, he informed me, the Church had numerous bodies of Indians, under tuition for a number of years; teaching them among other things, that if they would obey the Church in all things, the Church would assist them in regaining their lands from the United States Government, &c. I have often heard Micah, chap. v. ver. 8, (before quoted) cited, as applicable to this subject, vix:—the remnant of Jacob, being the remnant of Indians, and that the Indians are taught to fulfill this prophecy. Pratt said a number of tribes were then ready, at a moment’s warning, to take up arms against the U. S. Government, at a given signal from the Twelve,” &c. (ibid.)

Pratt had already written as early as 1838 that the American Indians were the remnant of Jacob and that,

…not only does [the Book of Mormon] set the time for the overthrow of our government and all other Gentile governments on the American continent, but the way and means of this utter destruction are clearly foretold; namely, the remnant of Jacob [the Indians] will go through among the Gentiles and tear them in pieces. like a lion among the flocks of sheep. Their hand shall be lifted up upon their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. This destruction includes an utter overthrow, and desolation of all our Cities, Forts, and Strong Folds--an entire annihilation of our race, except such as embrace the Covenant, and are numbered with Israel. (Parley P. Pratt, Mormonism Unveiled: Zion’s Watchman Unmasked, And its Editor, Mr. L. R. Sunderland Exposed: Truth Vindicated! The Devil Mad & Priestcraft in Danger: by P. P. Pratt, Minister of the Gospel, Published by Orson Pratt, 14).

Pratt also declared,

…I will state as a prophecy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false. (ibid., 14-15).

Brigham Young, in a pubic discourse to the “Saints” recorded by Wilford Woodruff stated that,

President Young in his address to the Saints remarked that He was determined to have order in all things & righteousness Should be practized in this land. That we had come here according to the direction & council of Br Joseph Smith before his death & that He would Still have been alive if the Twelve had been in Nauvoo when He recrossed the river from Montrose to Nauvoo.

He spoke of the saints being driven from place to Place, And Said the ownly way Boggs, Clark, Lucas Benton & all the leaders of the mob could have been saved in the day of the Lord Jesus would have been to have come forward voluntarily & let their heads been cut off & let their blood run upon the ground & gone up as A smokeing incens before the heavens as an antonement but now they will be eternally damned.

Also said all the govornors & Presidents of the U.S.A Had rejected all our petitions from first to last. That when the Saints were driven from Illinois & perrish as it were on the Prairies then President Polk sends for a draft of 500 men to go into the Army. What for? That they might be wasted [one line of text illegible] entirely wasted away as A people.

If the Brethren had not gone they would have [p.241] made war upon us & the Gov of Mo would have been ordered not to have let us Cross the Missouri & the raising of the Battalion was our temporal Salvation at the time & said Polk would be damned for this act & that He with many of the goverment men had a hand in the death of Joseph & Hyram & that they should be damned for these things & if they ever sent any men to interfere with us here they shall have there throats cut & sent to Hell. And with uplifted hand to Heaven swore by the Gods of Eternity that He would never cease His exhertion while He lived to make every preperation & avenge the blood of the Prophets & Saints.

That He intended to have evry hole & corner from the Bay of Francisco to Hudson bay known to us And that our people would be connected with every tribe of Indians throughout America & that our people would yet take their squaws wash & dress them up teach them our language & learn them to labour & learn them the gospel of there forefathers & raise up children by them & teach the Children & not many generations Hence they will become A white & delightsome people & in no other way will it be done & that the time was nigh at hand when the gospel must go to that people to. (Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 3, 240-241, July 28, 1847)

Brigham Young claimed to know these things because as he stated in December of 1845,

The truth of the matter is those who are leading the House of Israel while in the path of there duty know the wickedness that is among the people. It cannot be hid from them for they are in vision all the time. (ibid., 102, December 20, 1846).

As Connell O’Donovan writes:

Catherine later left Mormonism after Kimball repeatedly pressured her to marry him plurally, and after her disappointing temple endowment experience. After her refusal to marry Heber C. Kimball, Catherine Lewis returned to the Boston area. Sometime soon after May 3, 1847, Catherine Lewis corroborated the depostion of George J. Adams before the Massachusetts State Supreme Court in Cobb v. Cobb that they both had certain knowledge that Brigham Young and Augusta Adams Cobb had had sexual intercourse while Augusta was still legally married to Henry Cobb. (O’Donnell, op. cited, 62)

According to D. Michael Quinn:

Ordained a special apostle by Joseph and admitted as one of the original members of the Council of Fifty, George J. Adams had been excommunicated on 10 April 1845 for defying the Quorum of Twelve by teaching and practicing polygamy in New England. In May, he organized a church in Iowa, with Joseph Smith III as the intended president and himself as young Joseph's spokesman, and on 15 June 1845 Adams wrote: "I have suffered much persecution since i left Boston and much abuse because i can't support the twelve as the first presidency i can't do it when i know that it belongs to Josephs Son-- Young Joseph who was ordained by his father before his Death. " Adams had told Emma in 1844 that he had witnessed the ceremony, and fifty years later James Whitehead included Adams in the list of witnesses to the blessing of Joseph Smith III in January 1844. But George J. Adams was an erratic and inconsistent advocate of Joseph Smith III, and even though James J. Strang's claims left little room for lineal succession, Adams testified to the world in 1846 that Strang was the one "appointed and chosen of God, to stand in the place of brother Joseph.” (Dialogue, Vol.15, No.2, 82).

To show how the Twelve treated those who disagreed with them and Young’s succession claims, Irene Bates wrote:

The accusation of "licentiousness" seems to have surfaced mainly during the succession crisis of 1844, a year after polygamy had been introduced in Nauvoo. Even then the judgments passed on William's behavior were contradictory. During the trial of John Hardy, formerly president of the Boston area, Hardy accused William, along with George J. Adams and Samuel Brannan, "and at least five others of the Twelve," of teaching the "plurality wife" doctrine in secret, "in its worst features." William Smith, he alleged, had also behaved in an "obscene" manner towards certain females. Wilford Woodruff, visiting Boston on his way to England, evidently accepted the allegations as true. Writing to Brigham Young from Boston 9 October 1844, he said:

I soon discovered from various sources that the conduct of Walmart. Smith, Adams, Brannan, Ball and others had been such in crowding their spiritual wife claims . . . until some of the strongest pillars were shaking, and if any opposed them in their deeds, they would trample them down until presiding Elders were loosing their posts and some ready to come out in battle array openly against the Church.

Yet Parley P. Pratt, only three months later, wrote in The Prophet 18 January 1845 in New York:

I have just returned from a short visit to Boston and vicinity . . . I must now hasten to close by saying that I highly approve of the course pursued by Elder Walmart. Smith and the presiding officers in general in this region . . . and by a strict and just administration of the laws and discipline of the church they have been enabled to cut off from the tree those branches which were most bitter and to excommunicate those members which were seeking the destruction of the society in which they were. Thus they have preserved the church in union by the aid of the Spirit of God.

Nevertheless, George J. Adams and Samuel Brannan were cut off from the Church for adultery three months later, 10 April 1845, Brannan being restored to fellowship six weeks later. No action was taken against William Smith and he was ordained as Patriarch to the Church 24 May 1845. Less than five months later, one of the grounds for Parley P. Pratt's objection to William as an apostle was his conduct in the East; thus one can only conjecture about the basis for the change in Pratt's publicly stated view of William's activities there.

There is a reference to possible sexual misconduct on William's part prior to Joseph Smith's death which appears as a second-hand account recorded in Abraham H. Cannon's diary 9 April 1890. According to Cannon, President Snow--illustrating the fact that all must be tested--told of one instance, unspecified in time, when Brigham Young had been "tried to the very utmost by the Prophet." Joseph had instructed Brigham to prefer charges against William for adultery and "many other sins." Cannon, quoting President Snow, continues:
Before the time set for the trial, however, Emma Smith talked to Joseph and said the charge preferred against William was with a view to injuring the Smith family. After the trial had begun Joseph entered the room and was given a seat. The testimony of witnesses concerning the culprit's sins was then continued. [In] a short time Joseph arose filled with wrath and said, "Brother Brig[ham] I will not listen to this abuse of my family a minute longer. [I] will wade in blood up to my knees before I will do it."

Most of the labeling of William as licentious, however, seems to be retrospective. For example, in the January 1865 issue of the Millennial Star, a short history of William Smith says, "In all his missions the course of conduct he pursued towards the females subjected him to much criticism." Jedediah M. Grant, in a discourse in the Salt Lake Tabernacle 23 March 1856, compared Joseph Smith--a "great lover of women" who elevated them and made them virtuous and happy--with William, the "profligate brother," whose brand of love would make women “wretched and miserable, would debauch and degrade them." Even Thomas L. Kane, ignorant of the reality of polygamy among the Saints, referred to William on 11 July 1851 as a "ribald scamp" who, because the authorities had been forced to excommunicate him for his own licentiousness, had concocted "that unmixed outrage the spiritual wife story." Kane's observation was published, without correction, in the Millennial Star, November 1851, by editor Franklin D. Richards. (Irene M. Bates, William Smith, 1811-93: Problematic Patriarch, Dialogue, Vol.16, No.2, 16-17).

She also observes that, “Because of the secrecy involved in the early practice of polygamy before the Saints came west, church laws governing it were, to some extent, unformed, unknown, and unenforced, so there were abuses of the principle as well as the approved practice of it.” (ibid., 18).

For example, “… in 1843, George J. Adams had brought back a wife and child from his mission in England, even though he had a family already in Nauvoo. According to gentile Charlotte Haven, the first wife "is reconciled to this certainly at first unwelcome guest to her home for her husband and some others have reasoned with her that plurality of wives is taught in the Bible." Adams had been charged with adultery 12 February 1843, but he was restored to full fellowship only three months later, 27 May 1843, and a Times and Seasons announcement said he had been "honorably acquitted of all charges." (ibid.)

Connell O’Donovan writes:

Adams never participated in LDS temple ordinances in Nauvoo, although apparently William Smith taught him parts of the endowment ritual, which he passed on to Mormon women in New England as part of a “secret lodge.” By March 1846, Adams became interested in the James J. Strang faction of Mormonism and wrote to Strang. His letter from Cincinnati, Ohio warned Strang that the Brighamites and Rigdonites were telling lies about Adams. That he is an alcoholic is “a Base phalshood” being spread to destroyhis influence. In fact, crowds always gathered “wherever and whenever I lift up myvoice.” The other rumor, that Adams “was fond of womin” was also “a Base lie” and his phrenological chart proves it showing that Amativeness is not very developed in him.(Adams to Strang, March 27, 1846, Strang Collection Document #34, Beinecke Library,Yale.) (O’Donovan, Boston Mormns A-C, 40)
George Adams had many problems with the Strangites, and O’Donnell writes that the “Boston branch of the Strangite branch of Mormonism voted on February 1, 1847 that it would not “sustain Elder George J. Adams, any longer as a public teacher in the Church of Jesus christ of Latter Day Saints” due to his misconduct and immoral doctrines, including the misuse of church funds, and also for having “taught that it was not wrong to commit fornication and Adultery under certain circumstances.” (ibid.)

Adams gave a deposition on May 3, 1847 in the Cobb v. Cobb divorce/libel case, where he testified that,

“In the fall of 1844 after her return from Nauvoo to Boston, Mrs. Cobb said she loved Brigham Young better than she did Mr. Cobb, and, live or die, she was going to live with him at all hazards. This was in the course of a conversation in which she used extravagant language in favor of Mr. Young and against Mr. Cobb. Mrs. Cobb went out again to Nauvoo, the second time, and lived with Mr. Young, and their living together and their conduct, was the subject of conversation in the society and out of the society. The subject of conversation, to which I have alluded, was that persons had a right to live together in unlawful intercourse, and Mrs. Cobb avowed her belief in this doctrine, and said it was right. (Quincy Whig, (from the Boston Post), December 22, 1847, Online here, Accessed December 20, 2014)

She also said (claimed George Adams), “I never will forsake brother Young, come life or come death. She (Augusta Adams) said that the doctrine taught by Brigham Young was a glorious doctrine; for if she did not love her husband, it gave her a man she did love". Catherine Lewis also testified that these things were true.

Brigham Young married two women with living husbands in 1842 and 1843, Lucy Ann Decker (born on May 17, 1822) “married” Young on June 15, 1842, and Augusta Adams Cobb (born December 7, 1801) “married” Young on November 2, 1843. Lucy Ann Decker was married to William Seely (b. January 27, 1816) about the year 1836, had three children together and both were members of the Church. Little’s Biography of Lorenzo Dow Young says (p. 56) that William Seely was wounded in the battle of Crooked River. Mike Quinn lists him as one of the Danites. Lorenzo Dow Young was a close friend to Lucy Decker’s father, Isaac. On March 9, 1843, Harriet Page Wheeler Decker, wife of Isaac Decker, was “married” to Lorenzo Young as a spiritual wife.

There are no records for any divorce of William Seeley from Lucy Ann Decker (by the compiler above) and no information about why they separated, except for a family “tradition” that Seeley was an abusive drunk. Yet, after he left Nauvoo he moved to Chicago and became quite wealthy where he died in on 20 April, 1851 without ever remarrying. He left his two children his estate.

Augusta Adams Cobb married Henry Cobb on December 22, 1822 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts. Henry Cobb was a handful of years older than Augusta (born June 23, 1798) and was a shoe dealer. Henry and Augusta had nine or ten children together, the next to last child born in 1838 but died in infancy. The last child of Augusta Cobb was born on May 19, 1843 and was named Brigham Cobb but also died in infancy on November 7, 1843 in Nauvoo. (See Connell O’Donovan, “Early Boston Mormons and Missionaries, A to C 1831-1860”, 24-39, PDF, Sept. 2014, Online here, Accessed December 1, 2014).

Augusta and Henry had no children from 1838 to 1843, but she gets pregnant in August of 1842 (when Brigham Young is in Nauvoo).

Augusta Cobb was baptized by Samuel H. Smith on one of his missionary journeys to the east in 1832, and wrote in his journal concerning this event:

29 held a meeting in the evening a[t] Mr Merises to two ladies confesed their faith in the work the people attentive So visited Some that Washington[s] believeing baptized three a Augutasta cobb Elizebeth Harendeen [sic – Cobb] & [blank space] Porter & [blank space] Porter July 1[s]t held a meeting at Fan[n]y Bruers….(Samuel H. Smith Journal, entries of June 29; July 1, 1832, LDS Archives)

His missionary companion at the time Orson Hyde wrote:

29 people came in at Sister Brewers & we preached to them & answered their questions in the forenoon & in the afternoon went to Sister Grangers & a number Came in & conversed as in the forenoon preached in the evening at No. 195 Ann St Mr. Merris. two ladies confessed their faith in the work a Miss & Mrs Cobb people paid good attentio[n] after meeting was invited by a Christian Elder to call on him next day at 2 oclk went home with Sister Brewer
30th visited 3 families and Baptized 3 persons at South Boston, had quite a comfortable time the Lord was with us talked with a free will Baptist Elder found him quite unbelieving he feared lest he should lose some of his flock or at least it was said he was a free will Baptist preacher his name was Hymes (Orson Hyde Journal, entries of June 29-30, 1832, LDS Archives)

[July 2] talked with a man names [Henry] Cobb…I cried against his spirit and told him ‘it was of the Devil…’

Wilford Woodruff mentions Augusta Cobb in his Journal in 1841:

6th We left Portland at 7 o-clock on board the Bangor. The sea was rough & most all was sea sick. We arived in Boston at 6 o-clock in the evening. We Spent the night in Boston at the Layfaett Hotel. I had a vary interesting time in the evening with Elder Freeman Nickelson Sister Vose, (57 Temple Street) Sister Cobb & others who called at our room [at the Lafayette Hotel] & spent the evening. They were vary anxious that I should stop & Preach with them but my circumstances would not permit. The distance of the Day 110 miles. (Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 2, 1841–1845, p.110, July 6, 1841)

And in 1843:

30th Br Frost walked to New Haven with me & Bought $12.91 cts worth of Books for me. I then parted with him & took steem Boat for New York & arived at 6 oclok & Called upon Elder Foster 145 walker St & suped with him. Then walked with him to Br Rogers 67 franklin St. I here found Elder B Young & Sister Cobb. They were well. Elder Young went home with us & spent the night with me. Distance of the day 75 me. Distance of the day 75 m. Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 2, 1841–1845, p.314, October 30, 1843.
On March 7, 1842 Henry Cobb’s name appeared on a List of Bankrupts in the Boston Daily Courier.

Brigham Young and many of the Quorum of the 12 arrived in Boston on September 8, 1843 and held a Conference the next day where he told the Boston “saints” that “we are rough Stones out of the mountain, & when we roll through the forest & nock the bark of from the trees it does not hurt us even if we should get a Cornor nocked of occasionally. For the more they roll about & knock the cornors of the better we are. But if we were pollished & smooth when we get the cornors knocked of it would deface us. (Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 2, 1841–1845, 297).

On September 23, Augusta Cobb left Boston with Brigham Young and some others (along with her 6 year old daughter Charlotte and baby Brigham who took ill and died in Cincinatti) who were returning to Nauvoo. They arrived there on October 22, 1843, with the dead infant in a tin box who was buried in Nauvoo. According to the Nauvoo Neighbor the baby was five months and 20 days old when they buried him. Eleven days later, Brigham Young “married” Augusta Cobb on November 2, 1843 (the same day that Brigham sealed his sister Fanny Young to Smith) while she was still legally married to Henry Cobb. Augusta Cobb returned to Boston in the Spring of 1844 accompanied by Young’s daughter Vilate who was attending a private school in Salem Massachusetts and they arrived on April 29, 1844.(O’Donnell, op. cited, pg. 31)

Upon her return, Heber C. Kimball enlisted her aid in trying to persuade Catherine Lewis to become one of his spiritual wives, but even though they were friends she was unsuccessful, though Lewis did make the journey to Nauvoo after the murder of the Smith brothers where she participated in the Endowment Ceremony and lost her faith.

On July 18, 1844 Young wrote to his wife Mary Ann Angel and told her that he,

…left in the evening for Boston found my self in Boston on Sunday morning stayed with the Saints through the day had a good meeting. on monday I went to Lynn on monday saw Vilate on tusday She came up to Sister Lewis with Sister Cobb She is in good helth and sperits. she is going to school. Sister Cobbs children think much of her and due all they can to make her happy She will come home with me this seson. sister Cobb is well all things goes well with hir, as far as I can fined out. Mr Cobb tried to get a bill of devose from hir but could not, and she is in peasable? possesion of hir famely and hir house. I stayed and visited with vilate through day, went to Salem in the evening stayd for 3 days with the Saints and returned to Boston and went to Lowel to visite the Bretherin stayed over the sabath with them. I have jenerly had a good time with the saints. But the time at present seems to be big with events it seems as though judgements hung over the people and would soon be pord out upon them, but judgement belongs to the Lord. (Brigham Young to Mary Ann Angell Young, July 18, 1844, MS 16230, LDS Archives, courtesy of Connell O’Donovan, op. cited above, 32).

Henry Cobb did not give up trying to get a bill of divorce from his estranged wife. In 1846 he sued Augusta for divorce claiming that she had become “the Spiritual Wife of a Mormon Leader” while having “criminal conversation” with Young. In the November 1846 session the case went before the Supreme Court of Massachusetts. (O’Donovan, 34).
Neither Cobb nor Young appeared as prescribed by the court order on March 2, 1847, but they did have representation by a Boston lawyer.

George J. Adams was the main witness against Cobb and Young with his written deposition corroborated by “a widow lady, who had been to Nauvoo, and while there “been endowed in the Temple”. This would be Catherine Lewis, the one time friend of Augusta Cobb. Henry won the divorce case and was “decreed a full divorce from the bonds of matrimony.” (ibid., 35)

According to Adams testimony, Augusta told Henry Cobb,

…she loved Brigham Young better than she did Mr. Cobb, and, live or die, she was going to live with him at all hazards. This was in the course of a conversation in which she used extravagant language in favor of Mr. Young, and against Mr. Cobb. (ibid., 33)

In the divorce/libel lawsuit it was charged that the first known time Augusta Cobb and Brigham committed adultery was on August 10, 1844 in Boston, then she traveled to Nauvoo with Young in late August. Cobb returned to Nauvoo and Young in the fall of 1845 and on December 1, 1845 they again committed adultery. On the 16th of December Augusta Cobb received her temple endowment and passed through the veil to Heber C. Kimball who presented her to Brigham Young. She was sealed to Young on February 2, 1846, while still legally married to Henry Cobb. She also received her second anointing that day. (ibid, page 33)

It appears that breaking the laws of the land did not hinder her from receiving these “blessings”, but it may almost cost Brigham Young his life according to the Journal entry of William Clayton.

In 1862 Augusta Cobb wrote to Brigham Young claiming that he had warned her away from being alone with Joseph Smith, because she would have been “overcome” by him:
If you had allowed me to have gone up to Nauvoo free and untrameled In my Spiret I should have seen Br Joseph the first thing. But instead of that you exacted a promise of me that I would not see him alone Saying he would certainly over come me I replied if he did he would be the first man. You then Said I had never had to deal with a Prophet of the Lord[.] Now suppose he had over come me And I should by that means have raised up a Son or a King if you please[?] Who would have been the wiser?––––– Not Mrs [Catherine] Lewes Most certainly And I should have been Sealed to him And all would have been right." (Augusta Adams Cobb to Brigham Young, February 4, 1862, Courtesy of Connell O’Donovan).

Here Cobb states that being “overcome” by Smith would have produced a child that she claims may have been “a Son or a King”, then she would have been sealed to him and it would have “been right”. She then remonstrates about Catherine Lewis, and then reminds Young that:

…who was it that <came> to Lynn and stoped at Mrs Lewes’s and sent for me what transpired after I arived there? You very well know, Altho you may have forgotten, but I have not God for bid that I ever should, After Mrs Lewis Apostatized she went before the Court and gave Oath to all she knew Mr C got a bill of divorce for adultry by that news, and my name now stands recorded in Boston Court state House as an Adultress (ibid., 1, Online here, Accessed December 5, 2014, added emphasis).

Cobb was dissatisfied with Young, and here claims that she committed adultery with Young while he was in Lynn in 1843. According to Young’s diary he was there in August and September of 1843 and took Cobb back with him to Nauvoo along with Sister Sarah Alley, who became the spiritual wife of Joseph B. Nobel.

the next day had a pleasant visit held our conference in New York tund [sic] some [same?] day came to Boston had a good visit at Lima [Lynn] hed our conference according to apointment [September 9] staid till September 29 (Brigham Young Diary, August 31, 1843, Courtesy of H. Michael Marquardt)

staid [in Boston] till September 29 then started home with sister Alley & Cobb came to New York staid one day came to Pheledelpha (Brigham Young Diary, September 29, 1843, Courtesy of H. Michael Marquardt)

Catherine Lewis and Augusta Cobb both were raised with “Victorian” values and yet both chose different paths, one embracing Smith’s doctrine of spiritual wifeism while the other rejected it and those that taught it, even though she once thought them inspired men. This practice tore their friendship apart and caused Augusta Cobb to turn her back on the moral code each had embraced from their youth. For Cobb, no man could really be good enough for her, Smith’s teachings brought out in her the need to have more than even an “American Moses” could personally offer her. The claims she made about loving Young soured, but that did not change her opinion about Smith’s teachings. For Lewis, they created in her the need to expose them as something evil and wicked, and she did just that in her 1848 publication. They became two sides of a polygamous coin, both believing they had chosen for themselves the right course of action that would lead them to the reward each of them so desired in the after life they both believed in.

Brigham Young would make a claim in 1855 about his initial reaction to polygamy which has been quoted many times:

Some of these my brethren know what my feelings were at the time Joseph revealed the doctrine; I was not desirous of shrinking from any duty, nor of failing in the least to do as I was commanded, but it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave, and I could hardly get over it for a long time. (Brigham Young, July 14, 1855, Provo, Utah John Dehlin 3:264-268; DN 5:282., CDBY, 994, added emphasis).

And ten years later,

Polygamy did not have its origin with Joseph Smith, but it existed from the beginning. So far as I am concerned as an individual, I did not ask for it; I never desired it; and if I ever had a trial of my faith in the world, it was when Joseph Smith revealed that doctrine to me; and I had to pray incessantly and exercise faith before the Lord until He revealed to me the truth, and I was satisfied. I say this at the present time for the satisfaction of both saint and sinner. Now, here are the commandments of the Lord, and here are the wishes of wicked men, which shall we obey? It is the Lord and them for it. (Brigham Young, June 18, 1865, Journal of Discourses Vol. 11, 128).

But in 1866 Young would also claim that,

An angel never watched him [Joseph Smith] closer than I did, and that is what has given me the knowledge I have today. I treasure it up and ask the Father in the name of Jesus to help my memory when information is wanted and I have never been at a loss to know what to do concerning the Kingdom of God. I knew of the doctrine of polygamy by revelation to myself while I was in England before it was revealed to me by Joseph. (Brigham Young, October 8, 1866, SLC Bowery Conference. LJA 12-56-4,2; BYC; BYA 5:52-55, CDBY, 2383, October 8, 1866).

We will let the readers decide where the truth of the matter actually lies, but for someone who claimed to so abhor the principle of polygamy, Young “married” 20 year old Lucy Ann Decker in 1842, (a full year before Joseph Smith dictated his polygamy “revelation”), took two more “wives” in 1843 (Augusta Adams Cobb & Harriet Elizabeth Cook - both on the same day); 11 more in 1844, including a 15 year old (Clarissa Caroline Decker), a 16 year old (Elizabeth Fairchild), and a 17 year old (Diana Chase). He took 23 more wives in 1845-46.

[_grindael]

The same evidence I used, Compton used. Compton has the exact same opinion that I do, that evidence of sex in the marriage is ambiguous. But that doesn't mean that it didn't happen, wasn't expected in the "marriage", or that the "marriage" was only a "ceremony". It wasn't.

LOL I agree with that! So where is the disagreement? I agree it is plausible that Joseph Smith had sex with Helen, I never said he didn't. However, ambiguous evidence is not good evidence. Just because Joseph Smith had sex with other teenage wives doesn't mean he had sex with Helen. In my opinion it is best to be agnostic about this issue.

and I am not convinced that " anything more than ceremony" are the exact words of Helen. Why? because human memory is not very reliable.

So you are not convinced, and are now touting "exact words" As to agreeing with me, Perhaps you should have read what I wrote more carefully before lecturing me to be more "careful". And the evidence that Lewis provides is not "ambiguous". It is corroborated by other evidence. As I said above at the BEGINNING, I don't see any evidence that Smith actually had sex with Helen, but there is plenty of evidence that this was expected in the "marriage", the marriage wasn't some kind of ceremonial thing, and that there is no good reason to believe that the marriage wouldn't have been consummated.

[_DoubtingThomas]

So you are not convinced, and are now touting "exact words"

What I am saying is that we can't be certain that Lewis didn't misrepresent what Helen said. Why? because human memory is not very reliable.

the evidence that Lewis provides is not "ambiguous". It is corroborated by other evidence. As I said above at the BEGINNING, I don't see any evidence that Smith actually had sex with Helen, but there is plenty of evidence that this was expected in the "marriage", the marriage wasn't some kind of ceremonial thing, and that there is no good reason to believe that the marriage wouldn't have been consummated.

Again, I agree, I said "it is plausible," but you can't do much with only that. Most LDS will always point to the lack of proof that Smith had sex with Helen. You can't change minds without compelling evidence that Joseph Smith had sex with a 14 year old.

plausible - "(of an argument or statement) seeming reasonable or probable"

Again, I agree it was not just a ceremony, I agree that sex was expected.

[Guest]

Please remember many critics made a big mistake for believing that Josephine Lyon was the daughter of Joseph Smith. [/b]

Hi DoubtingThomas.
I think it is incorrect to state that "critics made a big mistake" in this regard. Many scolars, believers and disbelievers agreed on this matter due to the family lore. You seem to write with capital letters in matters where it would be more wise to include laguage indication your lack of knowledge of the details.

What facts do we have?
A verified conman (unless you believe in folk magic), marries married and unmarried females behind the back of his wife. Marries, repeat, marries these women. We have witness statements of sex in several of the instances. We also have evidence that he was trying to keep the marriages from the knowledge of the public, indicating that evidence would be scarse. We can observe that all of his followers who pursued this principle understood marriage to include sex.

Only in the panicked damage control attempts made by Brian Hales do we get artificial lines drawn in the sand trying to create a faithful narrative where attempts are made of removing sex from the equation.

And your tossing around of labels like anti-mormon reduces the value of your arguments. I would suggest to research a little first before coming down heavy with the capital letters.

Kind regards
Uther

[_DoubtingThomas]

What facts do we have?
A verified conman (unless you believe in folk magic), marries married and unmarried females behind the back of his wife. Marries, repeat, marries these women. We have witness statements of sex in several of the instances. We also have evidence that he was trying to keep the marriages from the knowledge of the public, indicating that evidence would be scarse. We can observe that all of his followers who pursued this principle understood marriage to include sex.

The world is not black and white! Just because Joseph Smith had sex with other ladies doesn't mean he had sex with Helen. No one knows! We can only make assumptions

I am not convinced Joseph Smith was a con-man, he probably did believe his own horse sh*t! It is possible Joseph was a "sincere fraud"

To my mind, the most obvious solution…is to suggest that Smith was a well intentioned “pious deceiver” or, perhaps otherwise worded, a “sincere fraud,” someone who prevaricated for “good” reasons. Admittedly, the terms are not entirely satisfying. Nevertheless, “pious” connotes genuine religious conviction, while I apply “fraud” or “deceiver” only to describe some of Smith’s activities. I believe that Smith believed he was called of God, yet occasionally engaged in fraudulent activities in order to preach God’s word as effectively as possible. Robert N. Hullinger, a Lutheran minister, argued similarly in his 1980 book, Mormon Answer to Skepticism: Why Joseph Smith Wrote the Book of Mormon. Responding in part to Shipps, Hullinger plumbed Smith’s motives for writing the Book of Mormon by examining its rhetoric and concluded: “Joseph Smith … regarded himself as [a] defender of God.” “Even if one believes that Joseph Smith was at best a scoundrel,” he observed, “one still must account for the Book of Mormon.” Indeed, the book’s religious appeal—its defense of God, Jesus, spiritual gifts, call to repentance—argues against presuming that Smith’s motives were wholly self-serving.

Joseph may have had a brain disorder such as multiple personalities where he only thought he was having visions and communicating with God. Perhaps when Joseph heard voices in his head, he thought they were coming from God. Mental problems were not researched and identified in the early 1800s as they are now, so people would not know about such medical conditions as schizophrenia. Also Joseph's youngest son was committed to a mental institution when he was 32, so perhaps it was hereditary. [See for example Flagstaff Historian Probes Troubled Last Son of Joseph Smith.] We watched the movie 'A Beautiful Mind' in which a brilliant mathematician would see people and have detailed conversations with them, but they were totally imaginary. This went on for years until someone discovered this and tried to convince him that the people that he was having interaction with were not real. It was very difficult for him to accept this. This movie is based on a true story. A friend of mine's father was delusional at times and would see people that were not real. He would actually call the police on them. Is it possible that a similar kind of experience happened to Joseph Smith? Some people that believe Joseph was essentially a good man, but do not believe in the divinity of the LDS Church, think that Joseph may have had some similar experiences, as did the delusional mathematician in the movie 'A Beautiful Mind'. Perhaps whenever a strange thought entered Joseph's mind, he thought it came from God and acted upon it accordingly. He may have thought he was trying to do the right thing by getting people motivated by a new religion, and whenever people needed more convincing, he developed things on his own such as a prop covered in a cloth that he said contained gold plates - all to the end goal of following the guidance of the thoughts in his head.

[_Kishkumen]

In a normal marriage the husband and wife live together. Do you have any evidence that Joseph Smith and Helen lived together? if not, do you have any evidence that Joseph Smith had sex with Helen?

No evidence is no evidence, apologists make conclusions without enough evidence, we don't need to be like them! Please remember many critics made a big mistake for believing that Josephine Lyon was the daughter of Joseph Smith.

OK. There are many reasons why a couple may not live together in the same house. That does not mean they do not seek sexual fulfillment with their partner. They may only get to see each other on occasion because of economic or other reasons. Bigamists may have their two spouses in different cities.

So, I don't find this argument at all compelling.

As for the Josephine Lyon thing. Yes, it was proved that Josephine Lyon was not the daughter of Joseph Smith. Sufficient evidence was gathered to test the claim.

The fact that critics were wrong has no bearing on the plausibility of Smith having a sexual relationship with Kimball. We may never know or be able to test the question of Smith's relationship with Kimball. But the prima facie case for a likely sexual relationship is pretty damn good. I would not start with the assumption that they never had sex, because that would be absurd.

[_DoubtingThomas]

The fact that critics were wrong has no bearing on the plausibility of Smith having a sexual relationship with Kimball. We may never know or be able to test the question of Smith's relationship with Kimball.

I agree with that.

I would not start with the assumption that they never had sex, because that would be absurd.

It is best not to make assumptions for this issue, in my opinion.

[_SteelHead]

What I find interesting in this quibbling argument about the behavior of Joseph Smith, is some how we become so fixated on Joseph Smith, that we ignore the elephant in the room that is Brigham Young and his behavior in his polygamous marriages, with some women that were already married, and subsequent prophets with their teenage brides........

There is a pattern as a whole that stinks to high heaven, why get so fixated on Joseph Smith?