s v .1 AMI A "! Q01 DivisM W81 Section .lel. II. That all of the pretended reve- ations of Joe Smith are base frauds and puerile fabrications. III. That Joe Smith was an infamous and villainous deceiver and scoundrel. To render discussion profit- able and conclusive in determining what is the truth in regard to the issues, there must be a common standard of authoriiy that is accepted as conclusive authority by footh parties. There is such a standard in this discussion. The Israelite Sacred Scrip- tures of the Old Testament, and the Christ- tian Sacred Scriptures of the New Testa- ment. ' The book of Mormon cannot be appealed to as authority in this discussion, for the issue is, "Is thebookof Mormon worthy to be used as authority?" Even if it be found, in this discussion, that it is worthy to be used as authority, because it is of divine origin, that would not enable my opponent to use it in this discussion, in determining the issues in this debate. All appeal to the book of Mormon, as a standard in this debate, will be a begging of the question, or an impudent assumption of the very issue in debate. It is the work of each disputant in a discussion, to show that his position, clearly and lionestly defined, har- monizes with a correct interpretation of this commonly accepted standard, and that the position of his opponent, clearly and hon- estly defined, does not harmonize with a correct interpretation and use of this stand- ard. It is the work of my opponent in this discussion to clearly and honestly define his affirmative, concealing and evading nothing, using no equivocation or pettifog- fing, and then to show that his position hus defined, harmonizes with a fair inter- pretation and use of the Scriptures. It is my work, if my oi^ponent does not define his affirmative clearly and honestly — if lie attempts to conceal or evade the real teach- ing of his system, by equivocation, or pet- tifogging, to expose such chicanery and to show what are the real teachings of his system, and then to show that the teach- ings of his system, fairly and clearly stated, do not harmonize with a correct interpre- tation of the Scriptures. There are three questions to be settled. I. What are the teachings of my opponent's system, when clearly and honestly stated, without concealment or equivocation. II. What do the Scriptures, when correctly interpreted, teach in regard to the doctrine of liis system. III. Do the Scriptures, when clearly and fairly interpreted, har- monize with a clear and honest statement of the doctrines of the system of my oppo- nent. There is no sense in our spending time in talking about what we both accept. Nor in caviling over what is not in dispute. Let us then determine, as far as may be, in Avhat do we agree; concerning what do we disagree; what conclusions should we draw from those things in which we agree, con- cerning those things in which we disagree. Whether the position of my opponent in regard to the things in wliich we agree is m harmony with his position in regard to those things in which we disagree. Let us inake the issues as few, as brief and as clear as possible. I. My opponent and myself both believe that the Israelite Sacred Scrip- tures, of the Old Testament and the Christ- ian Sacred Scriptures, of the New Testa- ment, were given by inspiration of God, and that they are therefore of divine origin, and authority — a revelation from God to man. We differ concerning "The Book of Mormon." My opponent believes that it also was given by inspiration of God and that it is also of divine origin and authority a revelation from God to man, containing "the fullness of the Gospel '' and that it stands related to the New Testament, as that does to the Old-andis as much superior to it. I believe that the Book of Mormon is a base, puerile fabrication, and a wicked fraud. II. We both believe that God has made revelations to man, through men inspired by the Holy Spirit — through angelic mes- sengers — and through his Son Jesus the Christ. My opponent believes that he has spoken to men through Joseph Smith, and men who liave accepted him as a prophet of God, and that God has through such persons, given revelations to men. I belive that Joseph Smith was a wicked, contemp- tible impostor, and that all who have pre- tended to speak by inspiration, in this age THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE are either hypocritical impostors or self- deluded visionaries. III. We both believe that, in the apostolic age, God spoke to men through the apostles of Christ, and through persons to whom the apostles imparted supernatural gifts, by the impo- sition of their hands. My opponent believes, that, in the apostolic age, others than those to whom the apostles imparted superna- tural gifts by the imposition of their hands, enjoyed those gifts. He believes also that those gifts were an all important element of the religion of Christ, and that they were to continue, until the end of time, in the church. That those gifts can be enjoyed now. That they should be enjoyed now. That the condition of the church Avhere those gifts are not enjoyed is that of apos- tasy—a dead church. He believes that those gifts can be imparted now by the imposl'aou of hands, of persons now living. That they are so imparted and enjoyed in his orsraiiization. That all believers who do not enjoy those gifts are in an apostate* condition. I believe that those gifts were to exist only during the apostolic age. That it was the will of God that they should cease, when the word of God was completed in the New Testament, and that, as it was his will that they should cease then, they did cease. That' in the apostolic age, those ffifts were never enjoyed by any, except those to whom an apostle imparted them by the imposition of his hands. That no oiie but an apostle could, or ever did impart those gifts. That they never descended to a third person. That the power to impart those gifts was the "sign of apostleship." That when the last person, to whom an apostle imparted those gifts, died, they ceased from earth. That sucn was God's will and law. Also that the condition of the church, when the best of those gifts were enjoyed, was the formative, the child- like condition of the church. That the condition of the church, under the control of •' the perfect law of liberty,"— "of that which is perfect," the completed word of <;ud, is as nmch superior to the condition of the church, when the best of these gifts V. ere enjoyed, as the condition of the world, V. lien God ceased from creation — after crea- ting man, is superior to the period, when by miracles of creation, he was preparing for man. Or as the condition of the full grown man is superior to that of the unde- veloped child. Or as the condition of our country under our completed constitution, and government in accordance with it, is superior to the condition of our nation, while the constitutional convention was in session, framing the constitution. I am careful to define and elaborate these differences, because this is the key note to the whole discussion. This is the crucial issue in this debate. My opponent bases his claim that Joseph •iSmith was a true prophet of God; that the Book of Mormon was given by inspiration of God. that it ' ' con tains the fulness of the Gospel ' ' — that the Book of Mormon and other pre- tended revelations stand related to the New Testament, as the New Testament stands related to the Old Testament, that his people possesses these miraculous pow- ers and spiritual gifts, on a claim that the promises of Joel and other prophets, of John the Baptist, of Jesus, of Peter and the apostles, concerning spiritual gifts, were to be enjoyed by the church in all ages. If my position, that these promises refer only to the apostolic age, and were enjoyed only in the apostolic age, and that they were to remain only until the Word of God was completed in the New Testa- ment,— that in the New Testament, God completed this miraculous work, and the exercise of spiritual gifts, in a perfect re- velation of a complete system of universally applicable and eternal truths and princi- ples be true, it utterly demolishes the claim of my opponeiit, by showing that revela- tions' in addition to those in the Bible, are needless, and contrarv to the teachings of God's AVord, and therefore his Book of Mormon and pretended revelations are base frauds, and Joe Smith a vile impostor. We both believe that all followers of Christ, should be united and stand on the divine platform, laid down for such union, in Ephesians, IV. (A.) One God the Father. I shall, in the right place, prove that the teachings of the system of my opponent, in regard to the one God, are gross materialism and idolatry. (B.) One Lord ; Jesus of Nazareth ; the Christ, the only begotten Bon of God— the only Divine "Prophet, or source of all teaching in religion— the only Divine Priest, or sac- rifice and atonement for the sins of all men —the onlv mediator between God and man —the onlv Divine King,— the only source of all law in religion, and the only one whose commands we are to obey, in religion. I shall, in the right place, expose the gross sensualism of my opponent's system in re- gard to the origin and character of the Son of God. My opponent claims that Joe Smith was a prophet of God, whose teachings are to be obeyed, accepted as " the fullness of the gospel," and as much superior to those of Jesus, as the teachings of Jesus, are superior to those of the proph- ets of the Old Testament ; and whose com- mands are as much superior to the New Testament, as the New Testament is to the Old Testament. I believe that Joe Smith was a base imposter, a wicked deceiver, whose silly fabrications should be despised as contemptible frauds. (C.) One Holy Spirit, who inspired the men whose in- spired acts and utterances are recorded in the Bible. My opponent believes that the Holy Spirit inspired Joe Smith, and others who have accepted him as a true prophet of God, and that he inspires men now. I believe that all inspiration and miraculous powers ceased in the apostolic age, having accomplished their purpose, in giving to mankind, a completed revelation of general and universally applicable truths ; and that the Holy Spirit now influences men, in the only way in which one intelligence 10 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. can exert a moral influence over another, that is through the truth contained in his utterances recorded in the Scriptures, and through the teaching tliat 'is in accordance with the truths revealed by the Holy Spirit, in the Scriptures. (D.) The one faith — the faith — the teach- ing—the Word of God,— the scriptures — "the faith once delivered to the Saints." My opponent would add to this " one faith " delivered to the Saints — to God's Word, the Book of ISIornion, and other pretended revelations of Joe Smith, and of others who accept Joe Smith as a prophet of God. I reject all of these as base fabrica- tions of imposters, or as silly vagaries of fanatical visionaries. (E.) One baptism — immersion into water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit — into the re- mission of sins. My opponent teaches these errors in regard to baptism. I. Bap- tism for the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit, II. That baptism in the Holy Spirit was universal in the church, in the apostolic age, and that it can be enjoyed now, and exists in his organization. III. The farce of baptizing the living as proxies for the dead. I lielieve that in the days of the apostles only those of the baptized re- ceived the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, to whom an apostle imparted them by the imposition of his hands. I believe also that there were never but two occasions of baptism in the Holy Sj^irit, one on the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem — the other at the house of Cornelius in Caesarea — that both were miraculous — direct miracles from Heaven, and never were, and never will be repeated. The baptism for the dead I re- gard as a farce resulting from a blunder in regard to an obscure passage of Scripture. (F.) One hope — remission of sins to the penitent believer, who is baptized into Christ — union with God and his Holy Spirit, so long as the Christian, in a holy life, makes his body a fit temple for such union and such a guest; and eternal life if men are faithful unto death, Mj' opponent includes in this hope, miraculous spiritual gifts, in this life, and he debases the eter- nal hope into a materialistic sensual reigning of Mormons over Gentiles, in a materialistic sensual state, like the Para- dise of tne Mahommedan. (G.) One body— "The church of God" or "The church of Christ." Christ is the head of the bodj^, and all believers are living stones, members in this body, this tem- ple. In this church are Evanglists who proclaim the good news ; Overseers who take care of the flock— Servants who min- ister unto the church ; and members who are not called to such work. My opponent adds to this simple statement of the New Testament presidents,;councillors, apostles, twelve apostles three seventies of apos- tles, traveling bishops, presiding elders, quorums, patriarchs, seers, prophets, pas- tors, teachers, translators, revelators, un- til not even an inspired Mormon knows how many more, and about one-third of the men are officers of some sort. He asserts that all df these should exercise miraculous powers, and divides them into the Mel- chisedec priesthood, and the Aaronic priest- hood, and tells us that the Aaronic priest must be a literal descendant of Aaron." That caps the climax of absurdity. (H.) One name — "Christian" — for all individuals who are followers of Christ ; and "Church of God" or "Church of Christ " for the one body composed of these followers of Christ or Christians. My op- ponent calls his people " Latter Day Saints of Jesus Christ." Shades of the apostles what an Ashdodish lingo ! He calls his organization "The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints." Where in the W^orld of God does he find such a rigmarole as that? He may find such a jargon in the Book of Doctrines and Cove- nants, or Joe Smith's Book of Abraham, but not in the Scriptures. Such an Ash- dodish Babel is not found in the pure speech of Canaan, in God's word. Such is a fair statement of the points concerning which we agree, and also those concern- ing which we disagree. My opponent summarizes his teachings in his proposi- tion : " The Book of Mormon is of divine origin and entitled to the confidence of all Christian people" My first and cardinal objection to my op- ponent's position is that the Bible teaches that the work of inspiration, miracles and revelation, was completed in the revela- tions of the Son of God, that he give in person, and through his apostles, in the New Testament, in which there is given to mankind, a system of eternal truths, uni- versally applicable principles, which man can not outgrow, for which there can be no substitute, and to which there can be no additions. That as inspiration and miracle had accomplished their work in completing revelation, they ceased when the last person died to whom an apostle had imparted spiritual gifts, by the imposition of his hands. If this position be true, the Scrip- tures teach that such a claim as my oppo- nent makes for his Book of Mormon, is absolutely impossible. It was not given, or translated by inspiration, for the Bible teaches that inspiration and miraculous power ceased nearly 1,800 years before it appeared. This is the crucial question, the vital issue of this discussion. If my posi- tion be Scripturally true, my opponent's affirmatives are utterly unscriptural and utterly untrue, according to what is the standard of truth in this debate. We in- tend to hold our opponent right to the work on this point. If he does not meet and overturn my position, his claim for the Book of Mormon is "as baseless as the fabric of a dream." The first vital query then is " What do the Scriptures teach in regard to inspira- tion, miracles and revelations — in regard to when they first appeared — their purpose — their history and development — how long they were to continue ? What was their pur- pose, and how long did that purpose make it necessary for them to continue ? What THE bhaden and kelley debate. 11 do the Scriptures teach in regard to the continuance of inspiration, miracle and revelation? And their completion and cessation? The Scriptures teach that the Father has spoken, in the hearing of man, only three times. At the baptism of Jesus, Mathew, III, 17. At the transfiguration, Mathew, XVII, 5. When Jesus prayed and the multitude heard the answer, John, XII, 28. On all other occasions, the Father has spoken through representatives, — the Word — the Christ — the Holy Spirit — angels inspired men. The Word spoke to men through angels, or through men inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Word was the God of the Old Testament, John, I. Col- assians, I. Hebrew, I. The Word the God of the Old Testament spoke through angels. Acts, VII, " Ye received the word through the ministry of angels." Gal. III. " The law was ordained through angels, by the hand of a mediator" (Moses). While on earth Christ, spoke to men. Angels spoke to men as representatives of Jehovah, the Word, and of Christ, after his ascension. Rev. I. "The revelation of Jesus, the Christ, which God gave to him, to show to his servants, the things which must short- ly come to pass, and he sent his angels to his servant John, and made them known unto John, and John bear witness of the word of God." In Exodus, III, we read in- terchangeably, "Jehovah said," and " the angels said," showing that Jehovah spoke through his angels that represented him. In several places Jehovah says, to Moses through his angel that represented him, "I send my angel before you. I have put my word in his mouth. Hear him," etc. Isaiah, LXI, we read that the Mosaic dispen- sation was given by " an angel of the face of Jehovah " or a messenger from his pres- ence. We might illustrate this idea by many other passages, but these will suffice, for probably our only dispute will be over the work of the Holy Spirit. Both parties agree that the Holy Spirit inspired all, men who acted, spoke, or wrote under inspiration, from Adam to Malachi; that he inspired all who acted, spoke, or wrote under inspiration from Zachariah, the father of John the Baptist, until the last person died to whom an apostle ira- Earted spiritual gifts, by the inposition of is hands. My opponent claims that the Scriptures teach that these spiritual gifts were to remain in the church until the end of time, that it is the law of God that they should now exist, that they do now exist in his organization, that as a result of such existence of these gifts .Joseph Smith was inspired, was a true prophet of God, and therefore the " Book of Mormon," that he gave to the world, is a revelation from God. I claim that the Scriptures teach that these miraculous powers of the Holy Spirit were given for a specific purpose, the revelation of a plan of re- demption — that they were to exist until that purpose was accomplished in complet- ing the New Testament — that they ceased when they accomplished this purpose, in completing this revelation, in the New Testament. I claim that the laAV of God ordains that they were to exist for a certain purpose, the revelation of the scheme of re- redemption, and they were to continue until that object was accomplished. The purpose for which God ordained their ex- istence and continuance, has been accom- plished, in completino^ the New Testament; and they have ceased, having accomplished their object, and being no longer necessary. The issue is not one of power, but of fact and law. Not whether God can im- part gifts now, but whether it is his law that they should exist now. Or is it his law that they should cease with the apos- tolic age, having accomplished their ob- jects. As a question of fact, did Joseph Smith possess these powers ? Do his fol- lowers now possess them ? Proving that they can be exercised now, would not prove that Joseph Smith possessed them, nor that his followers do possess them. A man may be able to practice law, but that does not prove that he does so. The fact that God can impart such powers now, does not prove that he does so. God can have apples grow as tubers on the roots of trees, but that does not prove that he does. The question of fact remains, "How do apples grow ? " The fact that God imparted these powers to persons in former ages, does not prove that he does so now. God once brought animals and plants into existence by miracle of direct creation. That does not prove that he does so now. As a mat- ter of factj we know that he does not, but that he brings them into existence through operation of natural law. Let me here expose the vital error of my opponent's position, by an illustration. God exerted his miraculous power in crea- tion, to prepare the way for natural law, the law of reproduction, and the world is in a higher and more perfect condition under the ppei'ation of natural law, than when God exerted miraculous power, in bringing animals and plants into being, by creation. Miraculous power, in creation, was only temporary, and provisional, and exerted only to prepare the Avay for the higher and more perfect, natural law. In like manner, God exerted his miraculous power in connection with revelation, only to prepare the way for the higher and per- manent, a completed system of divine rev- ealed truth, in the completed word of God, in the completed New Testament. Mirac- culous power in revelation, ceased when that purpose was accomplished ; just as miraculous power, in creation ceased when it had prepared for, and introduced the higher and the permanent, the opera- tion of natural law. Miraculous power in connection with revelation, was inferior to the work of the completed word of God, just as miraculous power, in creation, was inferior to the operation of natural law. God is in the operation of his completed word of truth, in a higher and more perfect manner, than he ever was in the highest exercise of miraculous power, just as he is 12 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. in the operation of natural law, in a higher and more perfect sense, than he ever was in the exercise of miraculous power in creation. In each case the method em- ployed at first, was provisional and tem- porary, and was employed only to intro- duce the higher and permanent, for which it prepared the way. There is no evad- ing the conclusion that the operation of natural law and the influence of the re- vealed truths of God's completed word, are superior to the highest exercise of miraculous power, either in creation or revelation. We do not remove God out of nature, or his word ; but we show that, in each case, he acts in a higher and more perfect man- ner. We do not remove a single thing God created, nor a single troth of revelation. Miraculous power was not a part of the things created, but the means of creating them, and ceased when that was done, and gave way to the operation of a higher and more perfect means of accomplishing the same end. Miraculous power was not a part of tiie truths revealed, but the means of re- vealing divine truth, and ceased when that work was done, and gave way to a higher and more perfect work, and presence ofGod, in the moral influence of the divine truths revealed. The idea of my opponent, that the posses- sion of miraculous power is the thing to be desired above everything else, and that the condition of the church, when it was exer- cised, was the highest condition of the churcii, and far superior to its condition now, when it does not exist, and the church exerts only moral power resident in perfect truth, is a contradiction of the Scriptures, of reason, and of fact. Such a state of the church was the childhood of the church. The exercise of such gifts was necessary, be- cause it was in its childhood. They were aids to cliildhood, that ceased when the church "laid aside such childish tbings " The church is now in its manhood, and governed by "the perfect law of liberty" the com- pleted Word of God. The moral power of divine truth, appealing to reason and con- science of men as rational beings, is far superior to miracles, appealing to the child- ish wonder of children. A vital query is suggested here. How can one intelligence influence another? How can one spirit, the Holy Spirit, influence another spirit — the spirit of man? Man can influence his fellow man in two ways. I. By utterances or acts that convey ideas to the minds of the persons addressed. This is the only moral power or influence that one spirit can exert on another. II. An abnormal psychological influence, called mesmerism or psychology. This ig not a moral influence for it leaves the mind influ- enced no wiser, no better In like manner the Holy Spirit has exerted two influences over the spirit of men. I. A miraculous influence, psychologizing the spirits of men, so that tiiey uttered the words he wanted them to utter ; or performed the acts that he wanted them to perform. II. The ordi- nary influence, that he has exerted on the minds of those who heard or read the utter ances of those he psychologized, or saw o\ read the acts they performed. In the mirac- ulous work of the Holy Spirit he has always exerted two influences. I. The miraculous psychological influence exerted on thehearts of those inspired by which he caused them to do or say what he wanted to reveal to others. II. The ordinary and moral influ- ence that he exerted on the minds of those who heard or read their revelations. We desire now to emphasize a thought that we do not want to be lost sight of for one moment, in the discussion of the issues before us. "The miraculous influence of the Holy Spirit never, in a single instance, exerted one particle of moral power, on the spirit of the person influenced by it ; never in a single instance produced one jjarticle of moral change, in the person influenced by it." The cases of Baalam, Saul King of Israel, Jonah and Caiaphas show that the person influenced, often uttered what was entirely opposed to his own wishes. That he did not know what he would say before he was influenced. Nor what he was saying when the influence was upon him. When the influence left him he knew no more about the meaning of what he had uttered l.ii. "And verily. I say unto you again, thatthe othertribes "hath the Father separated from them; and itisbe- "cause of their iniquity, that they know not of them. "And verilv, I say unto vou, that ye are they ot wiiom "I said, oilier sheep I have which are not ot this lold ; "them also I must bring, and they shall hear my "voice; and there shall be one fold and one shop- "herd." But, says the objector, what evidence is that, that these were the people referred to? Only this ; in the singularity of the state- ment which the record makes, and the new fact brought to light, if it shall upon inves- tigation be found to be a fact, at a time m the world's history when it was supposed by scrip torians everywhere that Jesus T<>- ferred to another thing, and which view is 18 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. found to have been erroneous when exam- ined closely from a Bible standpoint in the light that is newly thrown upon the world by this record. And further it bears evi- d'ence in this, being a circumstance in the chain of evidence which unites to form a complete connection with this people and that at Jerusalem. And it is of value pro- viding the other links in the chain accord therewith, and harmonize, and thus indeed form a chain, the which, no other reasona- ble view is adverse. Do not understand me, or misrepresent me as jumping at the conclusion that be- cause of the expression of Jesus on the other continent, found in John's gospel, therefore the book of Mormon is true ; nor because the language is contained in the book from which I have read, therefore, it is true. I think I understand and compre- hend the rules of logic as well as those of evidence too well to make any such blun- dering, or startling leap, at conclusions as that ; and wish you to take only things for evidence after they shall have fairly been shown to be such. Whether I believed in the words read from the Record I have before me or not, there would hang to mind the singularity of the statemen^of Jesus at Jerusalem, ta- ken in connection with the other fact that it seemed to have been so wholly ignored and misunderstood by those to whom it was addressed. No one even to ask. Lord to whom do you refer? Indeed it is singular knowing as we do, that the Gentiles are not and never were reckoned as sheep. The same stolid indifference still manifest by that people and that seems to have hung by them so long before and after, that to them nothing was of worth or interest out- side of Judah and the little country on the east of the great sea. Returning to the line of evidence, I take up the testimony of the scriptures which relate to the establishment of a people in the land as claimed in this record : — Genesis, 49, 22, Jacob, (Israel), the head of the tribes in his last blessing upon the twelve sons whose children should figure so wonderfully in the history of the world, says, in his blessing of Joseph: — " Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough '* by a well ; whose branches run over the wall : " "The archers have sorely grieved him and shot at "him, and hated him: But his bow abode in strength "and the arms of his hands were made strong by the "hands of the miglitvGod of Jacob; (from thence is the "shrpherd the s^one of Israel) : "Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee "and by the Almighty, who shailbless thee with bltss- "ings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that "lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the "womb: the blessings of thy father have prevailed "above the blessings of my progonitors unto the ut- "most bound of thn everlasting hills: they shall be on "the head of Jo-eph, and on tlie crown of the head of "him that was separate from liis brethren." Whatever may, or may not have been the former entertained or expressed views of the meaning and application of this prophetic blessing, one thing must be ad- mitted by all the" intelligent, and that is, that the prediction clearly shows a change of place of residence and habitation at some period of time, of the posterity of Joseph. Also their settlement and inheritence of a courtry far greater in extent, and more wonderful for richness and desirableness than the country of Palestine, or that ad- jacent. The prophecy reveals what is to be the history of the descendents : — "Whose "branches run over the wall." "The "blessings of thy father have prevailed "above the blessings of my progenitors " unto the utmost bounds of the everlasting "hills." The blessing of Jacob's progeni- tors, Isaac and Abraham, consisted in the jsromise of the country east and south of the great sea (Mediterranean), from the River of EgyjDt to the Euphrates, including the whole*^ of Canaan . This is clearly establish- ed by the following references : Gen. 12:7; 7:8; 15 : 7 & 18 ; 26 : 3 & 4 ; 28 : 4, and 48 : 4. But in the prophetic blessing of Joseph the statement is emphatic that the branch- es (daughters, children, jjosterity), of Jo- seph were to extend above this, beyond Canaan and the country of the Mediterra- nean, even "unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills." Far from the country of Palestine, to a land teaming with the first things of earth, honored with the choicest of blessings and one to be desired above that of Canaan. I invite you to candidly and fairly enter upon the search for this "promised" land, and to be only as confident in the same as the history and prophetic writings shall fully and fairly warrant. Turning to Deut. 33 : is to 18, we find a further account and description of this same country, and also a prediction with reference to this same branch of the human family. It is the lan- guage of Moses, the great civil and eccle- siastical lawgiver of ancient times, and "the prophet " to whom even reference is made in pointing out a likeness of the great char- acter of Jesus. Upon these words we may rely if we are to place implicit confidence in any state- ments of the divine record. (Time called.) THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 19 MR. BRADEN'S SECOND SPEECH. Gentt^emen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen: — We return now to the rest of Joel's promise, and what was also included, in the Saviour's iDromises. Joel's i^roraise was to all flesh, without exception. It in- cluded every human being. Our Saviour in Ms last great commission to his apostles lim- ited Joel's promise to "as many as should believe " on him through the preaching of the apostles. His language includes all believers, without exception. But as our Saviour limits the promise of the Holy Spirit in Joel, so the Holy Spirit in Peter on the day of Pentecost, limits our Saviour's promise to "as many as the Lord our God shall call." There is no conflict, but merely a gradual development, by the Holy Spirit, in successive revelations, of the law of spir- itual gifts. Joel's promise was limited by our Saviour to believers ; and the Holy Spirit, in Peter, limits the promise of Joel and Jesus to those among believers " whom the Lord our God should call." Only those whom the Lord our God should call Avere to receive the Holy Spirit as a gift, or were to receive miraculous power through the Holy Spirit. When God ceased calling persons to the exercise of these gifts, they were to cease. The all-important qu-estion then is : " How did God call men to the en- joyment of the gift of the Holy Spirit, to the exercise of these miraculous powers, con- ferred by the Holy Spirit, called spiritual gifts ? How long did he continue to call men to the exercise of these gifts ? When did he cease to call men to the exercise of these miraculous powers ?" I claim that he called them to the exer- cise of sjiiritual gifts, in every instance, ex- cept the Baptism of the Holy Spirit — by the imposition of an apostle's hands — in that way alone. None but an apostle could call men to the exercise of these gifts. This power to bestow these gifts was " the sign of apostleship." When the apostles ceased to call men, God ceased to call men, to the exercise of these gifts, for his appointed and only means of calling men to these spiritual gifts ceased. Then as many, out of all flesh, out of believers, as God called — by his only appointed means, the imposi- tion of an apostle's hands — to the exercise of these spiritual gifts, and no others re- ceived them. Outside of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit no one ever enjoyed these gifts, except those on whom an apostle laid his hands, to impart them. Acts, VIII. Philip, who exercised wonderful spiritual powers, could not impart spiritual gifts. " Now when the apostles, who were at Jerusalem, heard that the Samaritans had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John, who Avhen they were come down prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for as yet he had not fallen on any of them, only they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." My op- ponent's claim that baptism is for the re- ceiving of the Holy Spirit, is at fault here. These persons had been baptized, and had not, and could not receive the Holy Spirit until an apostle had laid hands on them, for the account proceeds : " Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. Simon saw that the Holy Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostle's hands." Here it is declared, as clearly as human speech can make h, that the Holy Spirit was received through the laying on of an apostle's hands. That he was imparted in that way alone, for the apostles had to comedown from Jerusalem, and lay their hands on them, before they could receive him, although they had been baptized, and Philip the" mighty wonder- worker, who was full of the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit, was with them. If Philip could not bestow the Holy Spirit, no one outside of an apostle could. Acts, IX. Saul's case is supposed to be an exception. He was in Damascus, hun- dreds of miles from any apostle. As prophets, who were not Levites, sometimes offered sacrifices as prophets, when no Ije- vite was present to officiate, so here, God called and miraculously commissioned and appointed Ananias to act as special apostle, in this case, to confer on Saul the Holy Spirit. He declares: "The Lord Jesus sent me to you, that you may receive the Holy Spirit." This case no more sets to one side our law than the act of Elijah in offering sacrifices as prophet, when there was no priest to officiate, sets to one side God's positive law that no one but a Levite could offer sacrifices. Acts, XIX. Paul baptized the twelve disciples of John, at Ephesus. "Then he laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit, and spoke with tongues and prophesied. Tim. 1-6." "Stir up the gift of God that is in you, through the laying on of my hands." These are all of the instances of the imparta- tionof spiritual gifts, in the Scriptures, out- side of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was imparted, in every instance, by the imposition of an apostle's hands. These Scriptures prove beyond cavil that no one but an apostle could con- fer these gifts, and that they were con- ferred in that way alone. None but au apostle could call to the exercise of these gifts. These gifts never descended to a third person. I challenge an instance where they descended to a third person. That any one ever exercised spiritual gifts but one called by the imposition of an apos- tle's hand. When the last person to whom an apostle had imparted these gifts, by the imposition of his hands, died these gifts 20 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. ceased from earth . God ceased calling men to the exercise of these gifts when his only appointed means of calling them ceased Thus we utterly demolish every claim of inspiration for Joe Smith or any of his fol- lowers ; every shadow of claim of inspira- tion for the Book of Mormon ; all claim that it is of divine origin. The Scriptures clearly teach that these miraculous powers were exercised to give to man a completed revelation of a scheme of salvation from sin, and that when that ob- ject was accomplished, they ceased. We have already used the illustration of crea- tion. God brought animals and plants into existence by miracle of direct creation. But when that 'was done he ceased miracles of creation, and now operates in a higher and more perfect manner, by natural law. So he gave revelation by means of inspiration until he had completed a perfect system of revelation universally applicable, and eternal truths. Then he ceased revelation and miracle, and operates now through a higher and more perfect law, the moral power of these divine truths, thus revealed and completed. The Bible speaks of the unfolding of the scheme of redemption as being similar to the growth of each person from infancy to manhood. As the child lays to one side the discipline of the school and the parent, and enters on the duties of life, in which he uses what parents and teachers have taught him, so the Bible teaches that mankind have laid to one side the instrumentalities employed in child- hood and youth, and now, as men, use the truths God has imparted and perfected. There was a time when the settlers ot America had no government. Then they obtained from home government colonial governments. This was followed by the revolutionary government. Then came gov- ernment under the Articles of Confedera- tion. Under these a constitutional conven- tion was held, and a constitution offered to the people. They adopted it and estab- lished a complete government under it. All constitutional convention work then ceased. The Antediluvian Dispensation, from Adam to ihe flood, miglit be com- pared to the settlers before they had a regular government. The Patriarchal Dispensation, from the flood to the law of Sinai, might be regarded as the period of colonies and governments under the parent government. The Mosaic Dispensation might be compared to our revolutionary government. The preparatory work of John and our Saviour to government under the articles of confederation, when the con- stitutional convention was established and did its work. The apostles and the work under them might be compared to the work of the constitutional convention, and the organization of our government in accord- ance with the constitution. The apostles were appointed by our Saviour to give to the church its constitution the New Testa- ment, just as the people chose delegates to tlie constitutional convention, through their representatives, and empowered them to frame the constitution. Now mankind adopt the New Testament, form churches under it, and live in accordance with its principles, just as our people accept our constitution, form states under it, and live in accordance with the general laws and principles of the constitution. Just as the constitutional convention ceased it work, when it had framed the constitution, so the apostles and revelation ceased their work, when the New Testament was completed. To go back under direct revelations would be as absurd as to go back under a constitu- tional convention. Direct revelations were as much inferior to the operation of the completed word of God, as the constitu- tional convention was to government under the constitution. In all of the former dis- pensations, when miraculous powers were exercised, the condition of mankind was as inferior to our condition now, under a completed revelation, as all former condi- tions of our people were inferior to our present condition. Not only so but revela- tion in all dispensations speaks of the dispensations, when miraculous powers existed, as imperfect provisional, and pre- paratory to something higher and better. They speak of the work of Christ and his apostles as that which is perfect and com- plete. They never speak of anything that is to succeed it, of anything that is to»be better than the Gospel. John speaks of the work of Jesus as perfect. The apostle speaks of this work as the perfection of the work ©f revelation, as that which is per- fect. That which is to have no successor. They speak of what the Gospel will do, but not what something higher and better, that is to replace it, will do. The Scriptures teach clearly and positively, not that these miraculous gifts were to remain as a con- stituent and perpetual element in the Gos- pel, the church and their workings, but that they were the means of revealing the Gospel, the New Testament, and when that was done they were to cease. These miracu- lous powers' were no more a part of the Gospel than the exercise of miraculous powers exercised in creation was a part of things created. Just as miraculous power in creation was only the means, and ceased when it had accomplished its work, so miraculous power in revelation, was the means of revealing the word of God, and not a part of that word and ceased when revelation was completed, and did not re- main a part of what \%^ had introduced and completed. Constitution making is only a means of making the constitution, and not a part of it. It ceased wlien it had done its work in giving the constitution It does not remain as part of what it has made. My opponents position is as absurd as it would be to claim that God must now bring animals and plants into being by miracle of creation or that a constitutional conven- tion must set forever, and be forever mak- ing constitutions. rhe teachings of the New Testament harmonize exactly with our position and illustrations, Eph., IV: "Christ g&ve THE BR ADEN AND I^LELLEY DEBATE. 21 miraculous gifts to men. He gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, some to be shepherds and some to be teachers." These apostles and prophets, were extraordinary powers in the church. Their work was necessarily one accomplished by inspiration, miraculous power from the Holy Spirit. The evange- lists, shepherds and teachers were endowed with miraculous powers then, for such power was essential to their work, in the condition in which the church then was. All these had miraculous powers, spiritual gifts. How long were they to continue? For what pur- pose were these miraculous powers given ? Paul answers: "For the perfecting of the saints, unto the work of the ministry, for the building (the work of the ministry in building) of the body of Christ" or com- pleting the organization of the church — "until we all come into the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God" — or until " the faith" — the word of God — the New Testament is completed. This pas- sage of Scripture explains, definitely and jlearly, for what purpose these gifts were a^iven, and how long they were to continue, rhey were given to furnish the saints for the work of the ministry in building up the organization of the church, and were to re- main until that work was done, or until all attained to the unity of the faith, and the faith is perfected. Then they ceased, hav- ing accomplished their purpose. There can be but one answer to this. My opponent must show that the "until" refers to some- thing else than the completion of the organ- ization of the church, and the completion of the word of God — the New Testament, and show that the work of these gifts was not accomplished in these works, and that it is needed now. My position is still more fully taught in I. Cor, XII, XII, XIV. The apostle in XII. 8, 9, 10, and 28, 29, 30, enumerates the gifts that the Holy Spirit bestowed on persons in the church: I. Word of wisdom. II. Word of knowledge. III. The faith— the word of God. IV. Gifts of heahng. V. Working of powers. VI. Prophecy. VII. Discerning of spirits. VIII. Speaking in different tongues. IX. Power to interpret different tongues. These miraculous gifts made persons : I. Apostles. II. Prophets. III. Teachers. IV. Miraculous powers. V. Gifts of healing. VI. Helps. VII. Wise counsellors. VIII. Speaking in diff"- erent tongues. IX. Interpretation of diff- erent tongues. He then says: "Desire earnestly the best of these spiritual gifts" — while it is the order in the church to exer- cise these gifts — " but nevertheless I show unto you amore excellent way "--than the ex- ercise of the best of these spiritual gifts. Ob- serve carefully that Paul, after exhorting his brethren to desire the best of these spiritual gifts while it is the order of the church to exercise spiritual gifts, declares positively that there is a more excellent way than the exercise of the very best of these spiritual gifts. In this he flatly contradicts the central idea of Mormonism, which teaches that the highest condition of the church is the exercise of these spiritual gifts, and that the state of the church, when they are not exercised is, not as Paul declares " the more excellent way," but an apostate con- dition. Paul proceeds to unfold this more excel- lent way in what is the XIII, chapter in our English Bible — this way that is more excel- lent than the exercise of the very best of these spiritual gifts, which my opponent makes the all in all in Christianity. He declares that Christian love. Christian character and spirit, are the great purpose of the religion of Christ. All things — the highest and best spiritual gifts, are worth- less unless they aid in producing Christian love, Christian spirit and character ; and are valuable only as they aid in producing such results. He then unfolds a way of producing Christian love, Christian spirit and character, that is better than the exer- cise of the highest and best of these spirit- ual gifts, that my opponent regards as the alpha and omega of Christianity. He de- clares that Christian love, Christian charac- ter and spirit, shall remain forever, for they are the great object of the religion of Christ. "But prophesying" all utterances by inspir- ation, "shall cease" — "speaking in different tongues, shall cease" — that is all miraculous powers that are mere signs, of the presence of superhuman power shall cease. "Knowl- edge" — all knowledge by inspiration "shall cease," or in other words, when that more excellent way than the exercise of the best of these spiritual gifts obtains, all miracu- lous powers shall cease. Paul then gives the reason why they shall cease, and tells when they shall cease- We come now to a passage of scripture that is more frequently perverted and worse perverted than almost any other in the word of God. Paul is discussing the condi- tion of the church, and if the ordinary in- terpretation be true, he leaves the church entirely, and goes up into heaven, in his discussion, and contrasts, not two different states of the church, as common sense de- mands, but the church and heaven. Outside of the Bible, such an idea would be regard- ed as preposterous nonsense. But men seem to lay one side all sense, when study- ing the Bible. It is not to be understood as any other book ; but is to be made as unnat- ural and fantastic as possible. No conceit is too farfetched, too unnatural to be inject- ed into Bibical interpretation. I insist that Paul is contrasting two conditions of the church. One when spiritual gifts are exer- cised, the other when they are not exercised. Both states are states of the church, and of course here on earth fcnd before Christ gives up his Messiahship, and the church ceases to exist as an institution, on earth, for the salvation of man from sin. The passages following have not the slightest reference to heaven, or to anything but a condition of the church on earth. The apostle declares : "For now" — that is during the exercise of these spiritual gifts, the present state of the church — "we know 22 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. in part"— that is the knowledge imparted by these spiritual gifts is but partial— but a fragment of revelation each time they are exercised— "and prophesy in part"— that is speaking by inspiration, gives but a frag- ment of revelation each time it is exercised —'bat when that which is perfect is come" —when the "perfect law of liberty" of James —when that which makes perfect the man of God, the scriptures, are completed in the New Testament— "then that which is in part"— the exercise of these spiritual gifts— these partial revelations through them "shall be doue away." The apostle then re- turns to the figure used in the XTI chapter, where he compared the church to the human body, and personifies the church by his own body, and its development by his own growth. He declares that just as he "per- ceived as a child, felt as a child, spoke as a child, when he was a child," so the church, during the exercise of these spiritual gifts, "perceives as a child, speaks as a child," for for all revelations under such circum- stances must be fragmentary and broken. But as he "put away childish things when he became a man" so the church will put away these childish things, the exercise of these spiritual gifts when it passes out into the condition of manhood, when it is under "the perfect law of liberty" the completed Testament a law of universal truths, suit- ed to the liberty of manhood. This agrees exactly with the apostle's teaching in Eph. iv! as we have already seen. The apostle continues : "Now" that is during the exercise of these spiritual gifts _i'we"— that is all believers— "see as in a mirror dimly"— these partial revelations, through the exercise of these spiritual gifts, give imperfect knowledge— "but then"— that is when the word of God is completed in the New Testament— "we shall see face to face." As James declares : "the perfect law of liberty," the New Testament is a is a mirror, and if a man looks into it and is a doer of what it requires he is blessed. "Now," continues the apostle— that is dur- ing the exercise of these spiritual gifts— "I know in part" — that is the fragmentary re- velations, given through the exercise of spiritual gifts, imparts but partial knowl- edge— "I prophesy in part"- that is inspir- ed speaking through these spiritual gifts is partial and fragmentary — "but then" — that is when the word of God is completed in the New Testament— "I shall know even as I am known" — that is the church shall know what it ought to be, just as the Holy Spirit knows what it ought to be, for the Holy Spirit will then have made a perfect revela- tion of the matter. The apostle closes by declaring that "faith," the faith, God's perfected word — "hope" — God's perfected promises — "love"christian spirit and char- acter, that are the object of revelation, "shall remain forever, but the greater of these is love, christian spirit and charac- ter" the great aim and purpose of all religion. I have been careful to unfold this important revelation, because it cuts up bj'^ the roots, all claim of inspiration for Joe Smith, and all claim that the Book of Mor- mon is of divine origin. I might rest my case here. We will clinch the matter however by putting Mormonism to the test it challenges. Has Mormonism revealed a single new idea, not contained in the Bible ? Has it given a better expression to a single idea revealed in the Bible, than is given by the Bible: Man is constitutionally a religious being. Without any revelation his religious nature would have, and ever has had its expression in religious ideas and system of religion. Into these systems of religion man has wrought certain catholic religious ideas of his religious nature. Religions differ in the number of these ideas that they contain, and in their exi3ression of them. All human systems of religion are faulty in these par- ticulars. I. They do not contain all of the catholic ideas of man's nature. II. They do not express these ideas perfectly. III. They do not expand them into universally applicable principles. All human religions are national or race religions. They are not religions for all mankind. IV. They do not unite these ideas into a harmonious system. V. They do not expand the sys- tem into a universal and absolute religion. VI. They corrupt these ideas with error and evil. VII. They incorporate error and evil into the system as cardinal ideas. We claim for Christianity I. It contains every catholic religious idea of man's religious nature. II. It expresses each and every idea perfectly. III. It expands each and every idea into an eternal truth, a univer- sally applicable principle. IV. It unites all of these ideas into a harmonious system. V. It strips these ideas and the system of all error and' imperfection, with which human systems has polluted them. VI. It expands the system into an absolute religion, a religion for humanity. If this position be true, then a man can not outgrow Christianity. It is the work of all studv to reach universally applicable principles, such as the law of gravitation, or the Copernican law of the universe. When research has attained to such principles, it has reached tiie ultimate in that direction. It can never outgrow such a principle. It will never need anything in its stead. It can only learn more of the scope and grasp, the ramifications of these universal truths, throughout the infinite universe, but it can never outgrow them. It will never need anything in their stead. In Christianity, we have a system composed of such eternal truths, such universally applicable prin- ciples. Man can never outgrow them not even a "Re-organized Mormon." He will never need new truths, new revelations in addition to them, nor in their stead. If man progresses throughout eternity, he may be able to understand the scope and grasp of these eternal truths, these univer- sally applicable principles better, but he will never outgrow them, nor will he need something in their stead, no more than he will outgrow the law of gravitation, and need something in its stead. This forever THE BRADEN AND ItELLEY DEBATE. 23 silences and renders absurd the claim of Mormon revelations. The catholicideasofman's religious nature are these, I. The self-existent, independent, self-sustaining, eternal and absolute Being, the origin of all derived existences, aud the cause of all phenomena, is Absolute Spirit, or God. Has Mormonism any idea to take the place of this ? Does it give a better rev- elation of it than is given in the Bible? II. This Absolute Spirit created, controls and sustains all things in the boundless universe. Has Mormonism & revelation to take the place of this truth ? Does it give a better revelation of this truth than is given in the Bible ? III. Spirit existence. God who is absolute spirit; Christ who is a divine spirit; the Holy spirit, a divine spirit ; angels ; spirit in man. Has Mormo- nism any ideas to take the place of the teachings of the Bible on this subject? Does it give a better revelation of them than weflnd in the Bible? IV. The immortality of man's spirit and all spirits. Has Mormon- ism given us any new ideas on this topic? Does it reveal any truth not in the Bible, or better than it is expressed In the Bible? V. Freedom of volition in all acts of the spirit. Has Mormonism any new revelations on this topic, not in the Bible? Or does it express the truth better than the Bible? VI. The division of all things into good or evil ; all ideas into true or false; all acts into right or wrong ; all characters into righteous or wicked. What new revelations has Mormon- ism given us on these matters, that better ex- press this truth? VII. Clear, simple, in- fallible standard for deciding what is right and wrong, true and false. Has Mormonism given us a single new idea in regard to this matter? VIII. Responsibility to God? Has Mormonism added a single thought in regard to this? IX. Accountability to God? What light have we from Mormonism, on this topic, not in the Bible ? X. Retribu- tion here and hereafter. Has Mormonism given us a single new idea on this important topic? XI. God's providence, as our Fath- er in heaven. Has Mormonism added a ghost of an idea to our knowledge on that subject? XII. Prayer and answer to pray- er. What new revelations has Mormonism given us on that question ? XIII. Revela- tions from God, of truth man unaided could not attain. What new idea in regard to revelation does Mormonism give to man? XIV. Inspiration of chosen men as medi- ums of revelation. W^hat new light have we from Mormonism on this topic? XV. Miracles as proof of inspiration and revela- tion. What new truth has Mormonism in regard to miracles? XVI. Prophecy. What new ideas in regard to prophecy has Mormonism given to the world? XVII. Sacrifice for sin. What light have the pre- tended Mormon revelations thrown on this topic? XVIII. The expiation or atone- ment that Christ made for mankind. Have Mormon pretended revelations given us one new thought on this central idea of Christian- ity? XIX. The mediatorship of Christ, Has Mormonism given to the world one particle of light on that topic, not in the Bible? XX. A leader in religion and redemption. What light from Mormon revelations here ?* XXI. A perfect embodiment of teaching, and example in life. Has Mormonism given us a ray of additional light on the subject? XXII. An object of faith devotion and love? What light does Mormonism add to the teachings of the Bible? XXIII. Incarna- tion of Jesus as divine sacrifice, mediator, •and object of love and devotion. Does Mor- monism add a single thought on this topic? XXIV. Sin as a fact in man's life aud ex- perience. Its nature, its results. Has Mor- monism thrown one particle of additional light over this dark theme? XXV. Regen- eration of life, spirit and character. Have we any additional light on this glorious idea of Christianity, from the jack-o-lantern of Mormonism? XXVI. Forgiveness of sin on repentance and reformation. What new revelations on this cheering truth, have we from Mormonism? XXVII. A life of right- eousness moulded aud directed by religion. Does Mormonism give us new revelations here? XXVIII. The life ot each individ- ual, the family, siciety in all relations, nations, mankind, are to be regenerated by the pure religion of Christ. Do we owe any- thing to Mormon revelations on this subject? XXIX, The regulation of all thought, action, and life, in every relation of life, and sphere of action, by this religion. What new ideas does Mormonism give us here? XXX. Each person elevates himself in love and ric^hteousness, by giving himself in loving self-sacrifice for others. Does Mor- monism give a new revelation on this thought? XXXI, Man is to be a co-worker with God in the great work of redemption. W^hat new revelation have we from Mormon- ism on this topic? XXXII. Man in the mental and moral likeness of God, What new revelations here? We ask Mormonism. XXIII, Endless growth, development and progress of all intelligences,* towards the absolute perfection of their Creator, What new revelations have we here? We ask the Mormon. XXXIV. The resurrection and glorification of man's nature. What new revelations on this theme have we from Mormonism? XXXV. The universal Fa- therhood of God. What new light does ^Mormonism give us in regard to this topic? XXXVI. The universal brotherhood of man. What new revelations on tliis thenio has Mormonism given us? XXXVII. A system of truth to be believed, of worship to be performed, of rules of life to be lived. Has Mormonism in its pretended revelations added the ghost of an idea to what is in the Bible? XXXVIII. The church of Christ as a perfect organization, for the maintainanee of this religion, and man's culture in it. What new truth has Mormonism given us here? Will our opponent answer these ques- tions? He dare not contradict common sense and Gods word, in claiming that all of the pre- tended revelations of Mormonism, have sug- gested a ghost of a new truth, in regard to one of these great ideas revealed in the 24 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Bible. There is left for him one refuge. He may say that he does not claim that revela- tions are needed to add to the truths re- vealed in the Bible, or to express them bet- ter but the spiritual gifts are needed to enable man to do the work that the reliffion of Chi-ist and the revelations of the Bible demand of him. That inspiration and new revelations are needed to aid man in such work, and to enable him to do it. That human wisdom is not always sufficient to the task of developiuof and applying the univers- ally applicabe trutlis of revelation. Nor to the task of deciding what should be done in applying them. That revelations, inspir- ation, spiritual gifts, are needed to supply this want of human weakness. Also to authenticate and establish th© divine origin of Chri^tianitv. That as spiritual gifts were needed as helps and a sign of the divinity of the religion of Christ anciently, ao they are needed now. This is the only refuge left him. Should he attempt refuge there, we will soon drive him out of that last hid- ing place. Now will our opponent meet these two po- sitions. I. The Scriptures te^'^ch that inspir- ation revelation and miraculous power ex- isted for a definite purpose, the revelation of a perfect system of truth. That system of truth was completed in the New Testa- ment. Inspira;ion revelation and miracle ceased having accomplished their purpose. Therefore allclaims of later revelations is absurd and unscriptural. II. Christianity contains all religious ideas and expresses them perfectly. Further revelation is need- less. Will he grapple with these positions like a man and cease his jingling interpreta- tion of prophecies that have not more refer- ence to Mormonism than the frauds of a gang of counterfleters. THE BR ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 25 THIRD SPEECH OF MR. KELLEY. Gentlemen Moderatoks, Ladies and GentJjEMEn : When my time was called upon last evening I was citing proofs from the scriptures, relative to the establishment and occupancy of a people upon the Ameri- can continent. I turn and read again from Deuteronomy 33 : 13-18 : "And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the Lord be his " land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, "and for the deep that coucheth beneath, and for the "precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the "precious things put forth by the moon, and for the "chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the "precious things of the lasting hills, and for the pre- "cious things of the earih and fullnes<; thereof, and for " the good will of Him that dwelt in the bush : let the "blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the "top of the head of him that was separated from his " beihren. His glory is like the firstlingof his bullock, "and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them " he shall push the people together to the ends of the "earth; and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, " and they are the tht)usands of Manasseh " Here we have such a full and definite description of Joseph's land — where the branches — posterity of Joseph — were to pass to, and inherit, that it is hardly possible to make a mistake in applying it to the country, unless we shall while tryiiig to do so be determined in our minds at all risks to preserve to our souls some cherished and petted theory or selfish institution, rather than to approach fairly and openly the light. It is a land of broad fields and ex- tended territory. Of great diversities of soil, climate and temperature. It must ex- tend through and occupy in the ditterent zones. Here are the products of the earth set out in their fulness. Celebrated for its fruits and Inxurious vegetation, " put forth by the sun and moon . " A land of the chief minerals, " chief things of the ancient mountains;" for the wealth and products of its lakes and rivers, "the deep that coucheth beneath ; " and for the blessings of heaven, the revelations of God — verse 16, 'i For the good will of him that dwelt in the bush;" and then it was far away from Canaan, " to the utmost bounds of the ever- lasting hills." Associate this description now, with the promised blessing upon the children of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, Gen. 48 : 15-20, where the land is located in the midst of the earth ; which, when we remember that the patriarch stood in the country lying on the Mediterranean and near to Canaan, could not with any sense of justice or fitness to the statement be made to apply to that land, and it will be possible to in- telligently point it out. The children also were to " grow into a rnultitude." Wherever the land is, a mul- titude of people will doubtless be found who are the descendants of Joseph of Egypt. " And he blessed them that day, saying, " In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh." This accords with the description of the blessing of Joseph's land by Moses. It is one greatly to be desired ;' choice above every other land, as was the blessing of the lads : so much so that it would be the high- est thing to bless others as was the blessing of these children. The other sons of Jacob had their blessing and inheritance in Can- aan, and how could it ever be truly said, "God bless thee as Ephraim and Manas- seh," if theirs was thus confined to Canaan also? Pursuing the examination however, in search of this promised land and the line of Joseph, I next refer you to the prediction with reference to the departure from Jeru- salem of the people who evidently were led to the land spoken of by these inspired men and the manner and time of their coming. Jeremiah 48 : .32, " O vine of Sibmah, I will " weep for thee with the weeping of Jazer : " Thy plants are gone over the sea, they " reach even to the sea of Jazer : the spoiler "is fallen upon thy summer fruits, and " upon thy vintage." Here is introduced under the figure of a choice vine the dis- persion of the line of Israel's beloved, and an introduction of the fact that they should pass from the then inheritance to the sea, and over the sea ; as is also more specifically set forth by the prophet Isaiah 16 : 8, where it is evident the same event is referred to of which Jeremiah has given evidence. He says : " For the fields of Heshbon languish, " and the vine of Sibmah : the lords of the " heathen have broken down the principal "plants thereof, they are come even unto " Jazer, they wandered through the wilder- " ness : her branches are stretched out, they " are gone over the sea." Now pass in your mind over the sea, from the old country of Jazer on the east of the Mediterranean, in either direction ( so as to pass over the sea), and tell me what hmd you shall find and the only one you can find that answers the description of Joseph's land as foretold by Israel and Moses V The phrase, "vine of Sibmah," may be understood by comi^aring it with the saying of the Lord in the second chapter, 20th and 21st verses, of Jeremiah : " For of old time "I have broken thy yoke, and burst thy "bands; and thou saidest, thou wilt not "transgress; when upon every high hill " and every green tree thou wanderest " playing the harlot. Yet I had planted " thee a noble vine, wholly a right seed: " How then art thou turned into the dege- " nerate plant of a strange vine unto me ? " Sibmah refers to that to be desired, pleas- ant, choice. And the "vine of Sibmah," is properly interpreted, "a noble vine," "a right seed," which was true of Ephraim aiid Manasseh. 26 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Turning again to the evidences upon the main thread of our search, I refer you to the 49th of Jeremiah, 30th to 33rd verses inclu- sive ; where he gives the excited and hur- ried warning which God had commanded him to deliver, just a short time before the king of Babylon brings desolation upon the country of Jerusalem. The language of the prophe't fully discloses the troublous scenes which suddenly followed : " Flee, get you far off, dwell deep," (that is go unobserved, secret), "0 ve inhabitants of Hflzor, saith the Lord : for Ne- " bnc'hadne^zar king of Babylon hath taken connsel "as;ainst von, and hath conceived a purpose against "you Arise, get von up unto the wealthy na- "tion that dwelleth" without care, saith the Lord, "which have neither ga'es nor bars, which dwell " alone. And their camels shall be a booty, and the "multitude of their cattle a spoil: and 1 will scatter "into all winds them that are in the utmost corners ; "and I will bring their calamity from all sides thereof, "saith tlie Lord. And Hazor shall be a dwelling for "dragons, and a desolation forever: there shall no "man abide there, nor any son of man dwell in it." The warning to these people was to get out of the reach of the King of Babylon who at that time held complete sway in the (ountries of the east, and they were prom- ised that if they would obey the voice and hearken unto the Lord, they should be led to a wealthy nation, a land descriptive of Joseph's land, and which, had been afore- time inhabited and whose inhabitants dwelt without bars ; — with nothing to pre- vent persons who should go there of taking possession, — showing that the cattle and camels would be a prey to be had for the taking. Such a country as this existed at some place upon the earth at the time of the de- livering of the warning prophecy and of the captivity referred to, unless tlie prophecy is false. Where was it? The Book of Mor- mon comes in with the new light reflected in 1829, and shows that at the time, such a country existed upon the American con- tinent. It had to that date been inhabited by a people who were led here from the plains of Shinar at the time of the confounding of the languages ; and who had been greatly blessed and enriched and had builded cities and towns and earthworks, and had been rich in cattle and camels and all kinds of animals, and in mines and mining. But had been at this time hurriedly gathered together by their leaders from every part of the land, leaving their cities unkept, the ores in process of removal in the mines, their herds and their flocks free to wander, while they engaged in mortal combat, stir- red to the most desjierate frenzy by animo- sity and revenge, until the country had become desolate of inhabitants. Ah ! but says my opponent, this comes from the Book of Mormon, it is not evidence. But I shall not leave the testimony here. I refer to it to show you that so early as 1829, when the book went into the hands of the publisher, this work cast the new light upon the nation and peoples of the world, when all were in ignorance and darkness; not only with regard to the former habita- tion of the continent, but also the interpre- tation of these prophecies. For my proofs, I shall bring before you the corroborative testimonies which have come to light through the explorations and archgeological discoveries of the continent, as set forth and published in the first scientific and historical works of the times, and which could not have been known to the author of the Book of Mormon if it is claimed to be the work of man only. Upon last evening it was repeatedly chal- lenged, to point to a new thing which reflected light to the people from the work. I had nevertheless just referred him to the new light thrown upon the prophecy of the Master at Jerusalem. Here is another that stands out boldly and sublime as though flashed, by the inspired shaft from the heavenly realms ; and were it material to the maintenance of the authenticity of the work, I could gather from its brilliant pages ten thousand reflections of its rays, which are for the elevation of man, the encourage- ment, consolation and spiritual growth of the Christian as he wrestles with the evils of life, and which are not attained by the reading of any other work. But suY>pose I could not show a single new truth. How could it affect the argument as to whether God revealed himself to the people upon this continent, and that the result of such revealment were not teachings, "entitled to the respect and belief" of all the people who believe in the partial record that is left to us of the will of heaven as est intellects, and characters of the people among whon: it had its origin accepted it is >f 3i''iue origin. We trace each book of the Bible back in this way into the age, and i.nto people among whom it had its nrigin. We can begin with the oldest books and trace out the frame-work of corrol)orative history, geographj'^, literature, customs, etc., in which it had its origin, and into which it dovetails and interlocks at every point, fitting such frame-work, as the holes in the fuller's web fit on to the tenter-hooks on which it has been stretched. We prove that its actors authors and writers and speakers, acted spoke and wrote as the Bible declares they did. Having estab- lished its authenticity, genuineness and truthfulness, we prove that its speakers, actors and writers, were inspired when the Bible declares they were inspired, for we have proved the truthfulness of the Bible. II. We tiien examine its contents and prove bj' prophecy that has been fulfilled — by miracles that are authenticated by monu- mental institutions — by truths that are above man's power and must have been revealed and by its exact accordance in its teachings and in its results with the claitn of inspiration that it is inspired and of divine origin. My opponent cannot appeal to one parti- cle of the first line of proof. He can trace his book no farther back than to Imposter Joe Smith. It has not one particle of frame work of corroborating history, geography literature and customs into which it inter- locks. It stands on the naked assumption that Imposter Joe was inspired and on that alone. If he was inspired, then we should believe that he translated the Book of Mor- mon by inspiration, and of course it is true, and of divine origin. The Book itself has not one iota of interlocking corroborating. or collateral evidence. It steps out into littman life from the hand of Imposter Joe as the Goddess Minerva burst from the head of Jupiter, He claims that he re- ceived it from an angel by miracle and that he translated it by inspiration. Therefore it is of divine origin and mankind should accept it. There are no monumental insti- tutions no literattire based on it. It has had no career in the life of our race of which we have one particle of knowledge or proof except the assertions of the book itself. If my opponent appeals to the Bible, as Jesus appealed to the Old Testament, he must show that the Bible, in its history, narrates the same events as are found in the Book of Mormon. It does not hint one of them, except what the book of Mormon steals from the Bible. Or that the Bible foretells the events recorded in the Book of Mormon. He has attempted this, and oh how weak an attempt. I can prove that the Bible foretells the Koran or Swedenborg's writ- in^-s jtist as clearly. The false prophets aiul laise Messiahs of Israel furnished far moi-*' proof from prophecy than he has pro- duced. Even if the Bible foretold the events narrated in the Book of Mormon, that would not prove that the Book of Mor- 'nion is of divine origin. The Bible foretells events narrated in Assyrian and Egyptian history. That does not prove that the books recording what the Bible foretells are of divine origin. Do the prophecies he quotes, even if we admit his fanciful appli- cation, prove that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin, one particle more than prophecies in the Bible of events recorded in Egyptian history, proves that the Egyp- tian books were of divine origin? Where does the Bible prophesy in such a way as to prove that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin. The only proof of the divine origin of the Book of Mormon is the pretended inspi- ration of Imposter Joe Smith. If Im- poster Joe was inspired, then of course he translated the Book of Mormon by in- spiration, as he claimed, and we can believe his story that he received it from an angel by miracle, and that the angel told him that the Book of Mormon is what it pre- tends to be, and true. If he was not in- spired, we have not a shadow of proof of the divine origin of the Book of Mormon. My opponent can establish that Imposter Joe was inspired by proving that he wrought miracles, as nearly all of the in- spired men of the Bible did ; or that he foretold future events, as Noah, John the Baptist and others did, who wrought no signs, or that he had superhuman wisdom, and revealed what man could not know, as the inspired men of the Bible did, or that his character was such that he would not 82 THii BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. claim to be inspired, if it were not so, as we show in the case of Christ. If he appeals to the Bible as Jesus and the apostles ap- pealed to the Bible, let him produce from the Bible the proof they did. Let him prove that the Bible prophesies directly and clearly of Imposter Joe, his work and his book. Let him show that the work of Imposter Joe and the Book of Mormon are a clear fulfillment of Bible prophecies. The appeals to prophecy, made by Christ and his apostles, were clear direct positive and overwhelming. They were not such far fetched fanciful distortions and perver- sion's of the Bible, as we hear from Mor- monism. He seems to be afraid to affirm and defend the in^irationof Imposter Joe. If he abandons that, he abandons the sole basis of his claim for his book. The only basis for the claim for the divine origin of the Book of Mormon is two assertions. I. An angel revealed to Imposter Joe the ex- istence of certain plates and gave them to him and told him that the contents were true. II. That Imposter Joe translated these plates, and we have in the Book of Mormon the contents of the plates. Prove that you establish the divine origin of the Book of Mormon. Fail in that and you utterly fail to establish such claim. My opponent attempted to prove the di- vine origin of his book by appealing to these facts : I. It claims to come from the right source. So does the Koran. II. It claims to be a proper message to mankind. So do the Shasters of India. III. Its object is good, the salvation of mankind. The same can be said of t)ie revelations of Auni Lee. IV. Its teachings are good. So were the sermons of Steph^'us Burrows, the greatest scoundrel that eve.' lived. He, a vile im- poster, stole and uttered the teachings of the Bible. So did Job Smith and the Book of Mormon. If i.iupusi.t." Joe was inspired, and his book a rftvelatiou Burrows was also inspired and his sermons revelations, on precisely the same ground. My oppo- nent asserts that I should follow him in argument. That depends on where and how he leads. If he presents the issue clearly and fully, and any proof of his po- sition, I will follow him. If he does not, I will present the issues myself, and refute his system, whether he presents it or not. I am surprised that one who claims to be a lawyer, as does mj'^ opponent, should be ignorant of the rules of debate, that the negative is free to pursue two courses. I. Reply to the attempted arguments of the affirmative. II. Or by an independent line of argument prove that his affirmative is untrue. If he pursues the latter course, he completely overtuims the affirmative's y>o- sition, if he never notices one of his pre- tended arguments. My opponent's feelings seem to be very badly hurt by my calling Smith an im- postor, a deceiver, a scoundrel. If I jDrove that he pretended to be inspired and was not, that his book was a fraud, I prove him to be an imposter, a scoundrel of the black- est dye. A woman once declared, " I don't like Mr. Brown. He called my husband a liar. And that was not the worst of it. He proved it." Mormons will have the same reasons to dislike Mr. Braden. I have called Joe Smith an imposter, a scoundrel and I will prove it. My opponent reminds me that the Jews called Jesus a drunkard, a glutton, a lover of harlots and vilo per- sons. Will he answer one question? If the charges of the Jews had been true, would it not have proved that Jesus was an imposter? That he was neither inspired nor divine. If I prove that Joe Smith was a vile character, will it not prove that he was not inspired ? Now answer if you dare. The fallacy of the Jews, was not in using the wrong argument, but in making a false accusation. Jesus admitted that if their charges had been true, it would utterly de- stroy his claim to be sent of God and divine, when he challenged them "Who of you have convicted me of any wickedness?" In that question, Jesus flatly contradicts the nonsense my opponent uttered last night. He appeals to the errors and sins of men that the bible says were inspired. When he proves that they were ever in- spired while living in such sin, while committing or practising it, we will notice his argument. What portion of the Biblo was uttered or written by a man, while committing these vile sins ? What inspired act or utterance of David, Solomon, Moses or Paul, have we that was acted or uttered while they were committing vile sins ? He adnuts that he who transgresses the teachings of Christ is not of God. That ad- mission overturns all his special pleadings, in appealing to the sins of Bible characters. While in transgressions, they were not of God, not inspired, nor were their acts or vitterances revelations. Then comes the one everlasting text of Mormonism "He that hath the teaching of the Christ hath both the Father and the Son." He assum- es that if they have the Father and the Son, they are of God. True but that does not prove that they are inspired, nor that what they say or write is a revelation. Even if Joe Smith had been a good man, it would not prove that he was inspired, or that his book was a revelation, any more than the fact that Wesley was a good man, proves that he was inspired, and his ser- mons revelations. "But Joseph Smith claimed to be inspired. If a good man makes such a claim it must be true." No, a good man may be deceived. Hundreds of good men have been deceived in believing that they were inspired and that the stun" they uttered were revelations. The gross absurdity of the use that Mor- mons make of that passage will be seen if my opponent will answer question. How must a man have the teaching of Christ in order to have the Father and the Son? In mere preaching alone? Or in living them out in life? When the scoundrel Burrows laad the doctrine of Christ in his sermons, did he have the Father and the Son? Would not the fact that he was a hypocrite, an imposter and a scoundrel, prove that he THE BRADETv AKD KELLEY DEBATE. 33 did not have the Father and the Son, no matter what he preached? Does the fact tnat Joe Smith stole and put the teacliinti^s of the Bible into the Book of ^Mormon, prove that he had the Father and the Son, that he was a good man, that he was inspired, that his book was a revehition ? When the devil quoted the words of God to our Savi- our, did it prove that he had the Father and the Son? That he was inspired and that his utterances were revelation ? Even if the moral and religious sentiments of the Book of Mormon, that are stolen from rlie Bible, are good, it does not prove that its statements of pretended facts .'iie true, and iiiucli less does it prove that the book is a revelation, that Joe Smith Mas inspired, or even a good man. liangauge can hardly ex- press the idiocy of this pet argument of Mormonism. It would prove that when the devil transforms himself into an angel of light, and utters, hypocritically and to deceive, good sentiments, he is good, in- spired, and his utterances revelations, just as clearly as it proves that Impostor Joe had the feather and the Son, was a. good man, inaitired and his book a revelation, because ne stole good teaching from the Bible, and hypoofitically gave it to the u'orld, in the Book of Mormon, l.ying and claiming that his fraud was a revelation. The quotation i'roni Aots 17, no more proves or liints the divine origin of the book of Mormon than a rei:)etiti()n of the multi- pli'jation Table. Neither does the quotation from Acts 10. The quotation from John iO; 14-1*3. teaches the opposite to what he claims it teaches. In Gen. 17, 15, we read: •' The uncircumcised person shall be cut off from my people. Pie has broken m^' coven- ant." Circumcision was the mark of the flock. If the Nephites M^ere circumcised, they were of the same flock as those Jesus was addressing. If they were not circum- cised, they had ceased to be Israelites, and not a prophecy that my opponent quotes can have any reference to them. Neither the Bible, nor the Israelites, nor Jesus ever speak of Israelites outside of Palestine, as belonging to a fold separate and different from those in Palestine. If the Nephites of the Book of Mormon were circumcised Is- raelites, they were as much members of the fold Jesus was addressing, as the Israelites in Egypt or Palestine. Tlie sheep that Averc not of that fr^Jd of v.hich .Tesus was speaking, were not circunKisod Israelites in Eoypt or America or a^iy other place, for all circumcised Israelites were one fold. The other sheep that were not of that fold, that was inade up entirely of circumcised Israelites, were Gentiles.' The language has reference to the breaking down of a wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, and making JeMS and Gentiles one fold in Christ. The quotation from Ezekiel 34, " My sheep were scattered upon all the face of the earth" proves nothing for in such phraseology, often the Bilble means no more than that they were widely scattered, and it never refers to more than the old continent which was all that the Israelites knew anything about. The quotation from the highly poetical figurative language of .Tacob's blessing on Joseph, with its bold hyi^erbole, proves nothing. The Mormon interpretation is an unnatural one, foreign to the subject, and forced on to the lauguage- to sustain a theory. There is nothing in the language that 'was not fulfilled in Pa- lestine, as much as the hyperbole of many other prophetic promises, that all admit did not extend beyond the land of Palestine. Even if it did extond b^'vciid tho 1.;,; i' of Palestine, it need include no more than i;he old continent. It need not extend be- yond the Josephites in Europe, Asia and Africa. My opponent reverses the order of the line of argument. He must prove that the Josephites migrated beyond the old world, to America, before he can extend the language of the propb.ecy to America. He absurdly assumes that the language must extend beyond the old world to America, in order to prove that the .Tosephites came to America. OBIGIN OF THE T300K OF MORMON. I propose now to refute the claim made by my opponent that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin, "by proving that it had a very base human origin, about sev- enty years ago. If I can show that it was gotten up by three men, in the first half of the jjresentcentury, through base motives, and for purpose of fraud, and gain by fraud and deception, I utterly explode all claim to divine origin. I propose now to trace out such origin, for the Book of Mormon, as clearly as a chain of title to a piece of land. Let us first state what the Book of Mormon professes to be. It purports to be a history of America froin the time its first inhabi- tants entered it, just after the confusion of tongues at the tower of Babel, till about A. D. 400, a period probably of nearly 400O years. It asserts that this continent was peopled by three different families. 1. The faniil^y of Jared, who emigrated from the Tower of Babel, over 8000 years before the birth of Christ, and whose descendants were exterminated, on? portion of the book declares about 600 years before Christ; another portion of the book declares about 250 years before Christ. 11. The family of Lehi, a Manassehite,who emigrated from Jerusalem, 600 years before Christ, early in the reign of Zedekiah ki^ig of Judah. His descendents divided in- to two nations, the Nephites, the righ- teous portion ; and the Lamanites, the wicked portion ; III. The people of Zar- ahemla, Judahites who left Jerusalem about eleven years after Lehi. The de- scendants of these Judahites were de- stroyed in war or absorbed by the Neph- ites. In war, the Nephites were extermi- nated by the Lamanites, about A. D. 384. The Lamanites remained sole possessors of of the continent, and are the American In- dians. I wish tne reader to notice that, ac- cording to the Book of Mormon, not an Ephraimite, ever came to America. How then can the prophecies in regard to Ephra- 34 THE BRADI^.N AND KELLEY DEP>ATE im apply to the aboriginies of America, even if the history m the Book of Mormon be true? According to the Book of Mor- mon the deeds of this people were, by di- vine direction, en-vraved by their prophets, on plates of gold, brass, and ore (what ev- er that nondescript substance may mean). These plates were reiiffiously preserved by divine direction. The Book of Mormon lelis lis, on almost every page, with painful iterfition and reiteration, of plates, of how they were prepared, preserved and revised, . jianded down from generation to genera- lly,,, — how careful the Lord was to see that iJiis was done, until they fell into the hands of one Mormon, who about A. T>. 384 made an abridgement and buried the originals, together with certain relics, in a hill which is now near Manchester Ontario Co., New York. He handed this abridgment "these few plates" to his son Moroni, providently leaving a few pages for him to use in finish- ing tiie abridgement. Moroni finishes, by en- graving on the few pages left by his father, what happened after his father revised his record. Then he writes, and on nothing, for he tells us that his plates are full, and he had nothing to make plates of and is alone, an abridgment of the history of the .Tarnd- ites. Moroni then boxes up these few plates containing the abridgment made hy his fatiier, and his appendix to it, written on the few pages his father left him for that purpose, and buries them in a hill, Cumo- rah, that was in what is now Manchester, N. Y. He buried only "these few plates," and nothing with them for Mormon had bur- ied everytliing else years before, in an in- tirely different locality. "These few plates" remained in this box, till September, 22, 1823, when Moroni, then an angel appeared to Joe Smith, and re- vealed to him the existence of these plates, their place of burial, and a summary of their contents. September, 22, 1827, Moro- ni delivered the plates to .Toe Smith, who by means of a peep s^^t^'^ that he had stolen from the children of Willard Chase, trans- lated them, and gave their contents to the world, ii'. the lUy^'t. !>f IsLormon. The Rook of Mormon mentions a perfect museum of relics that ^re "hid up" some- where near Palmyra, New York. AVe give the list that our readers may see how care- ful the Lord was to have the records and relics preserved. We cite the pages of the Book of Mormon, English edition, where they are mentioned. It shows with what iteration and reiteration "plates" are men- tioned, and how much pains the authors take to convince the sceptical, that these records were so carefully preserved, there can be no doubt about the accuracy of the Book of Mormon. I. Plates of Laban, f>p 9 — 11 — 144 — 145. II. Brass genealogical plates, p 11. III. Brass plates of Lehi, afterwards abridged by Nephi, pp 3—44 — 62. IV. Brass plates of Nephi containing "the more part of the history" (shades of Murray what English) pp, IG— 13S. V. Brass plates of Nephi containing "the more part of the ministry" (shades of Addison, forgive the English of the fullnes of Mor- mon inspiration) pp, 16 — 144. VI. Ore (what nondescript substance is that?) plates ofNephi "containing mine own prophecies" p 44. VII. Plates of Zarahemla containing genealogy, p, 140. VIII. Plates of Mor- mon, containing an abridgment of Nephi's plates that contained "the more part of the ministry," p, 141. IX. Plates containing a record from priest Jacob to king Benjamin, p 141. X. Plates containing record of Ze- niff, p 161. XI, Golden plates of Ether, pp, 161,-312—516. XII. Plates containing Alma's aocount of "his afflictions," p, 196. XIII. Plates Jared "brought across the great deep," p, 530. XIV. Copies of Scriptures "out of which the sons of Mosiah studied 14 years," pp, 2o5 — 271. XV. Many records kept by peoi)le "who went north-west," pp. 394 — 395. XVI. Twelve epistles by differenii prophets on different themes. The Book of Mormon gives us only an abridgment of these. The originals are "hid up." XVII. The liahona — tiie sacred brass globe called the brass compass or brass director of Lehi, pp^ ,88—314. XVIII. The record of Laban, pp, 145 — 143 — 145. XIX. The engraved stone i)fCoriantumer p, 140. XXPThe six- teen stones that God touched with his fin- gers, p, 20. XXI. The two stone interpre- ters of Moroni, pp, 162—204. XXII. The two stone interpreters of Jared 's brother, pp, 522-523. XXIII. A white stone Gazelme, p, 212. XXIV. A brass breastplate found Avith Ether's plates, p, 161, Besides all these Smith and other Morrnons describe articles different from these enough to in- crease the number indefinitely. Mor- mon tells us p 492, that he hides all of these relies, and hands only "these fe-w plates" containing his abridgment to his son Moroni. They are "hid up" no one knows where. The reader will observe we have piles of plates, a score of them, men- tioned scores of times. No one dare deny the accuracy of records kept on metalic plates, imperishable material, with such constant care, and by divine direction, and inspiration. It is our purpose to prove that the Book of Mormon originated with Solomon Spaulding, was revamped by Sydney Rig- don, and given to the world by Impostor Joe Smith. We shall give first a sketch of Spaulding, and his work until he came in contact with Rigdon. Then a sketch of Rigdon and of his work, until he confeder- ated with Impostor Joe, to give his stolen fabrication to the world, by means of his stolen peepstone. Solomon Spaulding was born in Ashford Conneticut in 1761. He graduated at Dartmouth College in 1785, with the degree of A. B. He studi- ed theology and graduated in theology in 1787, and received the degree of A. M, He preached until after ISOO" On account of failing health he went into business in Cherry Valley, New York, He failed in merchandizing and moved to Conneaut, Ohio, in 1807 or 8, Here he went into the foundery business and failed again. There were in the township of Conneaut a great THE BR ADEN AND KELLBY DEBATE. 35 many mounds and other relics of an ex- tinct race of people. Mr. Spaulding be- came very much interested in these anti- quities. In 1809 he began a romance, in which he assumed that the ancestors of the Ind^ins were Romans. After writing forty or fifty pages, he abandoned this idea, because as he said, tlie Romans were too near the time in which he was writing. This MS was the only one Philastus Harl- but said he found in the trunk, supposed to contain all of Spaulding's INIS'S, when they examined the trunk at Mr. Clark's house, in 1S34. This MS we will designate as Roman MS or MS No 1. Ever since the European missionaries be- gan to labor among the Indians, as early as the year 1500, Spanish, French, English and Portugese Missionaries had observed certain things among the Indians, that led some of them to believe that the Indians were of Israelite origin, descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Such ideas can be found in the writings of Spanish Port- ugese, and French Monks, and in the writ- ings of Elliott, Cotton Mather and scores of Ainerican writers, before the commence- ment of the present century. Mr. Spauld- ing was a firm believer and earnest advo- cate of this theory. He began to write a romance, in which he assumed, that the aborigines of America, and the authors of its mounds and other antiquities were Is- raelites. He commenced writing this MS as early as 1809. His brother, J. Spauld- ing, certifies that he visited his brother Solomon in 1810, and found him writing a book which he called, "The Manuscript Found," which he intended to publish, and hoped by the sales to pay his debts. He described it as follows: ' It was a historical romance of the first settlers of America, and eiifieavored to show that the American Indians are the desceniiants of the Jews, or the Ten Lost Tribes. It gave a detailed account of their journ- ey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, until they arrived in America, under the command of Lehi and Nephi. They afterwards had quarrels and contentions, and separated into two distinct nations, one of which he denouiinnted Nephites, the other Lamanites Cruel and bloody wars ensued, in, which great multitudes were slain. They buried their dead in large heaps which caused the mounds, so common in this country. Their arts, sciences and civilization were all brought into view, in order to account for all the curious antiqui- ties found in various parts of Northern and Sorithern America I will remember that he wrote in the old style, and commences almost every sentence with, "And it came to pass," or "Now it came to pass." I will leave it to the reader, if the aver- age Mormon can give a better synopsis of the historical part of the Nephite portion of the Book of Mormon, then JohnSpauld- iug gives in describing his brother's ro- mance the "Manuscript Found." Martha Spaulding, wife of John Spauld- ing, and sister-in-law of Solomon Spauld- ing, testifies: "1 was at the house of Solomon Spaulding shortly before he left ConeHUt. He was then writing a his- torical novel founded on the first seiilers of America. He represented them as an enlightened and warlike people. He had for many years contended that the ab- origines of America were the descendants of some of the Lost Tribi s of Israel; and this idea he carried out in the book in question. The Hpseof time which has intervened prevents my recollecting but few of the leading incidents of his writings; but the names Lehi and Nephi are yet fresh in my memory as being the prinflpal heroes of his tale. They were officers of the company which first came ofiffrom Jerusalem. He gave a particular account of their journey by land and by sea, till they arrived in America, after which dis- putes arose between the chiefs, which caused them to separate into bands, one of which was called Laman- ites the other Nephites. Between these there were re- counted tremendous battles, which freqtiently cover- ed the ground with slain and these being bu'ried in large heaps, was the cause of the many mounds in the country. Some of these people he represents as be- ing very large." Again, I ask the reader if an average Mor- mon could give a better outline of the his- torical part of the Nephite portion of the Book of Mormon than Mrs. Spaulding gives in describing the "Manuscript Found" of her brother-in-law Solomon Spaulding. Henry Lake, Solomon Spaulding's busi- ness partner testifies: Solomon Spaulding frequently read to me from a man- uscript which he was writing, which he entitled the Manuscript Found,." and which he represented as- bemg found in this town. I spent manv hours in hear- ing him read said writings, and became well acquaint- ed with their contents. The Book represeneil the Amer- jCMu IndiHu.s as being the descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel, and gave an account of their having left Jerusalem, and of theirconlentions and wars which were many and great. I remember telling Mr. Spauld- ing that so frequent use of the words: "And it came to pass, ' ' Now It came to pass, ' rendered the book ridic- ulous. Aaron Wright testifies: "One day when I was at the house of Solomon Spaulding, he showed and read to me a history he was writing 01 the Lost Tribes of Israel, purporting that they were the first settlers of America and that the Indians were their descendants. He traced their journ- ey from Jerusalem to America. He told me his object was to accdunt for the f irtifieations etc. that were to be found in this country, and .said that in time it would be fully believed by all except learned 'men and historians " Oliver Smith testifies: "So'omon Spaulding boarded at my house six months. All his leisure hours were occupied in writ- ing a historical novel, founded upon the first settlers of this country. He said he intemled to trace their journey, from Jeiusalem by land and sea till their ar- rival in America, and give an account of their arts, sciences, civil'zation laws and contentions. In this way he would give a satisfactory account of all of the old mounds, so eommoii in this country. Nephi and Lehi, were by him, represented as the leading charac- ters, when they first .'tarted for .\merica. Their main object was to escape the judgements which they sup- posed weie coming on the old world." Nahum Howard testifies: "In conyeisation with Solomon Spaulding I express- ed my surprise that we had no account of the people once in this country, who erected the old forts mounds etc. He told me he was writing a history of that peo- ple." Artemus Cunningham testifies: ".Solomon spaulding described to me his book. He said ih.it it was a fabulous or romantic historv of the firs inhabitants of this country, and it purported lo be a record found buried in the e'arth. or in a cave. He had adopted the ani-ieiit or Scriptural style of wriiing. He then read Ironi his nianusciipt. I remember the name of Nephi, who appeared to be the principal hero of ihe story. The frequent repetition of the phrase "1 Nephi" 1 remember distinctly as though itwere yes- terday. Hl atteinp ed to account for the numerous antiquities which are found upon the coniinent." Jolm N. M Her who was a member of Solomon Sp mlding's household for many months testifies: "I perns d -spaulding's manuscripts as I had leisure more partii u.arly the one he called his "Manuscript Found." It purported to be a history of the first set- tlers o America. He brought them off from Jerusa- lem, under their leaders detailing their travels by land and by sea." 36 THE BBADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. KELLEY'S FOURTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen :— By way of reminding- you of the fact that sometimes a man gets frighten- ed at his own evil surmisiiigs I call attention to the statement of my friend, "That he was not going to be scared down." This was cer- tainly uncalled for. Who has tried to scare him down ? Have I, or has a single person in this audience? Now, I take this as the simple upbraidings of his own conscience. It reminds me of the story of the boy that got terribly scared upon a certain occasion. His hair began to stand up right lively, and the cold chills coursed down his back. Fin- ally he gathered up a little courage and edged up a little toward the object of his fright and after straightening up, he stam- mered out, 'Who's afraid?" It turned out that the boy had only been stuffed with a few ghost stories and was frightened at nothing. And it seems to me this is the true condition of my opponent. There is no necessity of being afraid here. I hope my friend is not afraid. I can say truly to you that I am not. What is he afraid of? I want him in this discussion to bring the strongest evidence he can. To do his worst, as well as best. Only let him state facts? He makes a statement with reference to the prophecy of .Tacob in the 49tii chapter of Genesis where in blessing Joseph, he tells him his " branches," (daughters), "should run over the wall," and says that men have read it for thousands of years and never thought of applying it as I have in this dis- cussion. Is that an argument against the force of my position? On the contrary it occurs to me to be an argument in favor of it. When men have read it, scanned it, for thousands of years, and no one conceived the idea of applying it to its proper place until it was made known as we claim by the revelation of God, it argues in favor of the divine knowledge. It is something that was not likely to be spontaneous in the heart of man, but let down from heaven as were many other things that I will be able to show you duiing this discussion. And yet will he deny that the Book of Mormon has given a single new truth to the world? Another thing he has referred to as an argu- ment, is the sermons of the "notorious Stephen Burrows," using his language. He seems to have been a laithful student of Burrows. Now, his sermons may be good, as he claims from his or the Disciples' { Campbellites ) standpoint of judging ; but I wid state to this audience fairly and can- didly that no such man as he says he was, could preach good sermons from the stand- point of the Latter Day Saints, nor the standpoint of the Bible; and they are not good sermons. I invite him to produce the sermons now, and I will examine them be- fore you and show that they are not good. Another thing. He said that he could show that the prophecies of the Bible which I have quoted refer as much to the Koran as the Book of Mormon. Why does he not do it then ? What is he here for but to show what they apply to? Let him doit. I deny that he can select a single one that has a like or similar application, and demand the proof. When he names one, I will show it does not, nor cannot be made to apply to the Koran as obviously as the Book of Mor- mon. He has so far failed, or refused, to follow me and notice my arguments, al- though he is in the negaiive of the proposi- tion. I sliali not be so kind with him, but will both set forth my affirmative proofs, and expose the fallacies in his positions. In his desperation to make out a case against the Book of Mormon he does not hesitate to ignore as applicable to man after the Apost- les' time, all thatis assuring and conaforting to the Christian. The beautiful promises, "Seek and ye shall find," " Knock and it shall be opened unto you," " Ask and it shall be given unto you," Matt. 7 : 7 ; " If any of you lack wis- dom, let him ask of God that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him," James 2:5; "How- much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask liim," Matt. 7:11; and many other like as- s.^.ring and comforting promises, are all things of the past with him. Confined to the apostles' age. Jesus says, " He tliat hath my commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me ; aiul he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him and will manifest myself to him." Again, " My Father will love him, and we will come unto hiin and make our abode with him." John 14 : 21, 23. But according to my friend's theory, all of these promises are limited to the apostles, and those upon whom they laid their hands. His theory limits pretty much all of the New Testament to the apostolic times ; especially does it, all giving assurance that the Christian may have a knowledge of God. Christ said, "I will pray the Father and he shall give you another comforter that he may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of Truth." Jobn 14:16, 17. "Where two or three are met together in my name there I am in the midst." But mj' opponent makes this lim- ited to the olden time. W^hat is the use pra.ving then, if God cannot give, and Jesus cannot be in the midst. Again, " The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God." "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mor- tal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you." Rom. 8 : 11-16. This is also limited THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 37 by the theory of the negative. Yet, it is clear from tli'e texts themselves, that these promises and experiences were, and are, for the doers of the word, the faithful in Christ in everj' a^-e. .Tohn said, "'I indeed baptize you Avith water unto repentance ; but be that cometh after me is micchtier than T, wliose shoes I am not. wortli.v to bear : he shall baptize you witii the Holy CJhost and with fire." Matt. 8:11. And ".fesus in keepinir with this says, '' Except a man be born of Avater and "the Spirit, he cannot enter into tlte Kingdom of God." .John 3 : l. These texts prove that the influence and power of tlie Spirit was to follow the baptism by wattir. But my opponent limits the baptism of the Spirit,' and holds on to the Avater. But upon what autlnn'ity? A vain assumption evidently thought necessary to bolster up 2iis Campbellite theory. His arguments prohibit salvation to the race after the apostolic age. Jesus tauglit, "Except a man be born of water and the Spirit he can- not enter into the Kingdom of (xod." Yet, Mr. Braden says, tliere is no birth or bap- tism of the Spirit now. There would be more consistency in al>andoning botli bap- tisms as they are botJi tauglit Ir.* the same persons and at the same time. In his mad- ness he not only Avars against the claims of the Book of Mormon and the Latter Day Saints, but all Christians who hold to a Christian experience nnder the divine ener- gies of the Holy GJiost. Every Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Friend, Jndepeudent, or Avhat not, Avho has testified of tasting the heavenly gift — the joy of the Holy Ghost shed abroad in the Heart, in any age or time since the Apos- tles, has witnessed falsely. Their expe- rien(;es are but vaui tilings and they, de- ceiA'ers of tbeniselA'es. There is no Spirit- ual communion, so Mr. Braden claijns, except through the medium of the A^ord. His is but a nrst step iji Atheism. It de- stroys or removes God out of the M"or]d, if not out of the universe. Insi>iration is not only conlined to the early church, but God, and Christ, and the Holy Ghost, are barL-ef Judas. They were the means simply of communicating that knowledge to the world that was framed and devised, by Deity himself. And when my opponent seeks by his illustration to reason apostles out of the world, he makes the blunder of placing the apostles in the position occupied by Deity himself, to the New Testament, and hisiUustratiou legitimately, instead of showing that apostles were to cease, puts God out of the Universe and out of the church, instead of the apostles. This is why I object to his theory. It is but on a par vvilh his other argument, wherein ho has souglitto shut the Holy Ghost, the life and power of the gospel out of the church. God gave the covenant or constitution of the Christian CImrch, .and it was not the work o'' tlie apostles. The apostles were the means of teaching this constitution to the world ; — "ambassadors" to publish the glad news. Tlie publication of the constitution of the I'nited States, was not l>y the fram ers, but by means of another's agency, tlio press, and public criers selected for that purpose. The framers of the constitution so far as their v/ork was concerned, would THE BRADEN AND liELLEY DEBATE. 41 bear a likeness to De/ty, who framed and gave the gospel law. Says Jesus m his de- livery of the law ; "The Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." John 12:49. Tlie apostles are, in the com- parison, in fact but the publishers, ambass- adors, preacliers. For God to give direction iiow he would have these laws carried out, would not necessarily either, be making 'ucif conMitution every day ;" any more than lie was makiuof new constitution every day .u the time of Paul and John. Who will say that because we have a constitution or iirtit basis in our government, we shall have no more laws. The only restriction is, that The laws shall not conflict with the con- stitution. The next objection I shall take up and examine, is that profound and doubtless scholarly argument, based upon the mirac- ulous in the creation of the world. That since God created the earth by miraculous power, therefore he says, I would have him continue to keep a miracle going all the time, in order that we might have miracu- lous things or new animals and plants. But he forgets that when God created the earth by miraculous power, if he wishes to call it miraculous, he at the same time established in the saane miraculous manner, for aught my opponent can tell, a law by which those things which were created, that he calls miraculous, were to be repro- duced. And we have the miraculous plants and animals now by virtue of that law. Just the same as he ordained in the first iige of Christianity by the law of the Holy r^pirit that apostles should continue if men Lept the faith, and if they kept not the Iciith, then they should not continue ; and if we have not the fruits by the ordination of the law of the Holy Spirit, it is because the law has not been kept, for God has not changed. Will my opponent now stop to tell us whether the law by which the natural cre- ation is now continued is not the same by which God originally wrought when it first germinated? When did Deity change, or at what time did the new law take the place of the old? JVIiike the coaiparison and follow it to its conclusion and you will see that instead of supporting his theory it destroys it. God in the creation of the world brought forth certain things, and ordained a means by which they should continue and they continue as at the first by that means, and as the law provided, to the just and unjust alike. In the establishment of his church he did many things which showed the proper fruits of his law, by means of the Holy Spirit. He ordained that they should con- tinue by means of the same agency and power, to the believer, the doer of the word, for this law was limited to such, and noi as the other, made alike to the just and the unjust. Do they continue? Has God changed? The law governing should as in the order of creation cause the same effect, and bring to the believer, knowledge, wis- dom, faith, prophecies, tongues and heal- ings. These are the legitimate fruits of the law of the Holy Spirit to the believer. But my opponent says no. Why? The simple reason is his people do not have the fruits, and the application will show that they are not " doers of the word." Now I call your attention to the real im- port of the story he related, which certainly displayed his ingenuity in taking an eco- nomical way of meeting my arguments. I have several times called your attention to the fact that he was not debating properly this question, and that he had abandoned any defense, so far as meeting my argu- ments is concerned ; and now, he comes in and admits it in his story of the boy, that he says was only waiting for something suificient to roll up so that he could have something to kick at. He is waiting for my arguments to roll up. This reminds me of another boy. He saw aji object in the path and at first sight he concluded he would kick it out. As he )ieared it, the object looked a little firmer than at first, but he thought he would kick at it any way. Finally he drew quite close and the object looked as if it was bundled up so tightly, that if he kicked he might get his toes hurt, and so he did not kick at all ; and this seems to me to be the true reason why he has not foot-balled my argu- ment. (Laughter and applause.) (Time ex- pired.) 42 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. BRADEN'S FOURTH SPEECH. Gextt,emen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen:— Mrs. Matilda Spaulding, Solomon 8paulding's wife testifies, after stating- that Mr. Spaulding was very much interested iu the antiquities found around Conneaut : "Mr. Spaulding conceived the idea of writing a his- tory of the long lost race that produced these antiqui- ties. Their extreme aniiquity lead him to write in the most ancient style, and as the Old Testament was the oldest book in the world, he imitaied its style, as much as possible. As he progressed in his narrative, the neighbors would come in from time to time, to hear portions read, and a great interest in the work was ex- cited among them. It claimed to have been written by one of the lost nation and to have been recovered from the earth. The neighbors would often ask how Mr. Spaulding progressed in deciphering the manusenpt, and when he had a sufficient portion prepared, he woulii inform them, and they would assemble to henr it rea.l. He was enabled, from his acquaintance with the classics and ancient history to intMduce many sin- gular nfliii'-M, which were particularly noticed by the people, and could easily be recognized by them." Let us say in passing that "Mormon " is one of those names. It is from the Greek and means literally a " bug-bear, a hobgob- lin." Miss Martha Spaulding, now Mrs. Kins- try, Spaulding's daughter testifies : " My Father read the manuscript I had seen him writing to the neighbors and to a clergy- man a friend of his who came to visit him. Some of the names he mentioned while reading to the people I have never for- gottenT They are as fresh in my memory as though I had heard them but yester- day. They are Mormon, Moroni, Lamanite and Nephi, etc., etc." Joseph Miller of Amity, Pa., who was in- timate with Spaulding while he lived in Amity, nursed him in his last illness, and heard him read much from his manuscript, saj^s : "Mr. Spaulding seemed to take great delight in read- ing from his manuscript written on foolscap. I heard him read most if not all of it; and had frequent coii- ve sations with him about it. Some time ago I heard most of the Book of Mormon read. On hearing read the account of the battle between the Amliciies (Book of Alma, chapter II.), in which ihe soldiers of one army placed a red murk on their foreheads, to distin- guish them from their enemies, it seemed to reproiiuce in my mind not only the narrative but the very words, as they had been imprinted on my mind byreading Spaulding's manuscript." Ruddick McKee of Washington D. C. tes- tifies : "I was a boarder at Spaulding's tavern in Amity, Pa., in the fall of 1814. I recollect quite well mV. Sp.-iulding spending much time in writing on sheets of paper torn from an old book, what purported to be a veritable history of the nations or tribes that inhabited Canaan. He called it ' Lost Manuscript' orsomesuch namt'. I was struck with the minuteness of its details and apparent sincerity and truthfulness of the author 1 have an indistinct recollection of the passage referred to by Mr Miller, about the Amlicites making a cross with red paint in their foreheads to distinguish them from their enemies in the confusion of battle." Mr. Abner Jackson of Canton Ohio who hciird Spaulding read the MS. to his father in Conneaut, just before his removal to Pittsburg, testifies : " Spaulding frequently read his MS. to the neighbors and commented on it as he progressed. He wrote it in Bible style, 'And it came to pass' occurred so often that some called him ' Old come to pass.' The names, Mormon, Moroni. Nephi, Nephite, Laman, Lamanite, etc., were in it. The closing scene was at Cumorah, where all the righteous were slain." We propose now to introduce Sidney Rig- don himself. Rev. John Winter, M. D. was teaching school in Pittsburg, and was a member of the First Baptist church when Rigdon was its pastor and was intimate with Rigdon. He testifies that "In 1822 or 3 Rigdon took out of his desk in his study a large M.~^. stating tlmtitwas a Bible romance pur- porting to be a history of the American Indians. That It was written by one Spuulding a Presbyterian preach- er whose health had failed and who had tnken It to the printers to see if it would pay to publish it. And that he (Rigdon) had borrowed it from the printer as a curiosity." James Jeffries, an old and highly respect- ed citizen of Church ville Hartford Co. Ma- ryland, testifies, in a statement he dictated to Rev. Calvin D. Wilson, Jan. 20th 1884, in the presence of his wife and J. M. Finney, M. D. ; and attested b^ Dr. Finney, Rev Wilson and Mrs. James Jeffries : "Forty years ago I was in business in St. Louis. The Mormons'then had their temple in Nauvoo Illinois. I h.id business transactions with them I knew Sidi ey Rigdon. He afted as general mana'.'er of the business of the Mormons (with me) Rigdon told me several times, in his conversation with me, that there was in the printing office with which he was connected in Ohio, a MS of the Rev Spaulding, tracing the origin of the Indians from the lost tribes of Israel. This MS. was in the office several years. He was lamiliar with it. Spaulding wanted it published but had not the means to pay for printing. He (Rigdon) and Joe Smith used to look over the Ms. and read it on Sundays. Rig- don said Smitli took the MS. and said 'I'll print it,' and went off to Palmyra New York." " Forty years ago" would be the fall of 1844, just after Rigdon had been driven out of N auvoo. The Times and Seasons assailed him bitterly, that fall .-ind winter, for ex- posing Mormonism. On his way from Nau- voo to Pittsburg, he called on his old ac- quaintance, Mr. Jeffries, in St. Louis, and, in his anger at the Mormons, he let out the secrets of Mormonism, just as he told the Mormons he would, if they did not make him their leader. George Clark, son of .Jerome Clark of Harwicke, N. Y., testifies that Mrs David- son left the trunk containing her first hus- band's MSS. at his fathers, before she went to Munson Mass, to live with her daughter. He says : "Shortly before Hurlbut got the MS. from fathers, during a visit to fathers. Mrs Davidsc n gave to my wife to read, a MS. writUn by her first husuand, Spaulding; remarking as she handed her the MS. : 'The Mormon Bible is almost a literal copy ot this MS.' " It was this MS. Hurlbut obtained from Jerome Clark, and which he never deliv- ered to Howe. He retained it and gave to Howe a few leaves, the beginning of an entirely different MS. Scores of witnesses who would have cor- roborated the above could have found THJ5 BRADEN AND KEI.T.EY DEBATE.^ wnere the Book of Mormon appeared, but these are enougrh certainly. We wish now to call the attention of the reader to these facts. 1. We have proved by sixteen witnesses of the highest char- acter, one Solomon Spaulding's brother, another his sister-in-law, another his wife, another his daughter, another his business partner, another one who was an inmate of his family for many months, another one with whom Spaulding boarded for months, and the others intimate acquaintances, that between the 3'ears 1809 and 1816 Solomon Spaulding spent much of his time in pre- paring manuscripts for a book he intended to publish called the "Manuscript Found." II. That from reading it and hearing him read it they became more or less familiar with the contents of his manuscript. III. Their description of his manuscript is as ac- curate an outline of the historic portion of the Nephite part of the Book of Mormon, in the p)ot of the story, the starting point of the history, its leading incidents, jour- neys, wars etc., the names of the principal chaiacters, as any average Mormon can give. IV. They mention only the Nephite portion of the book of Mormon, with one exception which we will soon give. V. They all declare that there was no religious matter in his manuscript. VI. Oliver Smith testifies that Spaulding told him just before going to Pittsburg, tluit he would prepare the manuscript for press while there, living a retired life for that purpose. VII J.N. Miller testifies, that in explain- ing his book to him, Spaulding told him that he landed the people at the Isthmus of Darien which he called Zarahemla. From all these facts we gather these conclusions. That Spaulding wrote, at first only the historic part of the Nephite portion of the Book of Mormon. This was his second manuscript which we will call manuscript No II. or Mormon manu- script No. I. It was this small manuscript that Mrs. Martha Spaulding his daughter saw in the trunk at W. H. Sabins her uncles in Onadago, Valley. N. Y. about the year 1828. From theaniount of writing Spaulding did during the seven years, and from Miller's description, it is evident that he prepared a naore complete manuscript adding the Zarahemla emigration. This we will call manuscript No. III. Mormon nviiuscript No. 2. In 1812 Spaulding mov- ed to Pittsburg, for the purpose of publish- ing his book, intending, as he told Oliver Smith to lead a retired life and rewrite it for the press. He showed it, his daughter testifies to Mr. Patterson, a publisher in Pittsburg who told him to rewrite it for the press and he would publish it. He did so and added the Jaredite emigration. Mrs. Spaulding, his wife, and Miss Spaulding his . daughter, testify, that he sent the manscript to Pattersoli's publishing house. 'Mr. Miller, Mr. McKee and Dr. Dodd of Amity, Pa., testify that Spaulding told them he had done so. In 1814 Spaulding then in very poor health went to Amity, Washington Co., Pa, His wife kept tavern and supported the family. Spaulding continued to write on his manus(!ript ana read it to all who would listen to him un- til his death Oct. 20th 1816. His wife and daughter put his manu- script and papers that they found, into a trunk and took it with them to the resi- dence of a brother of Mrs. Spaulding, W. PI. Sabin, Onandago, Valley, Onandsigo county, N. Y. In 1820 Mrs. Spauldin* went to Pomfret Conn. Sometime after- wards she married a Mr. Davidson of Hart- wicke, Otsego, county N. Y.and went there to live. She left her daughter IMiss Mar- tha Spaulding with her uncle Mr. Sal)in, and left the trunk contMining the manu- scripts in her care. M ss Spaulding testi- fies that she read one of me manuscript.s, a smallone, either Sj);iulding's first draft of the story, or his Mormon manuscript No. 1. — the one he wrote in 1809-10. She also testifies that while she was at her uncles, Joseph Smith worked as teamster for her uncle, and learned of the existence of the manuscript. Imposter Joe places his first visiou concerning tlie plates, Sept. 1823. As this is his way of dressing up his first knowledge of the njanuscript he worked for Sabin in September, 1828, and learned of the existence of the manuscript then. Sometime after her moving to HartwicUe, and after Sept. 1823, Mrs. Davidson sent for the trunk and it was sent from Onandago, Valley, to the house of Mr. Davidson in Hartwicke. In 1828 Miss Martha Spaubling married Dr. McKinstry and went to Mun- son Mass. to live. 188u INIrs. Davidson left Hartwicke and went to Munson to live with her daughter Mrs. McKinstry, She left the trunk containing the manuscript and papers — that is all she and her daughter found after Spaulding's death, in care of her brother-in-law Jerome Clark, in Hart- wicke. Plere it stayed until it was opened by Philastus Hurlbut an in New York, tliere was an account, not only of the aborigines of this continent, but it was stated also that the Chiistian religion had been preached on this continent, during the first cen- tury just as we were then preaching it on the Western Reserve." That clinches the matter. We will now introduce Darwin Atwater of Mantua, who testifies : " Sidney Rigdon preached for us when the Mormon defection came on ns, and notwithstaniiing his extra- ordinary wild freaks he was held in high repute by many. For a few months before his pretended conver- sion to Mormonism, it was noted that his wild extray- Hgant propensities had been more marked. That he knew bef storation of the spiritual Bifts of the apostolic age. He promised that alUiough we had not come up to the apostolic plan in full yet as we were improving God would soon give us « new and fuller revelation of his will. After the Book of Mormon had been read bv manv who heard Rigdon on that oc- casion thev were perfectiv satisfied that Rigdon knew all about liiat book when he preached that discourse. Rigdon's sermon ivas most thorou-My retuted by Bro. Campbell, which very much offended Rigdon. Scores of others who were present have mndesimilarstatements hundreds of times. Eri M. Dille testifies : "In the autumn of 1830 Sidney Rigdon held a meet- ing in the Baptist meeting-house on Euclid Creek. I was sici; and did not attend the meeting, but my father repeatedlv remarked while it was iu progress that he was afraid that Eigdon was about to leave the Disci- ples for he was continually telling of what marvelous things he liad seen in the heavens and of wonderful thi t's al)Out to happen and his talks indicated that he would leave the Disciples. "We will now prove that Rigdon came in contact with Smith in 1827-28-29, while Smith was getting out the Book of Mormon, Ponieroy Tucker, a native of Palmj^ra, New York, an intimate acquaintance of Impos- tor .Toe, who read much of the proofs of the Book of IMormon says : '' A mvsterious stranger now appears at Smith's and holds in'trcouise with the famed money digger For acoi'siderable time no intimation of the name or pur- pose of this stranger transpired to the public, not even to Smith's nearest neighbors. Itwas observed by some tliat his visits were frnquently repeated. The sequel of the intimacies of this stranger and the money dig- ger, will siunciently appear hereafter. There was g:eat consternation when the 118 pages of manuscript were stolen from Harris for it seems to have been im- possible, for some unaccountable reason, to retranslate the stolen portion. The re^ippearance of this myste- rious stranger ai Smith's at thisjuncture was again the subject of inquiry and conjecture by observers, from whom was withheld all explanations of his identity and purpose. When the Book of Mormon appean d Rigdon was an early convert. Up to this time he had played his part in the buck-ground and his occasional visits to Smiih's had been observed by the inhabitants as those of the mvsterious stranger. It had been his policy o remain in concealment until all things were in readiness for blowing tlie trumpet of the new gospel. He now came to the front as the first regular preacher in Palmyra." Mrs.' P^aton, wife of Horace Eaton D. D. for thirty-two years a resident of Palmyra says : 'Early in the summer of 1827 a mysterious stranger geeks admission to Joe Smith's cabin. The conferences of the two arc most private. This person whose coming immediately precede i a new departure in the faith was Sidney Rigdon a backslidden clergyman, then a Camp- bellite preacher in Mentor. Ohio. J. H McCauley, in his history of Franklin County, Pennsylvania, states:"^ "As a mutter too well known to need argument that Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism and Sidney Rigdon were acquaintances for a considerable time before Jtormonism was first heard of." Ahel Oiiase, a near neighbor of the Smilli's, testifles; " I saw Rigdon at Smith's at d'fferent times with con- siderable intervals between them." This disproves the statement that Rigdon never was at Smith's but once and that after the book appeared. He was there several times and some visits must have been before the book appeared. Lorenzo Saunders, another near neighbor, testifies : "I saw Rigdon at Smith's several times, and the first visit was niore than two years before the Book ap- peared." We have now brought Rigdon the second character in the origination of the Book of Mormon, in contact with the Imposter Joe Smith the third and last character in orig- inating the fraud. This acquaintance could have been brought about in two ways. Parly Pratt the school teacher in Lorain county Ohio, that Rigdon converted, had been a peddler in Central New Y'ork, and was ac- quainted with every noted character in it. When Rigdon let him into the secret of his scheme, he could have suggested to Rigdon that the seer and famous money seeker of Manchester, with his wonderful peep-stone, would be the very person to introduce his fraud to the world, as a revelation by mira- cle. Or it could have occurred in another way. The work of Smith and his gang in diirging over a large scope of country in solithern New Y^ork, and northern Penn- sylvania, had been extensively commented on by the press. Rigdon could have learned of tliis wonderful seeker after treasure, and his wonderful peep-stone through the press, and it occurred to him that here was the one to give his stolen manuscript to the world as a new revelation, by miracle, trans- lating pretended plates with his peep-stone. We are now ready for a sketch of Imposter Joe. Imposter Joe was born Dec. 23, 1805, in Sharon. Windsor county Vermont. The minister employed by the Home Missionary Society, to labor in Vermont 1S09-10-11-12-13 says, in his autobiography, that in 1812 a religious imposter created an excitement in the neighborhood of the Smith's . He taught that miraculous spiritual gifts could and should be enjoyed now, and claimed to ex- ercise them. He claimed to be a prophet, and then a Messiah, Christ in his second advent. Among the most active of his fol- lowers was Imposter Joe's father and mother, especially his mother. She proph- esied, at the time, that Joe, then seven years old, would be a prophet, and give to the world a new religion. Joe was raised with this idea before him. All the family were taught and believed it. Joe's father used to speak of Joe as the "genus," as he termed it, of the family. This accounts for Joe's peculiar gravity when but a child, and as a youth. He was to be a prophet, and he must not act as other children and boys did. In 1815 the Smiths moved to Palmyra N. Y. and in 1813 they squatted on an unoccupied piece of land, belonging to minors and lived there until they went to Ohio in 1830. Soon after coming to Pal- myra, in a revival excitement, Joe showed THE ERADEN AND 1^J<:LLBY DEBATE. 47 some interest in religious matters, and joined the class of probationers on proba- tion, and was soon left oft' ' on suspicion" as the Yankee expr'^ssed a siraJiar experi- ence of his own. This is all there is of he I0115 story that Imposter Joe wrote in 1843, twenty three years afterwards, of his wonderful vision, of liis groing to the Meth- odist preacher with queries, that would be in character, had the querist been a person of mature mind, well versed in the contro- versies of the age, but were utterly out of character in the mouth of an ignorant illiterate boy of fifteen, that was remark- able chiefly for his power of exaggeration and falsehood, and not for thought. The ideas that he said he had then, he never dreamed of until he learned them from Sidney Rigdon, years afterwards. In Sep. 1822, while digging a well for AVillard Chase, Imposter Joe's father found a singularly shaped stone of cloudy quartz, strangely resembling a child's foot. Impos- ter Joe, who was loafing around was very much interested in the stone and finally stole it from Mr. Chase's children. This stone is the Urim and Thummim of Mormonism. Rigdon had stolen the "Book of Mormon." Now Imposter Joe steals the TTrim and Thummim, with which he pretended to translate Ridgons stolen manuscript. In Sept. 1823 Imposter Joe worked for W. H. Sabin, in Onandago Valley N. Y. Here he learned of the existence of the Spaulding manuscript then at Mr. Sabius in the care of Mtirtha Spaulding, Solomon Spauld'ng's daughter. During the year 1823-24-25-26- 27, Imposter Joe was en^Aged in loafing around, strolliug over the country, pretend- ing to find water by witching fur it with a witch-hazle rod, and pretending to find lost property, buried treasurers, and minerals, by means of the stone he had stolen from Mr. ("base's children. He had, a part of the time, with him, a gang of idle superstitious men, who dug holes over a large scope of country, in several counties in southern New York, and nortliern Pennsyl>^ania. His knavish tricks, and frauds, had attracted to liim great notoriety. His proceedings with a gang of dupes were published and com- mented on in several of the papers of New York and Pennsylvania. By this means Rigdon who was still looking around for some means to publish his stolen manu- script lieard of the Seer of Manchester, and his wonderful peep-stone. It occurred to him that here was the means of getting his new revelation — his "Golden Bible" before the world. MR. KELLEY'S FIFTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentl,emp:n : — This evening I shall intro- duce first, some of the unmistakable corrob- orative evidences of the truth of the Book of Mormon as found contained in the re- ports and records of eminent travelers, explorers, scientists, historians and archee- olegists, of the world. The Spauldi77g Romance no doubt will still be the means of entertaining you upon the part of the negative, as it seems to be a much easier task for him to spin out that yarn, than to attempt to answer the argu- ments of the affirmative. I will promise you one thing however, that is, that the Spaulding tale shall not go unanswered, if the arguments of the affirmative are. I will show you before the close of the dis- cussion of this question, if the negative holds out the time agreed upon, that, that thing is so rotten and deceitful in concep- tion, so false and malicious in publication, so absurd and ridiculous in belief, that you shall in your hearts feel ashamed that j^ou ever enter ta.ined the thought, that there might be something in it. In the mean- tim3 carefully follow him; he is a good rc.ider and has the story well rehearsed. But to the facts : In 1827 and 1828, when the greater part of the Book of Mormon was translated and put in manuscript, and in the year, 1829, when it was put in the hands of the printer, very little was known as to the peoples, anc'ent races and civili- zation, of the American continent. Taken in the light of what is known of these an- cient peoples to-day with the later devel- opments, there was comparatively nothing known at that time. There were then spec- ulations and theories afloat as to the prob- abilities of an older people than the Indians in a few cases, brougiit out by the finding of a few relics of rude implements and or- naments together with some bones, &c., unaccounted for, and in a few instances speculation as to the cause of certain mounds of earth, whether such showed a higher state of civilization and was the re- mains of an older people than was then to be found among the savages of the forest. But there wr.s no one wiio for a moment thought that the country had been inhab- ited by a people whose state of civilization and enlightenment had equalled, if not surpassed, that of Europe itself. In the arts and the sciences ; iu agriculture and 4S THE BR ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. mininsr; in masonry and architecture; in painting and sculpture; in engineering- and meclianical skill , in pliysics and medicine and in mathematics and astronomy. Not only this, hut to that time no one specula- t^d'in all the domain of history, science or literature, that the continent had been suc- cessively inhabited by different peoples of a high state of civilization, who in turn had become extinct or dwindled into barbarism. It was also at that tune a speculative be- lief tliat the continent was settled from tlie north, the people gradually making to the south Avhen it tuas settled, and that proba- blv some of flie rude tribes which inliab- ited northeast Asia had at some period wandered across Behring's strait and grad- ually made their way southward upon the continent. It was a.^o speculated that perhaps at some time some of the daring and hardy seamen of maritime Europe had discovered the country and formed small settlements whicli were afterwards de- stroyed by the more powerful nations, for the relics discovered up to 1829, were only in certain places, which would only indi- cate the landing of a ship's crew at the point ; and again, that the Chinese had been cast upon its shores in some accidental numner and the Indians were descended from them ; and later by some, that the "Ten tribes of Israel," that were carried away captive from Samaria by Shalman- esar, Kang of Assyria^ may have made their way to the continent and after a time fallen into idolatry and a state of savagery. But in turn every one of these theories have given way as the light of discover^' and research has been thrown upon them, and now none find a support as demonstrable facts. At the time be- fore referred to however, there was pub- lished to the world by a young man in the State of New York, a record claiming to give a positive and correct account of the peoples who had formerly inhabited this continent. The places from whence they came ; the diflerent times of their coming ; the countries of first settlement ; the varied states of civilization ; their knowledge of the arts, sciences, agriculture, languages and literature. The manner of settlement, leading from south to north. The extent of settlement and the magnitude of the population. Giving a general account of their hundreds of cities and the glory and grandeur of them ; of the industries, pur- suits and character of the people, and their final overthrow. And singular as it may seem, every statement with reference to these matters is in harmony with the facts which have been developed by the later researches of science. And upon nearly every one of its marvelous revelations as to these people, the result of the work of the archaeologist has been to furnish cor- roborative evidence of their truthfulness. Notwithstanding the fairness and candor in which the statements of this record have been published to the world, from the day It met the public eye, self-constituted lead- ers, theologians, and paltry politicians have taken it upon themselves to inform the public mind of their views of its teachings, always careful, however, to, if possible, keep the record itself in the background lest it reveal tlieir perversions, until at this time, I think I may safely assert and keep 'vithin the bounds of truth, that there is not published in America, a single Ency- clopedia, Gazetteer, Geography, History; History of the Religious Denominations, Review or Expose which has spoken of the work and undertaken to give its state- ments, unless such pnWication was made by the friends of this re<;ord, that does not contain a false, garbled and perverted ac- count of what it contains and teaches. I ask in the broaJ world of books every^ where, for one. Why is this my audience? If the book is a bad one will it not be suffi- cient to prove it so by giving its statements without perversion? Has it come to this ! That men are compelled to resort to false- hood and trickery in order to overeome and put down an evil thing? In the apostles' time the injunction was, "to be not over- come of evil, and overcome evil with good." But perhaps this with the other good things of the New Testament was confined to the apostles, and "to those upon whom they laid their hands." The truth is my friends that there is method in this madness. Somebody is Just afraid that if the light is turned on they may be discovered to be sitting in darkness. It may be said as of olden time: "Every one that doetfi evil hateth the light, neither conieth to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." 'But he that doeth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God." It was stated by my opponent last night that Sidnej^ Rigdon said in 1823, that a book would be published someday, "and be a big thing, "And," says he, "it is a big thing." Well it seems to me he makes Rigdon out a prophet, and a true one too, rather early in the career. According to this Rigdon was a prophet while he belonged to the Baptists, and after he was with the Disci- pies ; and I make my guess right here that if he had not found out they were not in accordance with the Bible and left them he would be accounted such with them to this day ; yes, and the grandest and ablest of them all ; making no exception to Camp- bell, or Scott or Barton W. Stone. It is much like the case of Saul of Tarsus, wno while he was a Pharisee was hail fellow well met. But when he became converted to the full light of the gospel, and after- wards preached good to the people and told them how many bad things he did when a Pharisee, "They cried out. Away with such a fellow, he ought not to be permitted to live upon the earth." But to return to the " big thing." This work my friends will prove to be a big thing to this age yet ; not to the destruction ofChristianity, but to its full establishment. Why ! do you not know that I can go side by side with the scientist and the skep- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 49 tic into the National Museum of our country and corroborate that work by the collec- tions, from the rude arrow-head of the In- dian to the cities of the clitf-dwellers which are there set out in full representation, simply by turning!: to the wonderful history in this book? And not only in these but in the fossil and other collections from the time you strike the bones of the mastodon till you come to those of the common do- mestic animals. It is trulj'- an ensign set up bearing the most indisputable tidings that Jesus was the .Son of God and that God is, who created the heavens and the earth and revealed himself to man upon this as upon the other continent; and this fact alone ought to be a sufficient answer to the question, "Of what use is the book?" Since it is brought to light in an age of the world when whole multitudes disbelieve in the existence of God, and millions whose fear toward him are taught by the precepts of men, believe in him only as a God of the past, but not now having any especial thing to do with the human family, the use of it is as apparent as any known thing in the universe. Opening this record (the Book of Mormon), I hurriedly cite some of its pages upon the civilization of the con- tinent. First of the civilization which came out from Babel four thousand years ago. Page 520 of the record : "And the whole face of the land northward, [that is from the straits, from what we terra the Isthmus of Panama northward], was covered witii inhabitants; and they were exceeding industrious, and they did buv and sell and traffic one with another that they | might get gain. And they did work in all manner of oro, and they did make gold, and silver, and iron, and hi ass, and all manner of metals; and they did dig It out of the earth: wherefore they did cast up mighty heaps of earth to get ore, of gold and of silver, and of iron and of copper. And they did work all manner of fine work. And they did have silks, and fine twined linen: and they did work all manner of cloth that they miglit clothe themselves. And they did make all manner of tools to till the earth, both to plough and to sow, and to reap and to hoe. and also to thrash. And they did make m11 manner of tools with which they did work thcfr beasts. And they did make all mannrr of weapons of war. And they did work all manner of work of exceeding curious workmanship. And never could be a people more blest than they, and more pros- pered by the hand of the Lord." Then I refer you to page 517 for another description : '•And in the space of sixty and two years," (that is from the time that Emer one of their kings began to reign), "they had become exceeding strong, insomuch that they became exceeding rich, having all manner of fruit, and of grain, and of silks, and of fine linen, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious things, and also all manner of cattle, of oxen, and cows, and of sheep, and of swine, and of goats, and also many other kinds of animals which were useful for the food of man; and they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants, and cureloms, and cumoms , all of which were useful unto man. and more especially the elephants, and cureloms, and cumoms." Citing you now to page 43, I refer you to the situation of the country as it appeared and was found to exist when the second people came to the continent — Those who came out from the land of Jerusalem six hundred years before the birth of the Savior : "And it came to pass that we did find ur>on the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were ■beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow, and the ox, and the ass, and the horse and the goat, and the wild goat, and all manner of wild ani- mals which were for the use of men. And we did find all manner of ore. both of gold, and of silver, and of copper." On page 394 we have a further descrip'^ tion, and also of the habits of the people: "And behold, there was all manner of gold in both these lauds, and of silver, and of precious ore of every kind; and there were also curious workmen, who did work all kinds of ore, and did refine it; and thus they did become rich. They did raise grain in abundance, botli in the north and in the south. And they did flourish exceedingly both in the north and in the south. And thev did multiply and wax excepding strong in the laud. And thev did raise ni.iuy lio ks and herds, yea, many fatlings. Behold, their women did toil and spin, and did make all manner of cloth, of fine twined linen and cloth of every kind." Leaving the description of the country and the people as set out in the book, I next refer you to their society and' moral and religious instruction. The book shows that the people were taught by Jesus when he manifested himself to many upon this continent. Jesus said unto them page 45G : "And as I have prayed among you, even so shall ye prav in my church, among my people who do repent, and are baptized in my name. Behold I am the light; I have set an example for you." "Pray in your families unto the Father, always in my name, that your wives and children may be blessed. And behold, ye shall meet together oft, and ye shall not forbid tiny man from coming unto you when ye shall meet together, but suffer them that they may come unto youi and forbid them not; but ye shall pray for them, and shall not cast them out; and if it so be that they come unto you oft, ye shall pray for them unto the Father, in my name; therefore hold up your light that it may shine unto the world. Behold I am the light whichVe shall hold up— that which ye have seen me do. Behold ye see that 1 have prayed unto the Father, and ye all have witnessed: and ye see that I have commanded that none of you should go awav, but rather have commanded that ye shouM eom'e unto me, that ye may feel and see ; even so shall ye do unto the world ; and whosoever breaketh this , commandment, suffereth himself to be led into temp- tation." I might cite its pages to show you with regard to the hundreds of cities that it re- fers to, and magnificent ones too, located upon different parts of the continent, and especially upon the part of the continent known as Central America, and of which I shall refer hereafter ; and also that part of the continent known now as Peru and Bo- livia. But v/ill proceed at the present upon another line. Having given you a glance into the his- tory as published in the years 1829 and 1830, I will briefly enumerate some of the prom- inent things mentioned in the work which have since been verified, and then intro- duce the evidences from Archteologists. 1. The book states that three civilizations have existed, flourished and decayed, upon parts of the continent, and one on nearly every part. 2. One of these, first settled north of the Isthmus, or " narrow neck of land " as de- scribed by them, and inhabited first what is now called Central America, and after- wards the more northern parts of the con- tinent. 3. The second settled on the east coast of South America and first inhabited that country occupying the territory that is now known as Peru and Bolivia, and from thence spread over the whole continent. 50 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 4. The third landed on or near the coast of what is now called Yucatan in Central America, 5. The last two of these civilizations were cotemporaneous, and that the/ after a time united and were known as one people. (i. That the habitation of each beo^an about 590 years before the Christian Era, and the joint habitation ceased about four centuries after, except as to the estranged tribes. 7. That the occupancy of the first or origi- nal inhabitants ceased at least a thousand years before these. 8. That the last prophets understood the Egyptian language in part and wrote in a bri'ef and plionetic system of their language. 9. That they also wrote in other lan- guages as did also the earliest of the peo- ples. That the civilization so far as to the occupancj' of the country were in each in- stance from south to north originally. 10. That they builded many great and fine cities in tlie northern parts of South A merica ; also, on and near the narrow neck of land, and north in the country of Cen- tral America, wnere the cities were the finest, largest, and most numerous. They also builded farther north upon all parts of the continent. 11. That the ancestry of the last two peo- ples was Israelitish, but not the lost "Ten Tribes." 12. That there was early brought to the continent by the first people, the common domestic animals and many others. (Here I will also state that the fossil remains of many of tliese were not discovered or known to the world to have existed upon this con- tinent till a very late date, some as late as the year 1800.) 13. That many of their cities were walled with solid masonry and made immense fortresses and that they had engines of war, and the battle ax, the cimeter, the sword and many other kinds of instruments of war. 14. That classes had fortified cities in the mountains far up, so much so that it was impossible to dislodge them, and they re- tired and lived there, except to sally forth and prey upon the people in the land or the agricultural portions. 15. That the structure and manner of building of their temples was upon a grand and magnificent plan and they were decor- ated with much expense and many curious and unique ornaments. 16. The enlightened and civilized part of the people were peaceably inclined and not warlike, and highly cultivated in morals and religion. This is the history as given in the Book of Mormon. I will now turn to my evidences with re- gard to this, as ascertained and published by explorers since the publication of the Book of Mormon citing you tbe first vol- ume of Joiin L. Stephen's explorations in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan, page 131. Mr. Stephens here sets forth the first reference made to the distinguished C'.ty of Copau. as being made bj-^ Francisco de Fuentes in 1700; but he only mentions it casually, and in his description he repre- sented it as containing figures of men like- wise represented in Spanish habits, with hose, and ruffle around the neck, sword, cap and short cloak. But that history has never been published in the English lan- guage. And little known of it in any part of the world, and it contained no true or full description of this ancient city. "From this time," says the author, "there is no ac- count of these ruins until tlie visit of Col. Qalindo in 18of), before refeired to, who examined them under commission from the Central American Qovernmeni and whose communications on the subject were pub lished in the proceedings ol the Royal Geographica: Society of Paris, and in the Literary Gazette of Lon- don." This was in the year 1834. I might remark here that there is in the books reference made to, a Spanish gentle- man, and also an explorer, who examined some of these ruins, and left his manuscript in the hands of the government, and which was published in London in the year 1822 But the publication in English of that man- uscript was confined to such narrow limits that at the time Stephens wrote this work, (1841), he had never himself seen the work, and such a journal as the London Literary Gazette had never heard of it in 1834. Mr. Stephens continues with reference to the first published account by Col. Galindo in 1834, as follows: "Not being an artist his account is necessarily un- satisfactory and imperfect, but it is not exaggerated. Indeed it falls short ol the marvelous account given by Fuentes one hundred and thirty five years before, and makes no mention of the movable stone hammock, with the sitting figures which were our great inciuce- ment to visit the ruins. No plans or drawings have ever been published, nor anything that can eive e'^en an idea of that valley of romance :ind wonder, where as has been remarked, the genii who attended on King Solomon seem to have been the artists." I cite you next to the account on page 142 of the same work, where the author in de- scribing some of the sculptured art of this ancient people says : "Between the two principal personages is a remark- able cartouche, containing two hieroglyphics well pre- served, which reminded us strongly of the Egyptian method of giving the names of the kings or heroes in whose honor monuments were erected. The head- dresses are remarkable for their curious and compli- cated form; the figures have all breastplates, and one of the two principal characters holds in his hand an instrument, which may, perhaps, be considered a scep- ter ; each of the others holds an object which can only be a subject for speculation and conjecture. It may be a weapon of war, and if so, it is the only thing of the kin 1 found represented in Copan. In other countries, battle-scenes, warriors, and weapons of war are among the most prominent subjects of sculpture ; and from the entire absence of them here there is no reason to believe that the people were not warlike, but peaceable ane easily subdued." Do not forget the fact in the examination that the only account pretended to have been given prior to 1834 of this city, that of Fuentes in 1700, represented these" relics as adorned in Spanish dress and costume, and which would have really misled a reader of the true character of the ruins. On page 155 of the same work we have another concise description of their sculp- ture: " The monument, tinhappily, is fallen and broken. In sculpture it is the same with the beautiful half- buried monument before given, and I repeat it, in wc.rkmopshic equal to the best remains of Egyptian THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. gl art. The fallen part wns completely bound to the earth by vines and creepers, n,iid before it could be drawn it •was necissary to unlace them, and te r the fibres out of the crevices. The paint is very perfect, and has preserved the stone, which makes it more to be re- gretted that it is broken. The altar is buried with the top barely visible, which, by examination we made out to represent the back of a tortoise " Before Mr. Stephens visited Central America — and in a manner he was under the auspices of the government of the Uni- ted States — he had visited all of the distin- guished countries of the Eastern continent, and examiued their cities, and had written oi given partial accounts of tliem He was a man well calculated to look closely into these cities of Ancient America and give a reliable account and description of them. I next refer you to page 310 of his second volume. In his description of the temple of Palenque another ruin city of Central America he says : "It s'ands on an artificial elevation of an oblong form, forty feet high, three hundred and ten feet in front and rear, and two hundred and .;tucco hard as marble, a other imper- ishable materials used by the builders. ' Next in this investigation I introduce the work entitled, American antiquities, by Josiah Priest. The book that I have was THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 67 published in 1833, and the earliest publica- tion that I have ever seen of the work was made in the year ISol. If Mr. Braden ha? an earlier copy than that, as he claimed be- fore this audience, I will examine his copy and see what it contains, and if there is anything in it of these marvelous works, which the Book of Mormon describes, I will give due credit to it on to-morrow evening, liut I state here without fear of contradic- tion that it does not contain the remarkable things that the Book of Mormon sets out, neither as to the habitation, extent of civ- ilization, or anything else. Neither does the book I have before me, which was published in 1833. But there is an account of a few interesting things in this. Turn to page 170, an account and description of ar- ticles obtained from a mound in the state of Oliio. One, "The handle either of a small sword or large " knite. made of an elk's horn ; armind the end where " the blade had been inserted, was a ferule of silver, " which, though black, was not injured by time; though "the handle showed the hole where the blade had '■ been inserted, yet no iron was found, but an oxide " or rust remained, of similiarshapeand size " "About " twenty feet to the north of it was another skel- "etiiii, with which was found a large mirror, about " three feet in length, about one foot and a half in "width, and one inch and a half in thickness; this " was of isinglass, (m/ca 77icmhrnnaf?a). On this minor " was a plate of iron, which had become an oxide. '• but before it was disturbed by the spade, resembled " n yi\ate of cast iron. The mirror answered the pur- •' pose very well for which it was intended." "The " kiiif« or sword handle was sent toPeale's museum. "Philadelphia." "On the south side of this tumulus, " and not far from it, was a semicircular fosse, or ditch, " six feet deep ; which, when examined at the bottom, "was found to contain a great quantity of human " bones, which ii is believed, were the remains of " those who had been slain in some great and destruc- " tive battle ; because they belonged to persons invar- " iably who had attained their full size, while those "found in the mound adjoining, were of all sizes, " great and small, but laid in good order, while those " in the ditch were in the utmost confusion " "The mirror was a monstrous piece of isin glass, a lucid " mineral, larger than we recollect to have ever heard " of before, and used among the rich of the ancients, "for lights and mirrors. A mirror of any k nd in " which men may be enabled to contemplate their own "form, is evidence of a considerable degree ofad- " vancement in the arts, if not even luxury itself." Passing from this important discovery as published by Mr. Priest, I call your atten- tion to the work of Mr. Stephens, vol. 1, page 105. Speaking of the remains which he had examined in his explorations of these ppoples' cities he says : "Architect- ure, sculpture, and paintinff, all the arts which embellish life, had flourished in this overgrown forest ; orators, warriors, and statesmen, beauty, ambition, and glory, had lived and passed away, and none knew that such things had been or could tell of their past existence." Now I will call your attention to some authorities touching the nativity of this last people whoinhabited Ancient America, showing their common origin with the Asi- atic race known as Hebrews. First, the work of Mr. George Catlin, published by H. G. Bohn, York Street, Covent Garden, London, in the year 1857, and entitled : "North American' Indians, vol. 2, page 231: "The North American Indians and all the inhabitants of the South, Sea Islands, speaking some two or throe hiiudrn'. d' .xer- ent languages entirely dissimilar, may have all sprung from one people." "ISKAELITISH EJCTRACTION." He proceeds with the following thoughts: " I believe with many others that the North Ameri- "canlniiians are a mixed people.— That they have "Jewish blood in their veiua, though I would not " asset t as some have undertaken to prove, that they "are Jews, or that they aie the ' ten lost tribes' of " Israel. From the character and composition of their " heads, 1 am compelled to look upon them as an >imal- " gam race, bRt still savages, and from many of their "customs, which seem tome peculiarly Jewish, as well " as from the character of their heads, I am forced to " believe that some part of those ancient tribes who " have been dispersed by Christians in so many ways, " and in so many different eras, have found their way "to this country where they have entered among the " native stock." "I am led to believe this from the very many customs "which I have witnessed among them that appear to " be decidedly Jewish, and many of 'hem so peculiarly "so that it would seem almost impossible, or at all " events exceedingly improbable, that two peoples in a " state of nature should have hit upon them and prac- " ticed them exactly alike." " The first and most striking fact among the North " American Indians thai lefers us to the Jew.s is that " of their wor.shipinp in all parts, the 'Great Spirit.' " or Jehovah, as the Jews were ordered to do by divine " precept, instead of a plurality of gods as ancient " pagans and heathens did, and the idols of their own " formation." Ibid., page 232 Mr. Catlin then offers "Twelve Rea- sons" why he accepted the idea that the American Indians are descendants from the Israelites in some way, and, as his investi- gations contain many facts which enter into this discussion, I offer them for your consid- eration. 1. "The Jews had their Sanctum Sancto- rum, and so it may be said the Indians have, in their council, or medicine houses, which are always held as sacred places." 2. " As the Jews had, they have their High Priests and their Prophets." 3. " Among the Indians as among the an- cient Hebrews, the women are not allowed to worship with the men, and in all cases also, they eat separately." 4. "The Indians everywhere believe that they are certainly like those ancient people, persecuted, as every man's hand seems raised against them." 5. "In their marriages, the Indians, as did the ancient Jews, uniformly buy their wives by giving presents, and in many tribes, very closely resemble them in other forms and 'ceremonies of their marriages." 6. " In their preparation for war, and in peacemaking, they are strikingly similar." 7. " In their treatment of the sick, burial of ttie dead and mourning, they are also pimilar." 8. " In their bathing and ablutions, at all seasons of the year, as a part of their relig- ious observances— having seinirate places for men and women to perform these im- mersions—they resemble again." 9. " The custom among tlie women of ab- senting themselves during the lunar influ- <-. ces is exactly consonant to the Mosaic law."' 10. "After this season of separation, pu- rification in running water and anointing, precisely in accordance with the Jewish command, is required before she can enter the family lodge." »8 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 11. " Many of them have a feast closely resembling the annual feasts of the Jewish Passover, and amongst others, an occasion much like the Israeli tisli feast of the Tab- ernacle, which lasted eight days (when his- tory tells us they carried bundles of willow bows and fasted several daj'S and nights), making sacrifices of the first fruits and best of everything, closely resembling the sin off<^ring and peace offering of the Hebrews (See this history in vol. 1, pp. 159. 170 of ' Beligions ceremonies of the MandariBS.')" 12. "Amongst the list of theii customs, bowevftv, we meet a number which bad fbeir origin, it would seem, in the Jevjish ceremo- nial code, and which are so very peculiar in their forms that it would Pfem quite im- probable, and almost impossible that two different peoples should have hit upon them alike, without some knowledge of each other. 1 hese I consider go further than anything else as evidence, and carry in my mind, '^ooclusive proof that these people are tinctured with Jewisn blood." itid., vol. 2, pp 232 ro235. lu keeping with these facts and deduc- tions of Mr Catlin, are otner authorities equally positive Mr. Bradford, in his re- fi^earche? into the origin or the Red race, adopts the following conclusions with re- gard to the ancient occupants oi ini* conti- nent r 1 "That they were of the same origin, ' -^nches of the same race, and possessed of nilar customs and institutions." 2 'That they were populous and occu- p.od a great extent of territory.'' 3. "That they had arrived at a consider- able degree of civilization, were associated in large communities, and lived in exten- sive cities." 4. " That they possessed a use of many of the metals, such as lead, copper, gold, silver, and probably the art of working in them." 5. "That they sculptured in stone, and sometimes used that material in the con- struction of their edifices." 6. " That they had the knowledge of the arch, of receding steps ; and the art of pot- tery — producing urns and utensils formed Avith taste, and constructed upon the prin- ciples of chemical composition ; and of the art of brickmaking." 7. "That they worked the salt springs, and manufactured that substance." 8. " That they were an agricultural peo- ple, living under the influence of regular forms of government." 9. " That they possessed a decided system of religion, and a mythology connected with Astronomy, which with its sister science, Geometry, was in the hands of the priest- hood." 10. " That they were skilled in the art of fortification." 11. " That the epoch of their original set- tlement, in the United States is of great antiquity," and lastly, "That the only indications of their ori- gin to be gathered from the localityof their ""uined monuments, point toward Mexico." Thus far I have read copiously from these celebrated authors, and yet their pages are filled with unnoticed and untouched corrob- orative proofs of what I have stated to you of the greatness and grandeur of the an- cient civilizations of this continent I havM also gathered in running through thev/orks of various authors upon these things brief statement'; which will aid you in determin- ing to some extent the certainty of the ap- plications of my arguments to these ancient peoples :is reflected in their own history, as r claim, set out in tne Book of Mormon. They are as follows: 1.*' Tney had a staadard of measure- ment and had a means ot determining an- gles" Baldwin p 24. 2 "These turns were not bull' '>7 the Egyptians." Stephens, vol 2, p 441 'A. Yet of i figure m Palenque Mr Short in his work p 392, states ' The head <1resd has been prououubed Egyptian oy au WDO have seen it 4 "They had Priests.' Stepneas. vol. 2. p 447 b Divmers aad Priests.' iDid. vol. I, p 175 6 They were agriculturists and also engaged in cpmning and weaving '' Bald- win ^p 40 41 7 " Madu use >f astr^jnomical instru- ments ' .1 bid, 42 5 -'Used military machines in war Stephens, y p 177 178 ' Believed in i ue flood, and had traces of th3 t-jwei •■>i' Babel ' Short 2b3. 10. "Possessed a knowledge o<' the sci- ences, and metals and u.sed tools oi por- jihyry." Baldwin, pp V.) 4 prophet's character, to bliml the people and prejudice them against the mes- sage, I Ills was the devil's system )f war- ftiipi from Adam to Christ, When Jesus Chris*^^ came with a message from God, the aich-deceiver ai^peared upon the field of battl'> armed with the old weapons of slau- iici' and misrepresentation. The accuser always feigned great piety and love and reverence for all I'ast prophets and hea- venly messages. He did tiiis in order to more readily gull the piuu.'^. Amoiit; tbeii first moves, they came to rhrist and said : '• Master, we would see a sign from thee.'' But he replied, "i\i' evil a id adulterous; generatioM seeketh after a sign." Indicat- iiig that honest men beu«ve the truth from otb.er evidences, They were soon in counsel seeking to in- vent a scheme b3' which to destr.iv him, Matt. 12:14. They sent a committee to catch him in his words, and failing in this they assailed his character and tilled Jeru- selem with slanderous etories. When ho diH a good deed it was in their view, bv the inspiration of the devil, " Beelzebul)." They accused him of being born of fornica- tion, of low parentage and of coming from a low eitv. Cilled him a rlutton and a wine bibber,'' and accused him of being a Iriend of publicans and smners ; he was so defamed, black mail«d, slandered, and lied about by certain >f the people, that t)ie masses were blinded and marshaleil agidnst him, au day> f wdi rise again. Command theremr/ that the sepulcher be made sure until tiu> tnird day, lest his disciples come by niglit and steal him away, and say unto th.-i people H-1 i^ risen from the dead, so the last error shall be worscthau the fiisl." Matt 27 . 63. 64. All thi.^ took place while tne witnesses of Jesus were in the midst of the ]>eople, readv to vindicate hi^chatacter, but they had no ears tJ bear tnem. They lovei large sums of money to circulate this story, witb the promise, that if it came to the •' Governor s ears, w- will persuade him and secure you '" Matt. 28 12, 13, 14. But the misrepresentations, cu ning inventions, and ?landers against the cause of Christ, did not stop here; they followed the apostles wherever they went, and called them "blasphemers," "pestilent,'' "and movers of sedition among the Jews through- out the world." Acts 25 : 5. This was so widely circulated that it was said, "As concerning this sect, we k7iow (hat it is everyAvhere spoken against." Acts 28 : 22. La'ter, in the time of the grandson of St. Luke, this same unjust course was followed, and they were published and vilified every- where. 'But, savs my opponent, they were false stories. Who said they were false'? Their enemies or their friends? Why, th*^ descendants of the enemies to this very day maintain that the stories were true, and that the Christians were deceivers. And in the narative of such a learned his- torian as Gibbon, we have an account that in the time of these grandsons, before re- ferred to, the Emperor of Rome sent a com- mittee to interrogate them and spy out the 60 THE «RADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. probable damage they mig-ht likely be able to inflict upon his kin2dom, if let live, and the messenger returned the answer, that they were men who were settled on a little spot of eround, and had hard, rough nands from woiking as slaves for a livelihood, and not worth noticing' Before this, a like in- terview had been had witft the apostle Paul by one of the most noted scholars of the aiie, and he returned the answer to his Emperor that, "Paul entertained no opin- ions that were calculated to interest or bene- fit men ol attainments and culture." Great God! I could reproduce such stories which were affirmed to be true tor hundreds of years after Jesus' time against the early Christians, until I might arouse the indig- nation of this audience against them, were I disposed to stoop to gathering garbage for weapons. The books are so laden, that when Gibbon had gone through them, although before a devoted Christian, it nauseated his hope in Christ, and he turn- ed from worship, saying it seems to me that if the great things told of in the scriptures are true tuey aught to be had by the people now as then, and I " find by run- ning through the history of the world, that mankind have been more ready to accept the history as correct of wiiat oecured m their forefather's time, than to believe the evidences of their own senses." He there- fore came to the conclusion that no miracles were ever performed as claimed by Jesus and the apostles. The quotation is made from memory, but I am sure if not the exact wording, the true thought and idea is carefully preserved and presented. Volumes might be adduced to show that the work of scandalizing, has been the method pursued by the enemies of truth and progress in every age ; not only to meet prophets and religious truth, but scientific truth as well ; and the battle has been waged almost in every instance when a new message has been sent to man, or a new truth revealed. With such a history before the world, is it not strikingly strange that in the blaze of the light of the nineteenth century, that men professing as profound a reverence for Jesus and the apostles, as the Jews did for Moses and the prophets, will accept this method of warfare, and scour the universe to hunt stories and gossip, to meet the claims and argument of a people, rather than accept the gage of fair and honorable warfare, and investigate their clrvims in the light of the facts presented. Strange as it may appear, this is all the kind of warfare that has ever in the least succeeded against the message brought by the Book of Mormon, and believed by the Saints. It is much easier to call Joseph Smith an "infamous scoundrel," and a "fraud," than to prove his message false. It is easier to assert that Sidney Rigdon was "fanatical" and "lazy," than to prove the doctrine of the Latter Day Saints untrue. It is far more suitable to perverted tastes to drink a little satisfaction from a misuse of the words, Mormon, Mormonism, and "it came to pass," than to accept the word of God. Stories, slander, the traducing of charac- ter is the method adopted by my opponent. This is not new, but an old system of attack ; but the only one that ever did succeed even momentarily against the truth. Now, ladies and gentlemen, did you ever listen for so long a time, to such a dark and misty web as was spun by my opponent last night? The whole material of which was gathered from the ebony cloud of gossip, tattle and scandal. Somebody said that one Spaulding wrote a romance. Some one else said that they had heard it read. It would seem from one of the stories, that Spaulding made a business of going around and reading it to his neighbors. In process of time it was left with a printer. It was not seen afterwards. Sidney Rigdon was in the tanning business in "that city ; he was awful lazy, however ; and of course he must have stolen it. The printer Patter- son, said no such manuscript was ever there, but that is nothing, the story runs on just as glibly. Then there were some old trunks, over in Pennsylvania and York States, left in back-rooms and by-places, etc., etc. One Rigdon reads a book on one occasion and would not let his niece see it. This was in Ohio. Finally a stranger is seen in Palmyra, N. Y. No one knows indeed who, and there is no evidence in fact that there was one there. Finally the Book of Mormon was published in March, 1830, and in the fall of the same year Sidney Rigdon came in contact with the latter Day Saints, believed their message, and, there- fore he is the author of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith is the cat's paw by which it is to be foisted upon the world under the inspiration of a peep stone which is stolen from one of his neighbor's children. Won- derful indeed ! He did not tell us whether Joseph could really see anything extraor- dinary in the stone or not. If so, there might be something in the seeing business after all. If not what inducement was there for Joseph to steal one in order to perpetrate a fraud, when he had but to stoop down to pick one up and run no risks. It matters not however, which horn of the dilemma my opponent takes, his story will run on just the same. (Time expired). THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE, 61 MR. BRADEN'S SIXTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Modebatoks, Ladies and Gentlemen:— Mr. Kelley started out with the assertion that at the time the Book of Mormon appeared, no one had thought of certain facts in archaeology, ethnology, phi- lology and antiquities of America, that are assumed and stated as facts m that book. Therefore if scientific research has demon- strated, since the Book appeared, that these statements and assumptions are true, Che Book must be true. It is either a revelation of such truths, for it stated them before they were learned by any human means ot learn- ing, or an actual history of them He claims that it is an actual history given to Joe Smith, by revelation, and translated by him by inspiration. The Book of Mormon may be divided into two portions : I. Cer- tain assumptions and statement in archaeol- ogy, ethnology, philology and the antiqui- ties of America. II, "Certain historical statements based on these aspumptions, in archaeology, ethnology, philology and the antiquities of America, that assume to ac- account for the antiquities of America, and to explain its archaeology, ethnology and philology. My opponent's argument has been an attempt to establish the truth of the first pnrt. He has never touched the second. f we prove that all of the first part was well known long before the Book of Mormon appeared we refute his proof. I have before me a work entitled "At- lantis," by I. B. Donnelly. In it he traces certain legends such as the Deluge, and certain stories all over America, and shows that they are found in Europe, in Asia, and Africa, He traces resemblances between the arts and antiquities of the O'd World and the New. He traces resemblances in philology or languages, between peoples of America and peoples of Asia, Africa and Europe, He traces ethnological affinities between the tribes of America and the Celts, the Scandinavians, Basques, Iber- ians and other Europeans— the Egyptians, ancient Africans, and the Negroes, the Chinese, Hindoos, Persians and Malays. He traces resemblances in arts, civilization, sciences, literature, customs between the peoples of America and peoples of Europe, Asia and Africa. A larger portion of the authorities he quotes were written before the Book of Mormon appeared. It has been known from the conquest of Mexico by Cor- tez, that there were three civilizations in Mexico, three immigrations into that coun- try, the Toltecs, the Chicemas and the Az- tecs, and that the first were very highly civilized. It has been known since the con- quest of Peru by Pizarro that there had been three or more civilizations there, that of the Incas being the last. It had been known for more than one hundred years before the Book of Mormon appeared, that mounds, fortifications, ruins, antiquities and relics had been found all over North America. It had been decided that tliey had been the work of races that were in America before the Indians. If this is denied we will give the names of the authors. It had been a prevalent idea that the Indians were of Israelite origin. Affinities of some tribes to the Scandinavian, Welsh, Tartars, Hindoos. Chinese, Persians. Israelites and Egyptians, had been observed and published. My opponent makes much of the cities of Central America. Cabrina and others had published descriptions of these long before the Book of Mormon appeared. It was such books and not the Book of Mormon that caused Stephens Squiers and others to ex- plore Central America. Not only so but Cortez in his conquest of America conquered Central America, then a part of the Aztec Empire, and conquered these very cities, and his companions who wrote of his con- quests describe them. They were inhabited when Balboa, another Spanish adventurer, explored the Isthmus and countries around it. So declare Herrer" and other Spanish writers quoted by Wilson Prescott and other American writers. Baron Humboldt visited Central America and described these ruins and his book was published in England and America in 1806. Spaulding was familiar with it. The Book ot Mormon agrees literally with Humboldt. Where he is right, it is right. Where late research proves that he is in error, it is in error. That is all we need to say in regard to his long lingo in regard to antiquities. We have proved that Solomon Spaulding was an enthusiast in American antiquities, believed that the Indians were descendants of the Israelites, As an earnest advocate of such theories, and as an enthusiast in American antiquities, he was well versed in the literature of the subject. Seventeen witnesses of the highest character testify that he wrote his "Manuscript Found" assuming all these facts and theories, pre- tending to give a history of the people who were the authors of these ruins and anti- quities several years before the Book of Mormon appeared. That Rigdon stole his manuscript and interpolated the religious matter. I challenge my opponent to name one theory or assumption in the Book of Mormon that research has sustained, that I cannot prove to have been well known before the Book appeared. " This overturns his entire argument. Let him prove that the Jaredites, Nephites and Zarahemlites came to America and had such a history as recorded in the Book of Mormon, All that he quotes from the Book of Mormon was well known before it appeared. If he will prove the truth of its historic statements he will sustain his book. Proving that certain asssumptions are true, no more prove that his book is true, than proving «2 THE BT^ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. that, similar aesumptions in Scott's nove;s are true, proves that those novels are leaJ. 1 will agree to take Scott's novels and prove that a far greater portion of Waverly or Ivanhoe is true in archaeology, antiqui- ties, etc., than my opponent can prove to be true in the Boole of Mormon. Not only so, but I will prove that its characters were real persons in a majority of instances, \ts places real, its battles real, and yet they are novels. He can not prove that a per- son, a place, or a battle of the Book of Mormon is real. T can offer ten fold as much proof of the very kind he offers, to prove the truth of the Book of Mormon, for Ivanhoe, and of the same kind. His line of proof IS absurd to idiocy. He takes the romance written by Spaulding, in which ne assumed certain' things well known, as the basis, and claims it is all true, because these facts so assumed as the basis are true. 1 will prove Robinson Crusoe to be true ■and of divme origin in the same way. We will now resume our history of the Book of Mormon. We have come down to the time of publication. In the fall of 1829 Martin Harris, one of the gang, mortgaged his farm, and E. B. •Grandin of Palmyra, began the publication of the Book. The manuscript was carried by several of the gang, a small portion each morning, and removed at night, for weeks. At last they were less careful. Mr. Gilbert says that the Imposter was very particular to insist that the manuscript be set up ex- actly as written. The translation had been done by inspiration, and it would be blas- phemy" to alter one iota. But as there was no punctuation, but little use of capitals, and as it abounded in mispelled words, and the most outrageous grammatical blunders, the printer absolutely refused to allow such an atrocious aflf'air to go forth with his im- print on it. The printer was allowed to correct some blunders in the manuscript. When one reads the book, and sees the thousands of blunders in it, after all the printer's care, the query arises " What must the manuscript have been?" What a pity the printer interfered with inspiration, in the way he did. If the manuscript had been printed exactly as it came from the inspired lips of Joe, and as it was penned by the inspired Oliver, who had special di- vine commission and unction to do his work, no doubt the world would have been con- verted long ago by such sublime evidences of inspiration. That printer robbed the world of " the more part " of the inspiration of the Book of Mormon. In the meantime Rigdon was preaching and working constantly to prepare the way for his scheme. He preached extravagant ideas of the millenium, such as are in the Book of Mormon — community of goods — restoration of miraculous gifts — new revela- tions and that something wonderful was going to happen. In private he approached persons as he did D. At water. A portion of the Kirtiand Church of Disciples that was organized by him and made up Inrgely of his converts formed a common stock com- n}UE;ty and practiced feet-washing, another Mormon peculiarity at the beginning. They did this under the direction of Rigdon and Titus Billings, who became a Mormon with Rigdon. In June, 1830, Rigdon attended the Annual Meeting of the Mahoning Associa- tion in Austintown. In an address he pre- sented his hobbies in regard to return to community of goods, and restoration of spiritual gifts, a restoration of everything in the apostolic churches. He was signally defeated, in discussion by Campbell. He left the Association soured and disap- pointed, declaring that he ''had done as much for the Restoration as Campbell and Scott, yet they got all the honors." Tradition tells us that, by advice of Camp- bell, Rigdon was put up to preach on Lord's Day, as a plaster to his wounded egotism. He* discoursed on "Envy," and took the conduct of Haman towards Mordecai as an illustration of tlie meanness of envy. All understood what he meant, Campbell and Scott were the Hamans, who, althoiigli mounted on the King's horse of public honor, were envious of "Rigdon, the Morde- cai sitting in the gate. When he came to a description of Haman's triumphal proces- sion on the King's horse, the horse ran away with Sidney. He mounted that horse andeavorted miraculously for someminutes. He turned him into a veritable Pegasus, and, like Bellerophon, he cleft the skies, and soared among the stars. As he was sky- scraping in his description of King Ahasue- rus' horse, Walter Scott took aim at him, and brought him down from among the stars bv roaring out in his broad Scotch, "Glory to King Ahasuerus' horse!" Rig- don had gone up like a rocket.; Scott brought him down like a stick. Rigdon returned home to Mentor. He sent for Pratt who came through Mentor in August, and went from Rigdon straight to Manchester, in thb wilds of New York, thirtv miles from any public thoroughfare, and Imposter Joe's mother says he arrived Saturday night, all worn out aft< r an ex- cessive day's journey, and was converted that niglit'and made a preacher of the New Dispensation the next day, doubtless, "ac- cording to previous appointment," as the preachers say. Pratt visited his brother Orson and enlisted him in tne scheme. Then he and Cowdry and Whitmer returned to Mentor. After weakly pretending to be ignorant of the scheme, and to oppose it, Rigdon is miraculously converted, by a vis- ion, embraces INIormonism, goes to New York, he and Imposter Joe have a revela- tion, that Joe is the Moses, Sidney the Aaron of the movement, and that Kirtiand is to be possessed by the saints forever, ;ind Smitli and his adherents, made up chiefly of confederates in his money-digging frauds and schemes, and confederates in the new fraud, the Book of Mormon, move to Ohio Rigdon takes liisnew brethren around to the congregations for which he had preac-lied. and which he had industriously prepnred for his move, and the Rigdonites in these churches embrace Mormonism and the fr:vud THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEIiATE. 63 was fully inaugurated in Kirtland, Ohio, in 1831. We have thus traced the origin of the Book of Mormon. AVe have proved that Bolomon Spaulding was the author of the historic portion. Sidney Rigdoii tlieautlior of the religious portion, and that Impostor Joe gave it to the world by means of his stolen peep-stone. It was begotten by Spaulding in sin, conceived by Iligdon iu iniquity, and brought forth by Impostor Joe in dej)ravity and pollution. It has spoken lies from its birth, and has lived on fraud and fanaticism, an<1 has resulted in delusion and ruin to thousands. It has gone to seed in Utah, in pollution that would disgust Priapus himself, and horrify a satyr. Priapus Young and He-goat Kimball are the ripened fruit of the infamy. \Ve will now take up the detection of the fraud. In an article published in the Bos- ton Journal, May 13, 1829, Mrs. Matilda Davidson, formerly Solomon Spaulding's wife and widow, testifies : "In 1834, a Mormon preacher, in a meeting in Con- • neaut, Ohio, read copious extracts from the Book of Mormon. The historical part was immediately refog- nized, by all the older inhabitants, as the identical work ofMr. Spaulding, in which they had been so deeply iiiierested years bef.ire. John Spanldiiig was prtselit, and recognized perfectly the work of his brotlier. He was annoy' d and afflicted, ihat it should have perverted to so' wicked a purpose. His grief found vent in a flood of tears, and he arose on the spot and expressed to the meeting his sorrow and re- gret that the writings of his deceased brother, should be used for a purpose so vile and shocking. The ex- citement in Conneant, became so great that the inhabi- tants held a meeting, and deputised Dr. Philastus Hurlbut, one of their number, to repair to tbis place and obtain from me the originil manuscript of Mr, Spaulding, for the purt>ose of comparins.' it with the Mormon Bible, to satisfy their own minds, and lo prevent the friends from embracing an error so delu- sive." We wish to call the reader's attention to this statement, that narrates an occurrence that attracted groat attention at the time. Il was pubiislied in the papers of the West- ern Reserve, and all over tlie United States. The citizens of Conneaut, in 1834, assembled to hear for the first time a Mormon preach- er. They hear the first words of the Book of Mormon that any of them ever heard. Scores of them, and among the number Solomon Spaulding's brother, his sister-in- law, his business partner, one who had boarded in his faniil.y many months, one who had boarded him many months, and other acquaintances, without any expecta- tion or previous concert of action on their part recognized in the Book of Mormon, the historical roman<^e of Solomon Spauld- ing with which they were so familiar from 21 to 25 years before. Now let us hear some of their testimony. John Spaulding testifies: "I have read the Book of Mormon, and to my great surprise I find nearly the same his- torical matter, names, etc., as were in my brother's writings. I well remember that he wrote in the old style, and commenced, nearly every sentence: 'And it came to pass '* or ' Now it came to pass ' the same as in the Book of Mormon. To the best of my recollection the Book of Mormon is the same as what my brotlier, Solomon Spauld- ing wrote except the religious matter." Mar- tha Spjiulding, wife of .John, and sister-in- law of Solomon, testifies: " I have read the Book of Mormon, wiiich brougiit fresh to my recollection the writings of Solomon Spaulding. I have no manner of doubt that the iiistorical part of the book of Mor- mon is the same that I have read and heard read more than 20 years ago. The old obso- lete style and the expressions: 'And now it came to pass,' etc., are the same." Henry Tiake, Solomon Spaulding's business part- ner, testifies: "WIu'U my wife read to me from the Book of Mormon, she had read but a few minutes before 1 was aston- ished to find the same passages in it that Solomon Pl)aul(liiig had read to me more than 20 years before froin his MMUusciipt Foun I. I have examined the l^)<>k of Mormon and have no hesitation in saying that the historical part of it is principally if not wlioUy taken from the Manuscript Found. I well r'Collect telling Mr. Spaulding that so frequent use of th' words: 'And it came to pass.' 'Now it came to pass,' rendered the book ridiculou*. One time when he was reading to me the tragic account of Laban I p inted out to him what I considered an inconsistency which he promised to corr< ci, but on examining the Book of Mormon, to my surprise I find it stands just as he road it to me. He left here in 1813, for Pitts- burg, to get his book published, but I heard no more of his writings till I saw them in the Bonk of Mormon. Mrs. David-on remarked to Mrs. George ('lark, when she handed lier the manuscript of Spaulding's Manu- script Found to read: The Mormon Bible is almost a literal copy of that manuscript." J. N. Miller, who boarded months in Spaulding's family, testifies : "I have ex- amined the Book of Mormon, and I find in it the writings of Solomon Spaulding from beginning to end, but mixed up with Scrip- ture and other religious matter, wliiih I did not meet in the " Manuscript Found." Many passages in the Mormon book are verbatim from Spaulding, others in part. The names Nephi, Lehi, Mormon, and in fact all the princiijal names are brought fresh to my recollection by the "Golden Bible." Aaron Wright testifies: " Spauld- ing traced the journey of the first settlers of America from .Teius.-i'em to America, as it is given in the Book of INIormon, except the religious matter. The historical part of tlie Book of Mormon, I know to be the same as I read and heard read from the writ- ings of Solomon Spaulding, more than twenty years ago, the names especially are the same without alteration. In conclu- sion I will say that the names and most of the historical part of the Book of Mormon, were as familiar to me, before I read it as most modern history." Oliver Smith tes- tifies: "When I heard the historical part of the Book of Mormon, I at once said it was the writing of Solomon Spaulding. Soon after I obtained and read the book, on read- ing it found much of it the same as Spauld- ing had written twenty years before." Na- than Howard testifies: "I have read the ,]Book of Mormon and believe it to be the 'same as Spaulding wrote, except the relig- ious part." Artemus Cunningham testi- fies: "I have examined the Mormon Bible and am fully of the opinion that Solomon Spaulding had written its outlines before leaving Conneaut." Joseph INIiller of Am- ity, Pa., who took care of Spaulding in his last sickness, and familiar with his manu- 64 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. script says: "The longer I live the more firmly I am convinced that Spaulding's manu'-cript was appropriated and largely used in getting up the Book of Mormon. I believe that, leaving out of the book, the portions easily recognized as the work ot Joe Smith and his accomplices, Solomon Spaulding may be truly said to have been its author. I have no doubt of it." Rud- dick McGee, who boarded with the Spauld- ings and became familiar with Spaulding's manuscript, says that "the Book of Mor- mon was founded on and largely copied from the romance of Solomon Spaulding." Dr. Dodd who attended Spaulding in his last illness, declared years before Howe's book appeared, that "Spaulding's manu- script had been transferred into the Book of Mormon, and that Sydney Rigdon had done it. This declaration was based on his knowledge of the manuscript, and what Spaulding ha:t told him about Rigdon's stealing his manuscript. Rev. Abner Jackson declares: "The Book of Mormon follows Spaulding's Manuscript too closely to be a stranger to it. In both many pas- sages appear, having the same names, found nowhere else. Such as Moroni, Mormon, Nephite, Laman, Lamanite, Nephi, etc. In the second romance called the Book of Mormon, we are told the same story of the same people traveling from the same place in the same way, having the same difficul- ties and destination with the same wars, same battles and same leaders and same results, such as the Mormon account of the battle of Comorah in which all the right- eous are slain. How much this resembles the closing scene in "Manuscript Found." Mr. Jackson, who was in the meeting at Con- neaut, when the Mormon preacher read the Book of Mormon, says that Squire Wright shouted out, "Old-coaie-to-pass has come to life again." Mrs. McKinstry, Spaulding's daughter, declares that the Book of Mor- mon is largely her father's Manuscript Found. His wife declares that it is a wicked remodeling of her husband's work. We might add scores of names who heard the Spaulding manuscript and recognized it in the Book of Mormon. The testimony of these seventeen witnesses, who were famil- iar with Spaulding's Manuscript Found" prove that the historical portion of the Book of Mormon what we charge Rigdon with stealing, is an almost verbatim repro- duction of that "Manuscript Found." If my opponent were on trial for his life, one quarter of his testimony would hang him higher than Haman. He must do one of three things: I. Prove that these witnesses never so testified. II. Impeach them. III. Or disprove their evidence by rebutting testimony. Or lose his case. There has been some controversy over Spaulding's* motives and object in writing his Manu- script Found. His wife and daughter stren- uously insist that he wrote it merely to while away his time in declining heiilth. That he had no intention of publishing it. That he refused to have it published, when Mr. Patterson ofFeied to publish it. It is probable that he so told his wife. He may have had two reasons for it. He had failed in business continually. His wife sup- ported the family and he might have feared that she would oppose the idea of publica- tion as one of his visionary projects. For the preservation of peace and that he might pursue his purpose unopposed, he doubt- less told her what she sa^'s he did. Again she seems to have been a woman of decided moral convictions, and he may have feared that she would regard such a scheme as very questionable if not a downright fraud. But there can be no doubt about his inten- tions to publish it. His brother says he wrot-e it for that very purpose, hoping to make money by it. So say Lake, Sniith, both the Millers, McKee, John Spaulding, his wife, and Cunningham. Joseph Miller and McKee say he prepared a manuscript for publication and took it to the publish- ing house for that purpose. There can be no doubt that he wrote it for the sole purpose of publishing it and that he expected to make money by publishing it. There is nothing wrong al out this. But that his motives, he knew, were some of them wrong, is evident from the tact that he kept them from his wife and daughter, and also lied to them in regard to Jiis object in writing the manuscript. Some of his ex- pressions show that his motives were very questionable. He intended to assert that his book was copied from a manuscript dug out of the earth, or found in a cave. He expected to deceive the world except the learned few, and cause them to believe this falsehood that he intended to palm off on them ; and also to induce all, but the learned few, to believe his book to be veritable his- tory as much so as any history. So he de- clared to Miller of Conneaut, Wright, Cun- ningham and others. No wonder he con- cealed his purpose from his wife and daughter. Howe says on page 289, of his history, that he has a letter in his possession that proves that Spaulding was sceptical in his last days. If so we can understand his caricaturing the Bible in the way he did.iu his romance. The Book of Mormon was in its inception a deliberate fraud, conceived by a backsliden preacher, who intended to foist onto the world, the fraud by falsehood, stolen by another renegade preacher, who increased the blasphemy of the fraud by plagiarising the Bible, so as to deceive the world by it as a revelation. Joe Smith, a money hunting, fortune telling impostor and infidel, gave it to the world by means of his peep-stone which he stole from Chase's children. We repeat that the whole atfair was begotten by Spaulding in sin, conceived by Rigdon in iniquity and brought forth by Impostor Joe in depravity and corruption, and it has thrived on ignorance, fauaticism and pol- lution, and has culminated in Utah, iu infamy that would make devils blush. Mrs. Davidson declares that Hurlbut wrote to her from Hartwicke that he found the Manuscript and would return it to her when through with it. He came to Howe THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 65 with a lie and told him he only found a portion of an entirely different manu- script. He sold the manuscript to Rij/eet morsel under the tongue the Spauldins: tale, "Old come to pass," and all. What! says one, have not these new authors who have been publishing for tlie past fifty years unfolded soinething new as to the civilization tliat is not to be g'ained by reading tlie Book of Moriiion? Nor anything either, that has been estab- lished as a truth that is conflicting with, or contrary to, that book ? I answer they have not ; and the book is full and explicit upon the civilizations. Will my opponent please show the new light or the fact of the difference or contradiction to the audic^ri(!e if tliey have? One demonstrable fact thus brought, which will show a statement in the book false, will have more weight with any honest investigator, than ten thous- and Spaulding stories, all laid, brooded, hatched, raised and palmed upon tlie world years after the publication of the Book of Mormon . This is his position fairly stated : The Book of Mormon was in press in 1829, and sent out as a publication in 1830. — A few persons under the guidance and leadership of one Philaster Hulburt, who, at the time had been cut otf from the church of the Latter Day Paints for bad conduct, and avIio had ijublicl.y confessed his crime and had been taken back upon his profession of re- pentance as I will show you by tlie church publications at the time, and was again cut off; and a few others at Conneaut, Ohio, of a like stamp, got together in 1833, with the Book of Mormon in their hands and vengeance and hatred in their hearts, and got up some affidavits as to a story which it was surmised had been written before by Solomon Spaulding. a broken down clergyman of that place. A fterwards they found a confederate in Mr. Howe, of Painsville, Ohio, who was terribly mad and jealous because his wife and sister had joined tlie church here in Kirtland. and so between Hulburt and Howe and these testifiers, they publislied their tale between the years 1834 and 1841, years after the publication of the Book of Mormon and with that book in their hands from which to make their garbled statemenis. There- fore, he concludes the thieving Joseph Smith who was always an honest and honorable man, stole the Book of Mormon from the Spaulding story and made of the theft a Bible. This is logic for you with a rush! Who again will doubt that my op- ponent is a profound logician? But I have yet to give you the rich part of his tale. A few of the best citizens of Ohio, at Con- neaut, got together one night and appointed one of their beloved number, to wit, the said Dr. Hullturt. who had before been ostracised from the Latter Day Saints for an open insult to a youns: lady in Kirtland, to go to New York, Pennsylvania, and other places, to get statements from other first citizens of "^the country (like to them- selves), and get up a story to beat the Book of Mormon. Did you ever before hear of so many of the first citizens of the country living near by ^'ou, who were never known outside of their neighborhood, ex- cept by the work of evil they did by signing false statements? His idea of best citizen is from the standpoint of whether they are on "our side ; " not from a single truth he knows. But let me right here call your attention to the fact that he has not even presented the testimony of a single one of these best citizens he refers to in full. Not a single statement. Not even the poor show of reading to you a Avritten statement in full of a single one of them. Not even the offer to read 3'ou a single aflidavit of one of these "best citizens."' I am here to examine the evidence in this discussion, and if he has any statements, or affidavits, I want him to read them here, and give the people a chance to judge and me a cliance to examine them. I deny, sir, that you can produce affidavits or respectable statements proving the statements and assertions you read last night ; and demand the evidence. Not a few lines from the witnesses but the testimony. I call attention to the fact that this opponent is the first I ever met who would stand before an audience and tell and rehearse what he says, somelxxly else said, old mother Grundy said about what somebody else said and' did, and then ask his audience to take it for evidence. What would you think of an attorney, who after rehearsing his case to the jury or judge, without ever offering to introduce a wit- ness or read a record except in extracts, would stand up and claim he had put his evidence in, and ask for a verdict in his fa- vor? Can you not see, ladies and gentlemen, he has not proven a single thing? What evidence has, he presented to you upon any matter? Mention, any of you who can. Oh, savs one, he gave us Mr. Rudolph's testimonv. Did he? I have not seen it or heard it read. I heard what Braden said Rudolph said Sidney Kigdon did : but what do you know about it? Mr. Rudolph is near here, if he knows anything, put him on this stand : you claim him as one of your own men, a Disciple Preacher. I want to examine him if his name is to be used, since he is near by and can be had. The only request I wil! have in the matter is that the evidence shall be taken on extra time ; and that we do not take up the hour named for discussion. I deny here that Mr. Rudolph knows a single fact which can in the remotest degree connect Sidney Rig- don with Joseph Smith or the liook of Mormon, prior to the time when Sidney Riffdon was converted to the faith of the Saints in the last part of the year 1830. And I make this statement fearlessly, after having had a conversation with Mr. Ru- dolph on the subject of the l)Ook myself last summer. Anotlier thing: I state fearlessly before you that Mr. Howe of Painsville, who first publisheii the Spaulding story and the affi- davits which were gotten up to blacken the character of Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, et al., and whose book is the key note from which all subsequent works have taken 70 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. their music, does not know one thing, not a single fact that can be made in the least to conr-ect that Spaulding storywith the Book of Mormon or show that Joseph Smith's character was bad ; or that a single affida- vit in his book is true. Will you put him on the stand here for examination ? I will bear the expense of bringing him here as he is a little farther away than Mr. Rudolph, I do not make these assertions for bluff, or effect; but for the reason that the world has tiiought Mr. Howe knew something about the matter, or he would not have published the book which forms the basis of all other lying works; and if he does know anything riow is the time to find i* out. One other thing. It has been asserted here that he has a chain of evidence. A chain of evi- dence! What is it to make a chain of evidence? Can you use broken or pieces of links? Has Mr"! Braden debated all his life and has not yet found out that to form a circumstance or truth, that the evidence of such circumstance or truth must be com- plete within itself and independent of anoth- er fact or circumstance which he claims to form another link? Each must be com- plete of itself to be evidence and constitute a chain. For illustration : It is said here by him that at one time a niece of Sidney Rigdon once saw him go to an old trunk, take out a manuscript, go to the fire place an(i read it, and that he would not let her se3 it. Suppose this is all true as the story goes; what of it? Is it jjertinent to the issue until they in some manner connect that same manuscript with the one claimed by Spaulding? Why! Rigdon might have had a hundred manuscripts and read them, and taken them from an old trunk, and put them back without first having given them to his niece to read, and each and every one of them altogether different from the Spaulding manuscript ; and if any such unconnected statement was offered as evi- dence in any court to sustain the most trivial case, it would instantlj' be ruled as improper. Before this can be made evidence the parties must also show by some other fact, or thing, thatthemanuscript which he is said to have read and would not let his niece see was the. Spaulding Romance, and then they may use it all as a link to show that Rigdon did have an opportunity of copying the Spaulding manuscript. Don't you know that if Sidney Rigdon did have the Spai:lding manuscript it is just possible he had another besides ; mother Grundy's manuscript, a manuscript sermon, or manuscript article for publication, and that at the time his niece saw him he was reading mother Grundy or one of the other manuscripts instead of iSpaulding? What then would be the true position of my opponent In this argument? Mr Braden offering to show that Rigdon had the Spaulding manuscript by citing the time he read mother Grundy's manuscript, and offering the people a false thing as evidence and asking them to accept it as true instead of accepting the facts. Take another one of his proofs (?). Mr. Rudolph says, so Braden says, that one time ^during the year 1827, Sidney Rigdon, who was their pastor at Mentor," Ohio, went off some place and was away two or three weeks and they did not know where he went to. It might have been over to Hiram, down to Mantua, to Cleveland or Cincinnati ; but no difference to him ; he will have it at this very time he was in the wilds of Pennsylvania or New York, concocting the Book of Mormon Avith Joseph Smith. Where is his witnesses showing where Rigdon was at this time, or that he was in New York? There is none, nor never has been. Now according to their idea Smith has no rights that even a rogue is bound to respect ; and so if they can show that their pastor Rigdon was out on a spree, Smith will have to bear the blame. My friends, don't you know that it would sink any man, prophet, priest, or king, to under- take to make of him a scapegoat to carry away the sins of many pastors of the Campbellite Church. But I have only been arguing the matter in this suppositious form— sifting it; — when I come to ask for the evidence, I find out the whole thing is trumped up to defeat Sidney Rigdon because he left their church. I shall now present to you a supposable case upon facts proven, and ask you to compare the two methods of argument. Upon the part of the affirmative I have shown that John the Revelator, in the 14th chapter and 6th verse of his book, says: "And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and peo- ple, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him ; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." I use this to sup- port the truth of ray claim. But how? 1. I show by it, the time that is referred to, " The hour of God's judgment." 2. That it was to be after John's time, or the year A. D. 96, bv turning to the preceding chapters. Rev. 1:19, 4:1, and 22:6. 3. That the hour of the judgment is the same as defined in Matt. 13 by Jesus. And it is "just afore the harvest," the same time referred to in Isaiah 18, when the ensign is lifted up ; and that the ensign of God is the gospel of Christ; this is what he calls men to look to, saying, "Repent ye and believe the gos- pel ;" and since it is the gospel and lifted up at the saine time that John saw the angel bringing it, I must conclude they are the same in teaching at least, for there is but one gospel. 4. Then, when I notice that the same time and event is spoken of in both, as in Isaiah 29, and Ezekiel 37, where the message and event is represented as a book that should be brought to light which should contain "doctrine," and (connected with its publication), understanding at- tained, and the power of God brought to light, as was the gospel when it was in the world in its fullness before, as Paul says: — "Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but in power and in the Holy Ghost, THE BE A DEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 71 and in much assurance;" (1 Thess 1:5), and that this is the same work specifically set forth as in the other texts, lime, place and conditions each being complete of them- selves and agreeing in all their phases, and that there is no reasonable interpretation or application of the prophecies agreeing with any other time, place, thing or event, I con- clude that they all refer to the same thing, and that that thing is the gospel which is to be again committed to the earth at the time, "just afore the harvest;" in "the hour of His judgment," and hence committed again sometime after the apostles' time, and which may be in our own time, and must be in this or hereafter, for the harvest spo- ken of has not yet come. Having made such a connected chain as this, every link beinir in itself complete, since they all refer toa like,or the same thing, and thatthinghas a complete likeness in the coming forth and teaching of the Book of Mormon, and no other book known to men will answer to the fulfillment as this, and the time in the his- tory of the world as predicted has arrived for the fulfillment, I say it is logical to con- clude, and the evidence irresistible as show- ing that this is the prophetic work, not- withstanding Satan's old cry of deceiver. How about his Spaulding story as com- pared with this logical deduction from ad- mitted facts? In the argument of a propo- sition or the trial of an issue, there is what is termed an atfirmafcive and a negative; a plaintiff and a defendant. One who affirms the truth of a matter and who must bring evidence to sustain this, and one who de- nies the suffiL^iency or application of the evidence, or else, admitting the statements of the one Mho affirms to be correct, he denies the conclusion, for the reason that some- thing else is true which must destroy the correctness of the plaintiff's conclusion. This other tiling or averment is what is termed an alibi, and may properly be made the defense in certain cases. But in other cases it cannot. For illustration : I set forth my claim and title to a certain piece of land, showing patent from the govern- ment, all due and legal transfers by proper conveyance ; show that this patent and all transfers and steps of entry and possession are strictly in harmony and keeping with the law, — it would hardiy be worth while for another to bring a suit to oust me under the plea that, it is true, he is properly entitled under the chain of title and I cannot break that claim, but then John Doe had a correct chain of title too, at one time, to a piece of land, and it is defendant's belief that plain- tiff ought to be kept out of possession for the reason that John Doe now does not know what kind of land his was nor where it is. No judge would for a moment hesitate to say that not even an issue had been formed by such a plea. If my chain of title could not be broken, no amount of alibi's would help the matter in the case. That which is conclusive to the proving of a fact, which fact establishes the conclusion of a proposi- tion, cannot be overcome by an attempt to prove some other fact ; for the reason that it is a contradiction to suppose that two facts exist and one the opposite of the other. To defeat nn^ title to the land then, tha defendant would be compelled to break the chain, and this would form a direct contest. In the discussion of the proposition before this audience, as the one alfirming, f luid the right to set out my claim ;— cliainof title; make it full and complete ui^der the law; and mj' opponent's right was to break this chain, and under the law he must do so or fail; for the conclusion of the law is, that he who comes bringing thin chain is true, for no man can get hold of the chain unless he is the true and accepted one. God has set this seal upon it; man un- derstands the things of man by the spirit of man which is in him; "even so the thin ITS of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." I Cor. 2 : 11. For this reason in determining who are of God and who are not, you may safely rely upon the rule, "He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." 2 John, 9th verse. He has established a law that man without the Spirit of God cannot look into his truth wliich is from above, and so select from itas toimjcsaupon the people and at the same time conform to the truth. Jesus recognizes the rule as being correct in the 28th chapter of Mat- thew's gospel, wherein he tells his diciples, if they teach all things whatsoever he has commanded them he will be with them to the end of the world. He did not even promise to be with Peter, and James, and John unless they proved their mission by abiding in the doctrine Not a part of it, but all of it, for this rule was to be given to his people and the world to test the true from the false ; true teachers from false teachers ; true prophets from false prophets. "If any man think himself a prophet or spiritual," says the apostle, 1 Cor. 14:37, "let him ac- knowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Ijord.'"' Not acknowledge by mouth through dissimulation simply, — butlethis teachings conform to the established test, and agree in all things with that which Paul had written. " He that is of God heareth God's words;" and in all things. " Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing ; by their fruits you shall know them." Not judging their public acts by their doings in private life, nor by the lives of their followers; for this would destroy the entire list: — Noah, Moses, Samson, David, Solomon, Elijah, Peter and Paul ; and judging simply by the fruits of the fol- lowers, it would also prove as false, Jesus and the apostles ; for all, except the twelve went back at one time ; Judas, oneof tl)ose, turned traitor and sold Jesus : another, denied him and cursed and swore ; all re- turned to their nets ; and Thomas was so far gone that he said ho would not believe, unless "he should first thrust his hands into his side," while some in the churches in a short time vvero guilty of such abomi- nations as wore not known, the apostle Paul says, amons;- the Gentiles. Speaking THE BPvADEN AND KLELLEY DEBATE. of those in Asia, Jesus signifies to his ser- vant John, that some were so wicked and corrupt, that unless they repented they should " be brought down to hell." To judge them then in this way would be wrong ; — contrary to the word of God. I will show you the way to judge men by their fruits. If those principles they teach are bad ; or men or women are bad who are living in accord with, and carrying out in their lives the principles taught, then it will prove the one bringing the message to be bad, and at the same time prove themes- sage bad. The argument is often made that the Christian religion is bad because those professing Christianity are bad. This IS not a correct premise. Before the conclu- sion follows, it must be further shown that, in bringing forth this bad fruit, they who call themselves Christians did these bad things by conforming to the principles and teachings of the Christian religion. Now, in this discussion, from the first, my opponent has chosen to leave the arguments of the affirmative and follow his own course ; and he has attempted to crush me under the weight of the stories he had at his command against the character of Mr. Smith. What a ridiculous position ! If my claim is true it is true, and no number of alibi's could affect it gotten up on life or character. But by taking this course he virtually admits the position of the affirmative to be unmovabJe ; because if he could move me what is the useof his alibi ? T am affirming and must make my case. He simply denies ; he does not In the proTjosition set up a counter case, claim, or thing. And yet he has chosen to introduce the alibi of the old Spaulding Romance ; (and romance it is), and to rely upon that, either as a counter proof suffici- ent, or as a means of prejudicing the people against an investigation of the facts. What- ever the object it matters not to me ; but I take it that by so doing he has admitted as true the position of the plaintiff in the con- test and now rests his case upon character, and the " Spaulding Romance." Does he not know that his very act in doing this is in itself another evidence of the truth of the Book of Mormon? and in this • making certain the application of another part of the prophecy in Isaiah, 29th chapter, the conditions of which I claim are complete in tlie Book of Mormon. The book spoken of there to come forth is to be fought in such a way. If the opposition was from a different standpoint the predic- tion would be incomplete. The prophecy sets out sufficient to show that it might have been properly tried under the rule, for it is to contain the doctrine of Christ ; — no mistaking this; verse 24: "They also that erred in spirit shall come to under- standing, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine." But notwithstanding this, it is shown conclusively in verses 15, 16, 20, and 21, that those who opposed the book would do so by turning things upside down ; — revers- ing the order of trying things under God's law, and use works which were "in the dark;" "scorn" the claims made by the one bringing the book, and "watch for ini- quity ;" — try to find something against his character ;— "make a man an offender for a word," "and lay a snare for him," for it was to be a work reproving the people for leaving the law ; and finally, they were to "turn aside the just for a thing of nought." — Preferring to the great facts of God's law and the justice exemplified there- in, those things that are of little account, a tissue and a refuge of lies as referred to in the fifteenth verse of the 28th chapter, or in other words the "Spaulding Story." Now, singular as it is, I have never met a man as yet, in the consideration of this question,' who has not tried the book from this standpoint. It was said of Jesus that "he was numbered with the transgressors," to fulfill the prediction of the prophet, made long before ; and if the certainty of agreement of prophecy and its fulfillment is-such, that he who was the upright and true, the humble and meek, the forgiving and pure of the city of Nazareth, must be charged with disobedience to law, stirring up of sedition, and treason to the State, and suffer the final affliction of death be- tween two thieves, why should I complain to suffer to the contest of lies, and ways that are dark, which the prophet speaks of as being brought to oppose at some day the Lord's work. (Time expired.) THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 73 MR. BRADEN'S SEVENTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen:— We Avish to call theattention to a fact strangely overlooked b^^ former writers— that Spaulding wrote several man- uscripts. Our reasons for such a position are: I. The leuffthot time he spent in wri- ting his book. He begun in 1809, and the manuscript was taken to Patterson's office i)i 1814. He spent five years on it. II. Mrs. S. Spaulding, liis wife, 'Miss Spixulding, his daughter, an(] J. N. Miiler, declare that he had many manuscripts. III. The witness- es in Coneaut, with one exception, describe only the Nephite portion, showing that he had only written that, when reading to them. The Zarahemlite and Jaredite por- tions were not written when he read to them. IV. Spaulding stated to J. N. Mil- ler that he would lead a retired life in Pitts- burgh, and re-write his manuscript. Mil- ler is the only one who describes the Zare- hemlite ]H)rifon. He had added that to his second Mormon manuscript. V. Pa'tersou told him to rewrite it and prepare it for press. Jas. Miller says he did, and left this copy with Patterson,'and tliat it was this, or his third Mormon manuscript, that Rigdon stole VI. The manuscript that Miss Spaulding read at the residence of her un- cle, W. H Sabin, was not large enough to constitute such a work as the publishers would publish. It was liis first draft on hismanuscriptNo.il. Mormon I. VII. The contradictions between these portions as we will show, prove that they were written in different installments, and added to each other. VIII. When Mrs. H°,rris destroyed lis pages Rigdon was sent for and he re- placed them from another Spaulding man- uscript, one of the ones stolen by Smith from Mrs. Davidson's house in HartAvicke in 1827. IX. Even after he failed to get his manuscript published and the copy he pre- pared had been stolen by Rigdon, he con- tinued to write on to the last. X, Spauld- ing's care in preserving his manuscript is seen in the fact that even the few leaves of his Roman manuscript were preserved, and found in his trunk in 1834. This removes the quibbling of Mormons about Rigdon's copying so much manu- script. He did not, he stole it. Spaulding so declared in 181.5-16. Rigdon showed the manuscript to Winters, and stated that it was the manuscript that Spaulding wrote — that Spaulding had left it at Pattersons— that he borrowed it— not copied it. Rigdon told Jefries he took the man u«cript from the printing office. It settles also all quibbling about size of the manuscript Miss Spauld- ing read at her uncles. Rigdon had the one lier father had prepared for press. She read the first draft or manuscript No. II Mormon manuscript No. I. It also puts an end to the three Id Josephh's talk that Spaulding's heirs had the manuscript in their care all the time. It puts an end to the challenge of Moinions "Why did not the Spauldings bring out the manuscript and prove tlie theft and pla- giarism by publishing the original manu- script?" Rigdon had stolen INIormon man- uscript No. Ill that Spaulding liad prei)ar- ed for press, Smith, in 1S27 had stolen other manu&cripts. Did Rigdon steal Spaulding's manuscript? We have proved that he was learning the tanner's tradein Pittsburg, when the manu- script was at Patterson's by Mrs. Echbaum. That he was intimate with Lambdin and was about the office so much that Engles the foreman complained of it. That he was much interested in the Spaulding manu- script that was a great curiosity in the of- fice, by Mrs. Spaulding. That the manu- script was stolen and Spaulding blamed Rigdon, by Jas. Miller, McKee and Dr. Dodd. That Rigdon showed the manu- script to Dr. Winters in 1823 declaring it was Spaulding's manuscript, left Avitli a printer, tliat he borrowed it, and told what it contained, by Dr. Winter. That he had it in 1826, and declared it would be a great thing some day, by his niece Mrs. Dunlap. We have proved that he knew of the publi- cation of the Book of Mormon, long before it appeared, and described it, by D. Atwater, A. Bently, Alexander Campbell, Green and Dille. We have proved that he was often absent from home while it was being pre- pared for press, by Z. Randolph, and oth- ers. That he was seen at Smith's while it was being prepared for press, by Tucker, Mrs. Eaton and McCauley, Chase and San- ders. We have proved that he prepared his congregation for the reception of the book and his ideas, and that his adherants went into Mormonism. We will, when we come to analyze the Book of Mormon, prove that there are Rigdonisms on nearly every page, and several on many single pages. I do not know how a stronger case can b© made. The constant jabber of Mormons, calling on persons to tell when and how Rigdon came in contact with and obtained posses- sion of the Spaulding manujwi'ipt, and when and how Rigdon and Smith came to- gether, and concocted this scheme, and brought out this book, is an insult to com- mon sense and every principle of law. If a man is arrested with stolen property in his possession, all the state has to do is to prove I. The rightful owner of the property. II. That it has been feloneously taken out of his possession. III. That it was found in the possession of the accused. Tliat is suf- ficient to convict him of being a thief, or a rect^iver of stolen goods, that the law holds as guilty as the thlet. The state does not have to prove that the accused stole the property. Having convicted him of having 74 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. stolen property in his possession, he has to prove that he came by it innocently, or be committed as thief or receiverof stolen goods. We have proved that Spaulding owned the Manuscript Found, that it was found in pos- session of Rigdon, that it was offered to the public as his own property bj' Imposter Joe. Unless Mormons can prove that Rig- don and Smitli came by it innocently, they are convicted as thieves, or as receivers of stolen goods. As lawyers the three Id Jo- seph and his man Kelley ought to know this. But we have gone far beyond what is necessary in order to convict Rigdon and Smith. Let me illustrate our work. Sup- pose that a man lives for years in Kirtland, who has a museum of rare relics. There are absolutely no duplicates of any of them. He is a sort of monomaniac over his museum, takes everybody' to see it that he can in any waj' induce to look at it, and is constantly talking about it, and describing it. Tie moves away, and some years afterwards a couple of fellows come along and advertise a wonderful museum, that thej'^ claim an angel gave by miracle to one of them. People of Kirtland flock out to see this miraculous museum. No sooner do they cast eyes on it, than a shout goes up, "why this the collection of 'Old-come-to-pass,' "" a nick-name they had given to their former neighbor. The two fellows are arrested for theft. The heirs of the old neighbor are looked up. They say the collection is in a certain trunk. When the trunk is ex- amined it is found that not a single article of the collection is in it. The trial comes on. The former neighbors of the original owner come in and testify, describing the articles in the collection of their old neigh- bor, and describe nearly all the leading articles in the museum. The museum is placed before them. They pick out all the leading articles, but reject some, saying, "he end not have these." The thieves would go to the penetentiary, unless they could show that they came by them honestly. But suppose the state proceeds to prove that the owner took his collection to a certain place to be prepared for exhibition. That one of the thieves was constantly around there, took great interest in them. That just before the owner's death, these relics disappeared, and that the owner and others blamed this follow with stealing them. That a few years afterwards he showed them to persons saying that they were the deceased man's relics, that he had left to be prepared for exhibition, and that he had borrowed them from the one who was to prepare them for exhibition, in order to examine them. That he was seen with them in his possession and examining them years afterwards, declaring, "they would be a big thing some day." That soon afterwards lie began to exhibit certain peculiar articles of his own manufacture, and to prophesy that an angel would give to the world a museum, with certain articles in it, describing the articles of the deceased man. Thathe was seen in company with his confederate. That the confederate began to tell that an angel had given to him a museum of such articles, and in a short time the two began to exhibit the museum, containing the relics of the deceased, and the articles the first fellow had been ex- hibiting. The case would be made out as clearly" as if a thousand men swore that they saw the theft. We have proven that Solomon Spaulding exhibited for years, in Conneaut, and in oth- er places, a cabinet of curiosities, that were absolutely nowhere else except in his Man- uscript Found. That he was a sort of mo- nomaniac over his Manuscript Found, forc- ing it on all he could get hold of, holding them like Coleridge's Ancient Mariner, That his mania had caused persons to nick- name him, "Old come to pass." V7e have proved that when the Rook of Mormon was exhibited in Conneaut, that those who had, through Sjialding's mania, been made fa- miliar with his Blanuscript Found, recog- nized the Manuscript Found in the Book of Mormon. Squire Wright shouting out, " Old come to pass has come to life." His brother arose and denounced the theft and. fraud ou the si)ot. His old neighbors sent a messenger to his widow, who sent them to the trunk, where the manuscript was supposed to be, and it was not in the trunk. It had been stolen. We have introduced the clear positive testimony of seventeen witnesses, who, in describing the Manu- script Found, give a better description of the Book of Mormon — the historic part — than the average Mormon preacher can give from memory. We have presented them the book of Mormon and they unite in picking out the historic portions as part of the Manuscript Found and in rejecting others as not in the Manuscript Found. We have proved that one of the accused, Rigdon, was around the place where the manuscript Spaulding had prepared for the press was last seen. That he took a deep interest in it. That Spaulding told James Miller and McKee and Dr. Dodd that his manusci'ipt had been stolen and Rigdon was suspected of the theft. We have proved that Rigdon in 1822 or 3 showed the manuscript to Dr. Winters, stating that it was a manuscript that Spaulding a Presbyterian preacher had left with a printer, for publication, and that he had borrowed it from the printer to read as a curiosity. It was a Bible romance, pur- porting to be a history of the American In- dians. That he told Jeffries he took it from the printing office and gave it to Smith to publish. That he spent so much time over it in 1826, as to cause his wife to threaten to burn it, to which he replied, "that it would be a great thing some day." We proved by ALexauder Campbell, A.Bently, and D. Atwater that Rigdon years before the Book of Mormon appeared stated that such a book would apjiear, it was dug out of the ground, was engraved on gold plates, contained a history of the aborigines of this continent, gave the history of the peo- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. pie who construed the antiquities of America, that it taught that the gospel was preached in America, in the first centuries of our era, as the Disciples were then preach- ing it on the Reserve. We have proved that Rigdon preached the religious portions, the part that our witnesses did not recognize as Spaulding's. We have proved that Rig- don was away from home during the time that Smith was working on his "pretended plates. That he was seen with Smith. That right after he began to visit Smith the latter began to telTabout finding the plates and began his pretended translation of them. We have made our case. MORMON CHRONOLOGY. 1761 — Solomon Spaulding was born in Ash- ford, Connecticut. 1785— Solomon Spaulding graduated with the degree of A. B. at Dartmouth Col- lege. 1787 — Solomon Spaulding graduated in Di- viiiiiy. He received the degree of A. M. from Dartmouth College. 178ci — Solomon Spaulding preaches as Con- gregational preacher till compelled to stop by ill health, in 1800. 1793_,Sidney Rigdon was born Feb., 19th near the village of Library, St. Clair township, Alleghany county, Penn- sylvania. 1796— Joseph Smith, Sen., and Lucy Mack married in Tunbridge, Vermont. 1800— Solomon Spaulding moves lo Cherry Valley, New York, and engages in merchandizing till 1805, and marries Matilda Sabin. 1805— Imposter Joe Smith born Dec. 23, in Sharon, Windsor county, Vermont. 1807— Solomon Spaulding having failed in business moves to Coneaut, Ohio, and engages in business. 1808— He becomes very much interested in the mounds around Coneaut, and has several opened. He begins a histor- ical romance, assuming that their builders were thedescendants of ship- wrecked Romans. His Manuscript No. 1. His Roman Manuscript. 1809— He abandons this idea as too near his own time and begins his Manuscript No. II. Mormon Manuscript No. I. He assumes that the aborigines of America were Israelites from Jerusa- lem. He fails in business and an- nounces to his creditors, his purpose to pubish his romance, as " Manuscript Found," and pay his debts. 1810-11-12— Spaulding continues to write on his romance, and to read to all that he can induce to listen to him. His monomania causes his neighbors to nick-name him " Old come to pass" on account of the absurd frequency of that expression in his manuscript. He begins Manuscript No. Ill, Mor- mon Manuscript No. II, adding the Zarahemla portion. He moves to Pittsburg to prepare his manuscript for publication. A religious impostor in Vermont, creates nunjh excitement m the neigh- borhood of the Smiths. Mrs Smith is very active in the excitement, and prophecies, that Joe, then a lad of seven, will be a propliet, and found a new religion. Joe is reared with that idea constantly before him. The family are all taught it. 1813-] -1— A t the advice of l*atterson, Spauld- ing prepares for press his Manuscript No. IV, Mormon Manuscript No. III. It is carried to Patterson's office for publication. Sidney Rigdon is learning the tanners trade in" Pittsburg. He is very inti- mate with Lambdin a leading em- ployee ot I'atterson. He is around the office so much, that Engles, tlie foreman, complains of it. He takes great interest in Spaulding's manu- script. Spaulding moves to Amity, Washing- ton county, Pa., and his wife keeps tavern. 1815— The Smith's move to Palmyra, New York. 1816— Spaulding informs Jas. Miller, McKee and J r. Dodd, that his manuscript has been stolen from Patterson's office, and that Ripdon is blamed with the theft. Spaulding died Octo- ber 20th, 1818. His widow collects his papers that she can find and tokes them with her, in a trunk, to the residence of his brother, W. H. Sabin, Onondaya county, New York. 1817_Sidney Rigdon' joins the Baptist Church on Piney Fork of Peters' Creek, May Slst. 1819— The Smiths squat on a piece of land belonging to minors in Ontario County, New York. Rigdon studies theology with Rev. Clark of the Regular Bap- tist Church in Beaver County, Pa. 18i9_Rigdon is licensed to preach by the Connequessiiig Baptist Church. 1820— Rigdon goes lo Warren, Trumbull County, Ohio, where an uncle is a prominent member of the Baptist Church. He joins that church March 4th. He is ordained to preach by that church April 1st. Marries Phebe A. Brooks. Mrs. Spaulding, Spaulding's widow, goes to Pomfret, Connecticut. Rigdon preaches for the Baptist Church in Warren, and for others in the vicin- ity. , „ ,, 1821— Rigdon continues to preach for the Baptists in Warren. In this year, or in the year following, Mrs. Spaulding marries Mr. Davidson of Hartwick, Otsego County, New York, and goes there to live. -r , * j 1822— Rio don moves to Pittsburg. Is elected pastor of the First Baptist Church Jan. 28. ^ „ . Duiino- this year or the year following, he shows to D/. Winter, a prominent teacher in Pittsburg, a Baptist preacher, and an intimate acquaint- ance, Spaulding's Manuscript No. IV, 76 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Mormon Manuscript No. III. He says: "It is a Bible romance, purporting to be a history of the American Indians, that a Presbyterian preacher named Spaulding wrote, and left with a printer for publication. I borrowed it to read through curiosity." In digging a well for Willard Chase, Joseph Smith, senior, the father of Imposter Joe, found a stone of cloudy quartz, that singularly resembled a child's foot. Imposter Joe who was loafing around, stole it from Chase's children. This is the famous peep- stone of Imposter Joe, the Urim and Thummim of Mormonism. Rigdon had stolen its Bible, now, Im- poster Joe stole its Urim and Thum- mim. 1823— Bigdon preaches for the Baptist Church until Oct. 11th when he is excluded for doctrinal heresies. He goes to the Court House and preaches to his followers. Imposter Joe begins his course as im- poster. He pretends to witch for water with a witch hazel rod, and to find lost property and hidden treas- ures and mines with his stolen peep- stone bj' putting it into his hat and holding his face into his hat. In September, while working for AV. H. Sabin, where Miss Spaulding, Spauld- in^''s daughter was living, with her father's papers in her care, Jose[)h Smith learns of the existence of the Spaulding martuscripts. This is the true interpretation of his wonderful vision of Sept. 23, 1823, when Moroni, now an angel, appears to him, and reveals to him the existence of the plates he— Moroni— had buried hun- dreds of years before, and lets Joe have a ptep at thetn. Joseph Smitli manufactured that story twenty years afterwards in 1843. He told of no such vision then.. The true interpretation is he learned of the Spaulfling manuscript while working for Sabin in Sept. 1823. 1824— Mrs. Davidson has the trunk contain- ing her husband's papers sent to her in 1-fartwicke, N. Y. Rigdon preaches for his adherents until in the summer, in the Court House. He then quits preaching and works in a tannery, and begins revising his stolen manuscript. It was a period of great religious excitement and new parties were springing up continually. The excitement of the movement of the Campbells was begin nijig to be the chief topic in Western Pennsylva- nia. Rigdon had adopted some, but not all of their ideas He saw he could not be a leader, in competition with them if he went into it. He con- ceived the idea of remodeling the Spaulding manuscript by interpolat- ing portions of the Bible, and his own peculiar religious ideas, pretending that it was a record kept by the Israelites, who came to America, just as the Bible was kept by Israelites in Asia, and was as much a revelation as the Bible. He intended by such fraud to start a new religious movement with himself as prophet, and his stolen manuscript thus revised as its new revelation. 1825 — Rigdon continues his revision of his stolen manuscript and works in the tannery. Smith is in the height of his glory as imposter, He has a gang of loafing dupes and knavea digging through southern New York and northern Pennsylvania for buried treasures, mines of precious metals that he pre- tends to see through his stolen peep- stone. He extends his operations to Harmony, Pa. He makes the ac- quaintance of Emma Kale. Asks her hand in marriage. Is decidedly re- fused by her father on account of his bad character. 1826— In the latter part of winter Rigdon moves to Bainbridge, Geauga county, Ohio. He spent so much time on his stolen manuscript that his wife threatened to burn it. He replied; "that the manuscript would be a great thing some day." Smith is in full blast as imposter. He extends his operations until the extreme parts are 150 miles apart. The doings of Smith and his gang, and the peep-stone of Smith are ex- tensively commented on by the press of the region. In June Rigdon preaches the funeral sermon of Warner Goodall in Mentor. He pleases the church, and it selects him as pastor and he becomes a Disci- ple preacher. 1827— Smith goes to Harmony, Pa., in the absence of Mr. Hale, runs off with his daughter and marries her in South Bainbridge, N Y. The ceremony is performed by Tarbell, J. P., .Jan. 18th. Rigdon tells Darwin Atwater that a book will soon appear giving an ac- count of the aborigines of this conti- nent and the origin of American antiquities. He tells A. Bently that a book was about to be published that was found engraved on plates of gold. A. Camp- bell testifies that he said also that it was dug out of the earth in New York. It contained an account of the abori- gines of this continent. That it said that the gospel had been preached in America just as the disciples were then preaching it on the Reserve, dur- ing the first centuries of our era. Rigdon preached during this and the three succeeding year, the peculiar ideas that are in the Book of Mormon. He indoctrinated all of his hearers, that he could, with these ideas, and prepared for the coming of his new revelation. In the spring of 1827 a stranger was ob- THE bradp:n and kelley debate. 77 served at Smith's house. Shortly after he made his appearance, the Smiths began to tell of the jrolden bible. People of Mentor began to notice that Rigdon was often al)sent from home for days, and no one knew where. Spaulding had intended to assume that his romance was a translation of a manuscript found in the earth. From 1818 tc 1827, the papers contained ac- counts of linding glyphs of metallic plates, covered with unknovvn charac- ters. In the spring of 1827, a story was started that a book of such glyphs had been found in Canada, and that it was called a "Golden Bible." Rigdon adopted this idea, and the scheme was concocted to pretend that Smith had found a book of gold plates called the "Golden Bible^' Smith was to pretend to translate it with his peep stone, stolen from the Chases children. He was in reality to use Rigdon 's revision of the manuscript he had stolen from Spaulding, and pretend that it was a translation of the plates that he pretended that he had fotmd. Smith informs Rigdon of the place where the rest of the Spaulding manuscripts could be found. The confederates dare not publish their fraud while they were in existence. In September, 1827, Smith was loafing around Mrs. Davidson's neighbor- hood, superintending agang, digging for a silver mine, on the place of Stowell, and also a well or two were dug in the neighborhood. September 22 he succeeded in stealing some of the Spaulding manuscripts. This is the true interpretation of his wonderful vision of September 21-22, 1827. They had now, they supposed, all the Spaulding's Mormon manu- scripts in their possession, and they supposed all means of detection were destroyed. Smith then began his pretended trans- lation of his pretended plates. In the fell Smith moved to Harmony, Pennsylvania, to his father-in-law. While on tfie road his goods were searched twice for stolen property. His father's house was searched about the same time. 1828— Martha Spaulding, Spaulding's daughter, marries Dr. McKinstry and •moves to Munson, Massachusetts to live Rigdon makes a convert of P. P. Pratt, a teacher in Lorain county, Ohio, who begins to preach for the Disciples. He lets Pratt into his scheme, who goes into it and eventually becomes the Paul of Mormonism. Smith begins to translate. Martin Har- ris is his scribe. In July Smith let Harris have 118 pages to take back to Manchester to use in making dupes and enlisting con- federates, in the fraud. Mrs. Harris who was bitterly opposed to the fraud, burned the 118 pages, without her husband's knowl- edife. Great consternation ensues. Rigdon comes and gets the Spaulding manuscript that Smith had stolen and reconstructs from this the portion that had been burned. Smith has a long revelation telling what bad been done by malicious persons — telling what no one had done or dreamed of doing. Smith did not know what had been done, and the Mormon God concocts a plan to cir- cumvent a scheme that had never been even dreamed of. Smith returns to Waterloo, New York, in the fall. The angels plow seven acres of wheat and sow ten acres of plaster to enable Whitraer to go and move Smilh. (1S29). In March Oliver Cowdery is made Smith's scribe. Rigdon comes and gives Smith what he has revised of the Spaulding manuscript, and translation proceeds. May 5th, John the Baptist appears to Joseph and Oliver, and gives to them the keys of the first priesth jod, etc. Smith has a cave dug in which to hold levees with angels. Smith gives Harris a scrawl to take to Anthon in New York City. Harris returns and pubMshes a false statement about the interview. Early in June the translation is complet- ed. In about two months Oliver Cowdery, an inexperienced blacksmith, wrote out at least two thousand foolscap pages, or an average of over thirty pages per day. 78 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. KELLEY'S EIGHTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gknti.e?ien : I know you have been enter- tained with the story and the gossip that has been brought forward. Tlie wonderful amount of testimony, too, that you have heard from those fourteen witnesses ! Have yon not been anxiously waiting- here, and listening, and watching to have something read in the shape of evidence? Yet, you have not heard one single affidavit read, one single statement read, one single thing read that could with any show of truth be properly called evidence. It is the first time I ever heard a man get up and state what he had culled from statements, or pur- ported affidavits, to an audience and ask them to take it as evidence, without hear- ing the entire statement of the party read, or if it is printed giving the reader the privilege of reading the entire evidence for himself. I will pick it out and select just what I want the audience to hear, and thus in fact stand as judge for the audience. That is the position of my friend before you. I will say, however, with regard to his story, (and he has made out his case he says,) he is done now : just understand that: — that it is, with one exception, the most singular thing that T ever saw or heard. There is one gotten up that is a fair parallel to it, however, — one just like it. I hdve it in a book in my house, and intended to have brought it over to-night and exhib- ited to you, but forgot it. It was published by Alexander Smythe in Chicago in 1880. Instead, however, of being against the Latter Day Saints, it is against the early, or former day saints. The author sets out by making the apostle Paul the hero of the Christian religion. He plays him as the master mind of the whole scheme trans- actetl in Palestine. He concocted the plan in order to establish a church and found a new religion in the time in which he lived. As a starting point and for the purpose of awakening the people to the scheme, this man says, that Paul procured a poor crazy fanatic, called John the Baptist, and sent him into the wilderness of Judea and had him preach a while to tell them that one who was then s+'^nding in their midst would soon come, and h"- '^ould be the Messiah and restore all things to them. After a while that one tliuu ..as to be the Messiah is brought out to play his part, according to the tale. He was a relative of John the Baptist, he says. It happens, too, that the party mixed in a grain of truth here in order to deceive, as Christ was a relative. Then the story proceeds to the effect, that, ai'cer awhile when the apostle Paul thought that he had used John the Baptist all he wanted to, he puts up a job on John and has Herod behead him. Then he has Jesus play the Messiah until the time that he thinks things are about ripe for to spring some great excitement in the world. All the time this author cunningly represents the apostle as playing behind the scenes, until Jesus has made himself well known, then he foists some horrid stories upon the ears of the populace in Jerusalem against the Messiah, and just at a time when he is approach- ing the city, (Jesus not knowing anything about Paul's perfidy,) and the excited peo- ple rise and put him to death. The Apostle Paul then steals his body and makes away Avith it : so the story goes. And after he had done that he starts down to Damascus, and all of a sudden the apostle gets con- verted to the new religion by a great mira- cle, arid goes back in order to make a great sensation in the world, telling his wonder- ful experience; and from that time becomes the " ringleader." You take that book, my friends, and read it, published in the nine- teenth century, in the year 1880, and ob- serve the things that it takes from the Bible, excerpting here and there, in order to make a show of truth, and notice the in- genuity with which the false statements are thrown in between, and then compare with his Spaulding storj', and you will find that it is a far more plausible story than he has presented to you in trying to account for the origin of the Book of Mormon. But he has chosen in this discussion to rely upon as a defense, as I was just saying before my time was called, the Spaulding stori/, and character; either as a counter proof suffi- cient or as a means of prejudicing the peo- ple against an investigation of the facts. But whatever the object it matters not to me, for I shall canvass the story itself, and see what truth if any there is in it. Prop- erly it does not belong to this question ; as foreign to it in fact as were the stories and false" charges of "deceiver," "gluttonous man," "wine bibber," &c., to ascertaining the truth of the mission of Jesus. Not- withstanding this, some want it examined, and I assure you it is but an easy task to drag it to the bottom. How bad indeed according to my oppo- nent's arraignment was this Smith crowd. The old man, the old lady, the boys and the girls. One would gather from his talk that they had been under the general espionage of the secret service department all along down the previous century. Yet, no crime was ever even charged against one of them, ex- cept in the old women's tales and gossip, spun by the pious (?) of the neighborhood. From before the time they left the State of Vermont they were thought to be squtam- ish. Yet, the old lady brought with her to New York State, a certificate of good stand- ing in the Presbyterian church. Were Presbyterians, and especially those of the old New Enjrland stock, in those times, immoral, impious, and Sabbath breakers? In New York, their sons Hyrum and Sam- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 79 uel and their dau^^hter Sophronia also Joined the Presbyterian cliurch and were in good standing in that churoh during this time; yet they wereawful bad folks. Tliey quietly remained members of this body, "whicli was considered one of the straightest sects, up to theyear 1827, when they deliber- ately withdrew from it themselves because of their conversion, as they claimed, to the restored gospel. Joseph, an attentive list- ener at tlie Methodist church, and he is just about to be taken in as a member, when he happens to think that he will go and pray ; — ask God what he shall do ; for he is in a confusion of mind over what to do. My friends, have any of you ever been in such a state! and if so did you go to your heavenly Father to ask his advice? Now tills is the sum total of the crime of the fourteen-year-old boy at tliis time. He went and asked God for wisdom, and said the Lord spoke to him and told him what to do. It would never have been of note in the world about his asking, had he not stated that at the time he received an answer; and such an answer. What was it? "That the churches were not right," This was before Mr. Campbell ever left the Baptist church, sir, and while Charles and John Wesley were singing, "Almighty God of love, Set up the ait active sign, And Minimon whom thou dost approve For messengers divine. From Abram's favored seed, The new apostles choose; Go. spre.id throughout the earth around. The dead reviving news." Was it any worse for young Joseph Smith to say these churches were wrong, and did not meet in full the measure of the Alniigty than others ? Ah ! but he said God told him so, in answer to prayer. Well, did he never tell my friend anything in answer to prayer. Answer me that, and do not forget it as you did at Wilber ! ! If Jesus or his mes- sengers, did not tell him this, where did he getlt? He was not the learned and schol- arly man that you claim for Mr. Campbell; nor in a part of the world where he could gain from the wisdom of the Wesleys. Yet, he is the first of the age to come out boldly and frankly and say, "none of them are right." Not that they were wrong in all things, for he recognized that there was some good in each and all of them. But that none were all right — acknowledged of God. Sixty-three years have passed away and novv who says it among the religious teachers ? Mr. Campbell soon did ; Walter Scott, Sidney Rigdon, Henry Ward Beech- er. Dr. Thomas, Dr. Cheeney, Prof. Swing, W. H. H. Murry, and a host of others. And this, too, notwithstanding the great refor- mation wrought under Campbell. His might be termed the water reformation ! Young Smitii, as any young boy would have done under such circumstances, with confidence in his heart and faith in the justice of his cause, goes directly with his answer to his preacher, the pastor ; states his case ; and what would you have sup- posed the reception under the circum- stances, of a person of his age going to the pastor with the story, "The Lord showed me in tlie vision that the ehurclies were all wrong." Now take the opposite view. Suppose the answer to Smith had been, You join the Methodist Church, (there was no Campbellite Church in the world to this time), as that is more acceptable to me than the Baptist or Presbyterian. Do you think the Methodist preacher would have called the boy a liar, and said he had no such vision ? No, you all know, he would have put young Joseph at the head of the con- verts, and had him testify every night. It makes a big difference whose ox is gored sometimes. Why I remember well last winter reading an account of a lady in the Methodist church in Coldwater, Michigan, who claim- ed to be actually healed by the power of faith in that church, and the church ac- cepted it. While the Saints at the same place for the last twenty years had been affirming that God so wrought with them and that they had had many instances of such blessings, yet they were looked upon as fanatical, unorthodox, superstitious, be- cause of this belief. Is it because it did not happen in our church that we are to say : — "Oh, it is all stuff; they are a set of fana- tics." But there is another thing that young Smith said the angel told him, that is more remarkable, if made up, tlian the other ; it was a i^rophecy : — "Thar his name should be both good and evil spoken of among all nations, kindreds, tongues and people." How did this young boy know that his name should be spoken of among all people, every nation ; — by his friends as being a good man and by his enemies as being an evil man? The prophecy is clear and distinct, the fulfillment is complete — no one to gainsay it. The wonderful state- ment made by the then boy and the sub- sequent fulfillment should cause the most incredulous to stop and think before he condemns. How did he know this? Take the greatest villain on the earth or the most worthy man, are their names, even in this later time of the easy transmission of news, known among all nations, kindreds, tongues and peoples. Strike the heart of Africa and the Mohammetan country, and they have all heard of Smith, and they hold him in one relation or the other. But go to the heart of these same countries and they have not even heard of the terrible charac- ter that struf^k down our President, who, i* seems, in his iniquity, would have been known all over the world if any one pos- sibly could by this means. And yet this young boy stated early in 1823 that the angel said to him that his "Name should be both good and evil spoken of among all nations, kindreds, tongues and people. Can you point me to a prophecy in the Bible that has been more literally fulfilled? Now I propose to examine my opponent's alibi, as he has rested his whole case upon that, and you watch and see if he is not driven from his "Spaui^dino story" and 80 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. CHARACTER ! ! I referred to the fact that this old falsehood was met and vanquished when it was first circulated in 1835 and I8.S6, and later in 1839 and 1840; but he replies that I must meet it here and not tell about what has been done. Very well, m.y atfirni- ative arguments being in no way answered, lean well afford to meet it here; so now for the Spauldmg story as a theory. ^jWill you reply to my arguments upon this? We will see. The following are the claims made for that : First, That one Solomon Spaulding, a Presbyterian clergyman, about the year 1811, lived at Conneaut, Ohio, and being in poor health, for diversion in his invalid state, wroteastory and left it in manuscript form, which' was like the present Book of Mormon, except as to errors. Second, That from Conneaut, Ohio, he removed to Pittsburg, Pa., in 1812. and while there handed the manuscript of this story to a publisher by the name of Robert Patterson for examination and publication. Third, That the manuscript instead of being published was returned to Mr. Spauld- ing, and in the year 1814 he left Pittsburg and went to Amity, Pa., where he died in the year 1816, when his effects, including the manuscript, fell into the hands of his widow. Fourth. That at the time the manuscript was in the office of publisher Patterson, one Sidney Rigdon was engaged at, or in some way connected with said printing office, and in some way got the manuscript and purloined the same. Fifth, That Sidney Rigdon at the time, knew of Joseph Smith and had opportunity to get this manuscript to him, and Sixth, That Rigdon being a preacher at the time did this in order to start a new church and have a basis for his scheme. Before, during this discussion, I showed by the illustration of "a chain of title" to property, if the chain was perfect in all its parts it would stand the test, but if faulty or disconnected by a single transfer it would not. In the examination of one's title if you are able to show that one link in the chain is not a true one, forged, or obtained through fraud, the whole thing is void. But in this pretentious claim of the Spauld- ing Manuscript, which he has set up, I am not only able to prove that one link is at fault, but that the entire chain is bad, and every link at fault; from the inception by Philaster Hulburt, who had been twice, as I have before shown, excommunicated from the Latter Day Saints for immoralities, to the conclusion of it as published and com- pleted by Howe of Painsville, who had the Spaulding manuscript destroyed while in his hands. I enter upon the investiga- tion with the hope that I shall have your candid and unbiased judgment in the con- sideration of the evidence. First, did Spaulding ever write such a manuscript? I claim that he did not; and for proof of this refer you first to their own witnesses. 1. The manuscript Spaulding is said to have written was too meager a thing to in any sense compare with a manuscript that would make a book the size of the Book of Mormon. 2. The character of the "Manuscript Found," which is the oneall rely upon as the romance, was entirely different to the Book of Mormon. 3. He was such an invalid at the time it is alleged he wrote his manuscript, that it would have been impossible for him consid- ering his circumstances in life, together with his broken constitution, to have writ- ten such a manuscript had it been possible for any man of his own knowledge to write such a one as the Book of Mormon, which I deny. Taking up the first reason it will at once be clear to you that a manuscript written in the English language, as they concede Spaulding's was, to contain the amount of matter that is included in the strictly his- torical part of the Book of Mormon, would cover at least fifteen hundred pages of fools- cap paper. Was the "Manuscript Found" such ? The statements of those who claim they saw the "Manuscript Found," place it beyond doubt that it was no such. Mrs. McKinstry, the daughter of Solomon Spauld- ing in her evidence says, that she, "Read the manuscript frequently when she was about twelve years of age, and that it was about one inch in thickness." She read it frequently, so it could not have been very large. Then their other trumped up wit- nesses all, or nearly all, say they heard it read. Henry Lake heard it read. John N. Miller heard it read from beginning to end. Aaron Wright heard Spaulding read it, etc. Mrs. Matilda Spaulding. wife ot Solomon Spaulding. states in her testimony published in the Illinois Quincy ]V7iig, that it was about a third as large as the Book of Mormon and that her daughter (Mrs. McKinstry) read it frequently. Hulburt who was commission- ed by Henry Lake, John Miller, Aaron Wright, et al. (Braden's witnesses), to go and get the Spaulding writing, went and got it he says, and the only one in Spauld- ing's hand writing which the widow had. That he delivered it to E. D. Howe of Pains- ville, who was writing the book to break down the Mormons, and Howe says, page 288, of his book in describing it, that, "The trunk referred to by the widow was subse- quently examined and found to contain only a single manuscript book in Spauld- ing's hand writing, containing about one quire of paper." Then according to the description of the manuscript itself by those who actually saw it, it must have been a very small affair in- deed in comparison to the historical portion of the Book of Mormon. In fact there was nocomparisou of the one, to the other, what- ever. But Howe goes further with his descrip- tion and shows the style, subject, matter, history, and all ditferent. This brings us to notice that the second proposition in my statement is true. This agrees with Mrs. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DERATE. h\ Spaulding's description of the "Manuscript Found." In the letter to the Boston Re- corder, she says: "He (Mr. Spauiding) was enabled (while writing this manuscript) from his acquaintance with the cla? pics and ancient history, to introduce many singular names which "were particularly noticed by people and could readily be recognized by them." Page 43, Smucker against the M<"-mons. Tlien in the same letter she says: 'Mr Spauiding had a brother John Spauiding, residing in the place at the time, who was perfectly familiar with the work and re- pt-ated/y heard the whole of it read." What an easy thing my audience for a man to read repeatedly, a manuscript of two thou sand paeres: besides it must have been the most enticing novel ever written Just to think of repeaiedli/ reading such a manu- script! Now T hope the friends won't be back- ward again aboutgivingme their names for a copy of this enticing book, that can be had for only one dollar and a quarter And thrown in this letter is Braden's tht^- ory that Mr Smith did all this copy- ing, working, digging for money, rravol- ing, studying, plknuing, delving,— what a lazy boy ! in order to start a church Ividicu- lous! Did you ever hear of such a theory? For men to work for years and j'ears, and labor and hire men, and dig holes, and mine and sweat in order to get an excuse for starting a new church ? Did not Mr. Campbell start a new church without any such an excuse ? Did not Mr. Smith and Mr. Rigdon have as good a right to start a new church without all this as Mr. Campbell or Mr Wesley or Mr. Luther or near a thousand others who have started new churches since the time of Christ? It seems to me that starting new churches is not confined simply to a few individuals; we have too many to admit of such an idea. And look everywhere you may and you cannot tell which is right un- less you accept the doctrine which is taught in the New Testament, and abide by the rule, "If any of 3'ou lack wisdom, let hun ask of God, 'who giveth to al' men liberal Iv and upbraideth not, and it shall he given him." But my friend does not accept that doctrine. Then again, " the old neighbors were fun- bled to identify it by reason of the names taken from the classical authors and an- cient history." Were enabled to identity it by reason of these historical and classical names ! Here you have set out by Mrs. Spauiding herself how they were enabled to identify the work. What name have they got? Why he found one the other night, I believe it was " Mormon." It was a Greek word. Will you show me the word "Mormon" in Greek as used in the Book of Mormon? Mr. Braden: Yes sir. Mr, Kelley. You say you will but you will never do it. Mr. Braden : That is to be seen. Mr. Kelley : There is such a term as Mormo that they think that the Greeks used just the same as we use the word "Mor- mon." But to any person who will think a moment it is evident there is not and never was the slightest connection. The word Mormo was used to denote a hobgoblin, bug- bear, ot)ject of fright, etc Mormon was simply a man's name as used in the Book of Mormon, the name of a place of plea.sure, etc., and in no sense as the (ireek word Mormo was used The similarity of soun<1 between the two when they are written in English arg-ues nothing T can show that words of similar sound, so far as that is (!on- cerned m different hinguages liave no rela- tion whatever either in derivation or mean- ing, and are never used by the people to in- dicate the same or similar things That idea about the Greek word Mormo being the root of the word Mormon as found m thi>* book is simply ridiculous A thing gotten up by certain persons and tried to apply U> the word as used in the Book of Mormon lo deceive the ignorant But i will see when Mt Braden brings it But again : " Spaulding"s mannsrnpfc •■epresenled an idolatrous people," they say. The Book of Mormon does not 'I'he Spauid- ing " Manuscript P'ound " was delivered into the hands of this Dr P Hulburt who had got up all these lying atTidavils. about Smith and the Book of Mormon and he takes it to Howe of Painsville, Ohio, the very place where they are trying to destroy the authenticity of the Book of I\Iornion Howe because he" was mad about his wile and sis- ter joining the church, and Hulhurt he- cause he had been cut oft from the (;hurch, —they take the manuscript under jiromise to Mrs. Davidson that they would publish and send her a copy and divide proceeds; and when she gets no returns she writes to them about it and they answer her. 'It did not read like we expect^ed and we did not use it.' How about the manuscript now? Traced right into the hands of the bitterest opposers ol the Book of Mormon t>v your own witnesses, and long after the publication of the Book of Mormon This is the manuscript story which they are claiming was in the hand-writing of Solo- mon Spauiding who died l:)efore the pubh- ration of the Book of Mormon and whose band writing could be identified by his manuscript sermons, as Mrs Spauiding and Mrs McKinstry festitied ;— and from such a manuscript as this ten words preserved m Mr Solomon Spauiding's hand-writing would have been sufficient to have identified the two, if the Book of Mormon was the same, beyond all dispute whatever— and these opposers with their statements and affidavits in their hands, deliberately de- stroy the "Manuscript Found," which thev got Irom Mrs Spauiding (Davidson) and maliciously publish their statements Here is "old come to pass," right in their own hands in the year 1834. Now who is the imposter ; the deceiver? But further, when it is first published that INFrs. Spauiding (Davidson) claimed the Book of Mormon was a L'opy of the manuscript a gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Jesse Harper, visits at once Mrs (Spauiding) Davidson, Mrs. 82 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE, McKinstry, and Dr. Ely, in Massachusetts, and interviews these persons, and writes ■ his account to the Quincy (111-) W/rig, a bitter anti-Mormou journal , stating that in the interview he asi^ed and received answers to the following questions, to wit: — Q. "Have you read the Book of Mormon? A. I have read some of it. Q,. Does Mr. Spanlding's manuscript and the Book of Mormon agree ? A I think some of the names are alike. Q,. Does the manuscript describe an idola- crous or a rel'gious people? A An idolatrous people. Q, Where is the manuscript? A. Dr. P Hulburt came here and took it, said he would, get It printed and let me iiave one-half of the profits. Q. Has Dr. Hulburt got the manuscript printed? A. I have received a letter stating that it did not read as they expected and they should not print it Q,. How large was the manuscript? A. About one-third as large as the Book 4jf Mormon " (To Mrs. McKinstry.) Q. "How old were you wheu your father wrote the manuscript? A. About five years of age. Q,. Did you ever read the manuscript? A When I was about twelve years of age 1 used to read it for a diversion. Q,. Did the manuscript describe an idola- trous or a religious people? A. An idolatrous people. Q Does the manuscript and Book of Mormon agree? A. I think some of the names agree. Q. Are you certain that some of the names agree? A 1 am not. Q, Have you ever read the Book of Mor- moD ? A I have not." Then the following interview with Mrs. McKinstry on April 4th, 1882, m Washing- ton City :— Q,. "Mrs. McKinstry, have you the Man- uscript Found, Mr. Solomon Spaulding is said to havc' written, in your posession? A. I have not. Q,. What became of it? A. My Mother delivered it up for pub- iication to a Mr. Hulburt who camo to our house in Mass. for it, bearing letters of in- troduction from my uncle, a Mr. Sabine, a "lawyer in New York State. Q,. Why do you not get the manuscript again? A I have sent for it but Hulburt claims hediii not get any. Q,. Does Hulburt say he did not get any «iauuscript from your mother? A. Tliai is what he claims now Q,. How do you account for the fact Mrs. McKinstry that your father, while being- such a good man and a minister, should rite such a bad book as the Book of Mor- mon ? A. Well v/e never could account for that. Q,. Could you identify the manuscript was it now produced ? A I don't think I could. Q. Have you any of the old writings and manuscripts of Mr. Spaulding? A Yes. I have some leaves of his ser- mons. Q. And with these you think you could not identify the manuscript? A No, sir, I think not. (Mrs. Col. Seatou, who is present at the in- view.) Why yes, mother, if you have his writ- ing you ouffht to identify it. Mrs. McKinstry : Well, perhaps I could. Q, Was it written on common foolscap paper or the clergymen note paper? A. It must have been written on foolscap as they had no clergymen note paper in those days. Q,. How do you come to remember any of the names that were in that mam. jcript? A. Well, I suppose I should not, but Mr. Spaulding had a way of making a very fancy capital letter at the beginning of a ciiapter and I remembered the name Lehi, I think it was, from its being written this way " That is the way she identified it — on account of the word Lehi beginning with a very fancy capital letter. Suppose instead of being Lehi tne word had been Levi. Would not the capital letter have been just the same and might there not have been the same fancy about it? And still a different thing altogether. Instead of being Levi, suppose it had been Lincoln. There would have been the same fancy capital letter. But perhaps I ought to read the evidence without comment, and make my comment afterwards, so I return to that. The ques- tion is a.sked . — Q,. " When did you first think about the names in the Book of Mormon and the man- uscript agreeing? A. My attention was first called to it by some parties vvlio asked me if I did not re- member It, and then I remembered that they were.'' These parties were the old neighbors; Aaron Wright, Miller, etc. Did you ever have a case in court, my friends? If so, did you ever know the man on the other side to go to certain parties and say, "Now, see here, you are a good friend of mine and I am in a little trouble and I guess you know something to help me out. Don't you remember that a certain fellow upon a certain day said a certain thing? — And I will tell you what it was now, and see if you don't remember it?" Why! there is so much evidence manufactured in this country in that way that corruption is be- ginning to rule insomuch that it is thought that never in the history of the world be- fore, did so much evil creep into courts of justice, by reason o' ihe manufacturing of testimony and suborning oi witnesses. I again call your attention to the thought: — After her attention was called toil by these good, estimable, best citizens, etc., then she thought she remembered it. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 83 Q. "Was you acquainted with Joseph Smith? A. No. I never heard tell of him till I heard of the Book of Mormon. Q. Was Sidney Rigdon ever about your father's house? A. No, I never saw him." August, 1883, is another important inter- view. I will give the evidence of Mr. Howe, but not claim it as evidence if my friend upon the other side of the question will put him on the stand here for cross-exaniiimtion, I want you to listen to his examination. It is as follows : — Q,. "Mr. Howe, did Hulburt bring the manuscript to you he got of Mrs. (Spauld- Ing) Davidson? A, Yes, he brought one; but it was not the one we wanted ; it only told about some tribes of Indians and their wars along the lakes here and pretended to be tlie writing of some shipwrecked crew. It was the wars of the Winnebagoes, Chicagoes or Niagaries, I believe. Q. Why did you not publish it? A. Because it did not do us any good." Now, who has got the stolen property that he has made such a parade over? These other parties who are seeking for evidence in order to show that Mr. Smith has stolen property in his possession go and get the orig nal manuscript — tlie manuscript in the handwriting of Solomon Spaulding — in the penmanship of Solomon Spaulding, and they bring it here to Painsville, Ohio, and it is traced into the hands of Mr. Howe and Mr. Hulburt, the ones that are determined to crush out the faith of the church : — And what do they do? Publisli it? Keep it? Preserve it? Oh, no! "They did not use it." Why did they not use it? The reason is too evident to require naming. Ten words preserved in Mr. Spaulding's handwriting would have been sufficient to have identi- fied the two if the Book of Mormon was the sanae. And these opposers, both sworn ene- mies of Mr. Smith and the Book of Mor- mon with their affidavits in their hands. deliberately destroyed the "Manuscript Found," which they rot from Mrs. (Spauld- ing) Davidson, and published their state- ments and affidavits, instead of the manu- script that they got. Mind you they got the " Manuscript Found," and the only'oneever so called in fact, and 1 will show "that they did. I know that Mr. Howe tried to make a dodge afterwards and say that Spaulding had another manuscript called the "Roman Manuscript," »o my opponent says ; but Mr. Howe last summer did not give it as the Roman Manuscript, and I am prei)ared to prove that he said it treated of some Indian wars along the lakes here, too. And pre- pared to prove it with such testimony as will impeach him, so that if he will put himself under oath, I can send him to the penitentiary of Ohio for it. I liave asked you (Mr. Braden) to put him on the stand here for examination and you dare not. I make these statements fearlessly, because I want the truth of this ; one witness that heard him make such statement is upon the stand here now. Now, who is the im poster, the deceiver? But I will continue witli Mr. Howe's state- ment of last summer : "What do you know personally about the Book of Mormon and the Spaulding story being the same? A. I don't know anything. Q. Why did you publish a work claiming that the Book of Mormon was the Spaulding Romance? A. Because I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than that Joe Smith saw an angel. Q. Are those your grounds? A. Yes, sir, they are ; and I want you to understand that you can't cram the Book of Mormon down me." No, sir ! Not down him. He is on Mr. Braden 's side. Q,. "Do you swallow the Bible? A. That is my business. Q. Have you not published a pamphlet which does not endorse the Bible? A. Yes, I ha- e." (Time expired.) 84 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. BRADEN'S EIGHTH SPEECH. Gentt.kmen Moderators, T;Adtes and GENTiiEMEN: — It IS pretended that the plates were shown to three witnesses ear- ly in ,Iune, and shortly after to eight more. A contract is made with E. B. Grandin of Palmyra, to publish the book, Harris mort- gages his farm to pay for printing, and in return has a monopoly of the new revela- tion, that is "the fullness of the gospel," He intends "to make money out of it even If it is a lie" he tells his wife. The manuscript is carried to the printer with a great dealof tom foolery. Smith has two guards to protect his sacred person. The manuscript is to be seen only by the printer, and the elect. It is all to be taken out of the office each night by the elect. Rigdon preaches more wildly than ever. Is absent from home much of his time. Some of his adherents in Kiitland adopt his com- munity of goods, and organize a communi- ty, wash feet, etc. 1830— The Book of Mormon comes from the press in the latter part of the winter, with the name of Joseph Smith on it as "Anther and Proprietor." April 6th the first Mormon church is organ- ized at Smith's in Manchester, N. Y. In June the first Mormon conference is held in Fayette, N. Y. Rigdon attends for the last time the Disciple Association of Mahoning, held in Austintown. Herehe makes his last eftbrt to engraft his hobbies on to the movement of the Disciples, Campbell exposes their extravagant unsciiptural character. Rigdon preaches his famous sermon on "King Ahasuerui' horse" and leaves the Dis- ciples forever, utterly soured and dis- appointed. He remarks to Mr. Aus- tin of Warren : 'I have done as much for the Reformation as Camp- b'-ii or Scott, yet they get all the glory," H^ goes back to Mentor, and sends for J'ratt, wlio comes through Mentor in August, and goes from Riiaioii straight to Smith, thirty miles off all public tliorouglifares, travels a great dis- tance, and reaches Smith's Saturday night, just as meeting begins, is con- verted, on the spot, and inade a preacher of Mormonism the next day, Iii October, Pratt, Cowdry and Whitnier come to Mentor, Rigdon pretends to be ignorant of the whole aff'iir, and to oppose it for a day or so, then is miraculously converted by a silly vision. In Dec mber he goes to Smith in New York, preaclies the first and only Mormon sermon ever preached in Palmyra. Is recognized as the "mysterious stranger" v\ lio has been visiting Smith during the last two vears. Mrs. Davidson, Spaulding's wife and widow, goes to Munson, Massachu- setts, to live with her daughter, Mrs. McKinstry. She left the trunk that contained her husband's papers, all that she had of them, in her posses- sion, in the care of her broth er-in- Inw, Jerome Clark, of Hartwicke, New York, 1831— Joseph and Sidney get a revelation that the Mormons should move to Kirtland, Ohio, which is to i)e theirs forever. May 17th the Elders were sent out by twos June 7th the first endowment given. The Rigdonites all over the Western Reserve fall in with Mor- monism, and the imposture is in full blast. June 17th, in obedience to direct revela- tion, Joseph Smith and a party start for Western INIissouri to locate "Zion." August 3rd Joseph locates the corner of the Temple of Zion, three hundred yards west of the Court House in Independence, Missouri, Floods of revelations are poured f)ut, A city with golden streets, a Temple that never had been equalled, and other wonders were to spring up in that generation. 1832— February 16lh, Rigdon and Smith have a sliesand says that is all he obtained. He sells the manuscript of Manuscript Found to Mormons tcr $400 and goes to western Ohio and buys a farm. Never answers the let- lers of INIrs. Davidson and her daugh- ter in regard to the manuscript he obtained. ]83o— Feb. 14. The first quorum of apostles wereordained in Kirtland.and Young and Kimball were among the holy number. Classes of instruction and schools of prophets were established. Orson Pratt invents a new celestial alphabet for the saints. Why did he not adopt the reformed Egyptian from Smith's plates? Mormons have a craze of studying Hebrew. What need was there for that among people who had the gift ot tongues? Kigdon delivers six lectures on faith. All their sense and the scriptural ideas in them are what he heard among the Disciples. They are about the only sensible thing in Mormonism— that is after Bigdon's Mormon stuff had been throv.n out. INIormons have tried to rob Bigdon of the credit of being author of these lectures, and give it to Joseph Smith. Rigdon did the lion's work in brinoing down the game and Joseph took the lion's share, and scarcely left to Rigdon the bones that the lion leaves for the jackal. 1836— Kirtland Temple finished at a cost of $40,000, dedicated March 29. Smith pretends that he sees the house full of angels — that a pillar of fire was seen on the temple — that outsiders beard a great noise — that caused them to flock to the Temple. That the Mormons spoke with tongues. That Jesus, Moses, Elias, — who was he, — and Elijah appeared to him. gave him keys of priesthood, which had been promised years before. • June 29. The Mormons in Clay county, Missouri, are requested to move to Davis, Jackson, and Caldwell counties, because they had been impudent, dom- ineering, and had encroached on the rights of the rest of the citizens. They wisely decided to move and do so, and are kindly treated by the Missourians. 1837— In January, Orson Hyde and Kimball are sent to England as missionaries. In the spring the Mormon Wild Cat Bank is started in violation of law without a charter. The Mormons have a big hotel, tannery, mill, fac- tory, big storesand big things general, ly.' Smith and other leaders build fine houses, live like nabobs and dress like fops on other peoples' money and goods obtained by credit, fraud and rascality. Things are booming in Kirtland. In November Joseph's Wild Cat Bank, his printing oflice, his big store, his mills, his big land speculation, blew up generally. Rigdon and Smith are fined one thousand dollars each for their swindling bank frauds. Print- ting oflftce levied on and Smith de- clared insolvent with all his revela- tions. The printing office sold. The Mormons burn the printing office and the Meth- odist church. 1838— January 12th, Smith and Rigdon ligh^ out in the night to escape the peni- tentiary for swindling and fraud. They arrive in Missouri in March. They sc'atter the saints over several counties in order to obtain political ascendency. The Missourians begin to be alarmed, when they see that the Mormons elect none but Mormons, and that their propertv and rights are taken from them, and Mormons will give them no protection. Smith who had tried to seduce a woman in Pennsylvania, and who had much trouble in Kirtland about his intrigues with beautiful sisters, now began to tell his confidents that he had received THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. arevelation in favor of spiritual wifery, Rigdon's doctrine. Rigdon, Smitii.Cowderyand otlier lead- ing Mormons had practised lewdness and adultery and Rigdon defended it with his spiritual wiferj'. Now Smith told bis intimates that he had received a revelation sanctioning it. He did not reduce his revelation to writing but he practised its ideas more openly. This was one ot»jection that Missouri- ans urged to Mormons. Their loose conduct and family relations and the illegitimate children among them. July 4th. ^ Rigdon delivers his bom- bastic harangue, that the Mormons call "Sidney's Salt Sermon." He mounts King Ahasuerus' horse and cavorts, breathing defiance and de- struction to Missourians and apostates. The Danite Band is organized with Smith's sanction and authority, under David Patton, one of the twelve apos- tles. Dr. Arvard, a leading Mormon, instructs them that it is their mission to defend Mormons in their crimes, by lying, stealing, perjury, profanity and murder. Oliver Cowder3% Martin Harris and David Whitmer, the- three witnesses charging with lying, stealing, counter- feiting and defaming Smith are cutoff. Orson Hyde, T. B. Marsh, W, W. Phelps and many other leading Mormons apostatize. They accuse the Mormons of stealing, murder and other crimes. Tney accuse Smith with planning and being active in the outrages ot the Danites and the rest of the Mormons. Sidney Rigdon and 84 other Mormons retort by accusing the apostates with many infamous crimes. Outsiders conclude that rogues have fallen out and decent people are learning the facts. That both sides tell the truth on each other. Several quarrels occur between Missou- rians and Mormons. 'J'he Mormons steal eighty stand of arms at Rich- mond, Mo. They fire on the inhabi- tants at Crooked River, and kill sev- eral. The inhabitants return the fire and kill Patton, the Mormon Com- mander. Sept 30. In retaliation for the murder of their companions, the militia mas- sacre and outrage Mormons at Hahn's Mill. The Mormons are driven out of Mis- souri. Are given homes, food, cloth- ing and sympathy by the people of Illinois. This should be remembered. The citizens of the Western Reserve, Ohio, treated them kindly until Mor- mon conduct exasperated them be- yond endurance. The Missourians were glad to see their country settle up until Mormon out- rages, insolence and crime enraged them. Then their conduct became outrageous, but IMormons began the trouble. The people of Illinois were lavish in their kindness and favors. No emi- grants were ever loaded with favors as were the Mormons by the people of Illinois. Smith was arrested by the militia, who were determined to shoot him. He and leading Mormons handed over to civil authorities. They allow them to escape believing that to be the best way to get rid of them, 1839~March 25, Brigham Youngand others relay the corner-stone of the Temple. The Elders cut oft' many that had been leading Mormons, for crimes they charged them with. May 9. Smith goes to Commerce, Illi- nois. Dr. Galland gives him a great tract of land. Smith immediately gets a revelation that Zion is on his land. He calls the Mormons to his land, and sells to them what was given to him, and becomes uncommonly rich for that day and country. September, Brigham Young and Kim- ball are sent to England. Orson Pratt does not go although revelation said he would. October. Smith goes to Washington to get redress from the general govern- ment for wrongs to the Mormons in Missouri. 1840— April 21. The name of Commerce is changed by revelation to Nauvoo, which in Smith's reformed Egyptian means beautiful. The Mormons began to build a temple at Nauvoo, although revelation had declared that a temple should be built in no other place than at Zion, near Independence, Mo. October, Mormons petition for a char- ter. It is granted. They are given a charter granting them powers thatno government but an absolute despotism exercises. 1841— February. The charter goes into op- eration. Nauvoo is organized an in- dependent nation almost under it, Nauvoo Legion is organized with Smith as Lieutenant General, and with as many Major Generals, Brigadier Gen- erals and Colonels, as would have officered both armies in our civil war. April 6. The corner-stone of Nauvoo Temple laid with great militarv pa- rade, by Smith, although he had de- clared not ten years before that the oaly Temple that should be built and that speedily, was at Zion near inde- pendence, Mo. 1842 — Smith sends his Danite assassin, Port Rockwell, as he said, "to fulfill prophecy " in assassinating Ex-Gov. Boggs of Missouri. Smith and other leading Mormons prac- ticed spiritual wifery still more open- ly. It leads to trouble between him and his wife. She drives his concu- bines out of the house. 1845— in January Smith uses .Jacobs as a cat's-paw to try the mass of uninitia- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE 87 ted Mormons, in regard to polygamy. Smith and Jacobs select all passages of the Old Testament that refer to polyg- amy, and publisli tlieni in the "Wasp" a Nauvoo paper, witli comments, and special pleading justlfynig poh'gamy. It creates great excitement among the Mormons, tliat are not admitted be- hind the curtain of its mysteries. May 11, 1843, Smitli sealed to Eliza Pat- ridge, Emily Patridge, Maria Law- rence, and Sarah Lawrence, in tlie presence of Emma Smith, his wife, and Lovinia Smith his brother Hyram Smith's daughter, by James Adams a High Priest of Mornionism. Smith liypocritically denied any con- nection with the doctrine avowed by Jacobs, and denounced it. But he had taught it to too many — had practiced it too long, and with too many — liad sealed too many in polygamy, too many leading Mormons had practiced it too long, and too much for it to be concealed. Too many others had learned of the practice and were eager to gratify their lusts as Smith had done, and as other leaders had done. Smith's wife and others had to be pacified and qui- eted. July 12. Smith dictated to Wm. Clay- ton the infamy, that he blasphemous- ly called "A Revelation in Regard to Celestial Marriage." Joseph C. Kingsbury and N. K. Whit- ney took a copy of it. Then it was showed to Joseph's wife. The indig- nant and outraged wife denounced it as from hell and burned it. Kimball, Hyram Smith, Hyde, and at last the Pratts accepted it. August 12. The revelation is accepted and indorsed by the twelve in High C'ouncil. 1844— February. Smith announces himself as candidate for the Presidency of the United States, to the great delight of the Saints. Trouble had been brewing between the Mormons and the people of Illinois, who received them so generously and kindly. The Mormons elect Mor- mons only to office in Hancock county. They had the entire control of all ad- ministration of justice in Nauvoo. The rights of citizents were outraged and they could get no redress. They lost property and traced it to Nauvoo, and their attempts to recover it only exposed them to danger in Nauvoo, and to retaliation and injury from the Mormons. Mormons were insolent and tried to drive Gentiles out of the entire coun- try that tiiey had control of. The law and the rights of the others were trampled on by Mormons, until the outraged people of Illinois rose in arms in self-defense. In addition to this the tstimony of Higby, Martha Brotherton and scores of others in regard to the pollutions of Smith and the leading Morinons in the Endowment Rooms, and their polygamy or sj)iritual wifery, in- creased the indignation of an incensed people. April. Smith tries to seduce Nancy Rigdon the daughter of Sidney Rig- don the author of the doctrine of spiritual wifery— the wife of Wm. Law— the wife of Dr. Foster and others. The incensed husbands and fathers start a paper the "Nauvoo Expositor" to expose Smith and hi» confederates in their infamies. June. The first number contained the affidavits of sixteen ladies of the highest standing in Nauvoo, testify- ing that Smith and his confederates in infamy, leading Mormons, had tried to seduce them into lewdness called spiritual wifery. Smith gets his tools in the council to> pronounce it a nuisance and orders its destruction. Law, Foster and others fiee for their lives. Dr. Foster flees to Carthage for his life pursued by Danites. He sues out a writ for Smith's arrest. Mormons prej^are to resist. Smith refuses to obey the writ. The State military forces propose to enter Nauvoo and take Smith. He flees. Marks and Smith's wife indig- nantly call him back. Smith goes to Carthage declaring that his hellish spiritual wife doctrine had brought him into the condition ins whi(di he stood and would cost hin>, his life. The consience-smitten guilty wretcb meets liis fate by assassination June 27, in Carthage jaih ' The mass of the Mormons follow the lead of the Twelve Apostles and thafe of Priapus Young and migrate to Utah. Small bands follow the lead of Rigdon, Law, Cutler, Strang, and others during the years from 1844 to 18-52. 1850 — William Smith, brother of Joseph, calls a conferance in Covington, Ken- tucky. 1852 — June 1. A conference held in Beliot, Wis. through the efforts of J. W. Briggs. In October a conference held in La- fayette county, Wisconsin. 1853 — In .lanuary the Committee of Elders of the Josephites issue a manifesto to reject polygamy. April 16. Conference in Lafayette county, Wisconsin. Nothing special seems to have been done. 18G0 — In Apiil at the conference at Amboy, Illinois, Joseph Smith, son of the prophet — so called — took his father's place in that portion of the Mormons who called themselves; "The Reor- ganized Church of Jesus Christ ©f I^atter day Saints," who reject Pria- pus Young and his polygamy. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 1860 to 1884- -the record is merely a record of Conferences and no important or startling events are to be recorded. Unless it be the visit of Joseph III to Utah and his discussion in his paper with the Brighaniites over the issue -*' Was Joseph Smith II the author of j polygamy, and the revelation in favor j of so called celestial marrifige, dated ! July 12, 1843. | In this decussion Joseph III comes out j badly worsted. While one may sym- pathize with his desire to rescue his father's name from infamy, the facts of history are against him. QUESTIONS FOR KKLLEY. I. Do you deny the clear and positive declaration of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Miss Miartha Spaulding, John Spaulding, Mrs. John Spaulding, Lake, J. N. Miller, Smith, Wright, Howard, Cunningham, Joseph Miller, McKee, Dr. Dodd, Jackson, and Sidney Rigdon to Dr. Winter, that Solomon Spaulding wrote a historical romance in Bible style? If you do, on what ground do you deny it? Do you deny that the witnesses gave such testimony? Do you impeach the witnesses ? Do you rebut the testimony. II. Do you deny the statement of the witnesses concerning the plot of the romance? That it was precisely as they stated it, the plot in one other book, and only one other, the Book of Mormon ? III. Do you deny the positive statements of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Miss Spaulding, J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, J. N. Miller, Smith, Wright, Howard, Cunning- ham, Jas. Miller, McKee, Dr. Dodd, Jack- son and Rigdon to Winter, that it pur- ported to be a veritable history of the aborigines of America? IV. Do you deny the positive statements of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Miss Spaulding, H. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Wright, Howard, Smith, Cunningham, that it at- tempted to account for the construction of the antiquites of America, by giving a veritable history of their construction ? V. Do you deny the statements of J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, J^ake, Smith, J. N. Miller, Wright, Cunningham, Jack- son, that it attempted to prove that the Israelites were the aborigines of America, by giving the history of such aborigines? VI. Do you deny the statement of J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, J. N. Miller, Wright, Smith, and Jackson, that Spaulding gave an account of their leaving Jerusalem, to start their migration ? VII. Do you deny the statement of J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, J. N. Miller, Smith and Jackson, that he delin- eated their journey by land and sea, until they reached America? VIII. Do you deny the,statement of Miss Spaulding, J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spauld- ing, Smith, Cunningham, and Jackson that he represented Lehi and Nephi to be their letulers ? IX. Do you deny the statements of Mrs. J. Spaulding, J. Spaulding and Jackson, that they quarreled and divided into two parties, the Nephi tes and Lamanites? X. Do you deny the statements of J. Spaulding, Mrs. ,J. Spaulding, and Jackson, that in the wars between the Nephites and Lamanites and between the parties into which these nations divided, there were awful slaughters, such as are unprecedent- ed in any other wars ? XI. Do you deny the statements of J. Spaulding, and Mrs. J. Spaulding that they buried their dead after the awful slaughters in great heaps, Vv hieh caused the mounds, found in America? XII. Do you deny the statement of Mrs. S. Spaulding and Jackson that alter these slaughters, persons who Avere sole sur- vivors Avrote a record of their people? XIII. Do you deny the statement of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Lake, and Jackson that the survivors buried the records in the earth? XIV. Do you deny the statement of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Lake and Cunningham, that this history was found in the earth, where it had been buried : XV. Do you deny the statement of J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, J. N. Miller; and Smith that it gave an account of the civilization, arts, sciences, laws and cus- toms of the aborigines of America? XVI. Do you deny the statement of J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, Wright and Rigdon to Winters, that these aborig- ines were the ancestors of our present In- dians? XVII. Do you deny the statements of Miss Spaulding, J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, Smith, Wiight, J. N. Miller, Cunningham, and Jackson, that it contains the names Nephi, Lehi, Laban, Nephite, Lamanite, Mormon, Moroni, Zara- hemla. etc. ? XVIII. Do you deny the statement that in every instance the names were the names of the same places and persons, with the same characteristics and history, as the names in the Book of Mormon? XIX Do you deny the statements of Mrs. S. Spaulding, Miss Spaulding, J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spaulding, Lake, Jas. Miller, Smith, Cunningham, Jackson, and Rigdon to Win- ter, that it was written in scriptural style? XX. Do you deny the statement of Mrs. S. Spaulding, J. Spaulding, Mrs. J. Spauld- ing, Jas. Miller, Lake, and Cunningham that the manuscript was rendered absurd by its beginning nearly every sentence with: "And it came to pass," "Now it came to pass"? XXI. Do you deny the statement of Jackson that Spaulding got the nick-name of " Old come to pass " from this absurdity ? XXII. Do you deny the statement of Smith that one party left Jerusalem to es- cape divine judgments about to fall on the Israelites? XXTIl. Do j'ou denj'^ the statement of J. N. Miller that one party landed at the Isth- mus of Darieu, and called the land of Zara- hemla, and traveled across the continent to the northeast? XXIV. Do you deny the st-atement of Jas. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 89 Miller and McKee, that in a battle between the Amlicites and Ijamanites the Amli(3ites marked their forelieads with red crosses to distinfTuish them from their enemies? XXV. Do you deny the statement that the Spauldin«r manuscript could have been used for a pretended revelation, an addition to the Bible? XXVI. Do you deny the fact that there never have been but two books, the Spauld- iug- Manuscript Found and the Book of Mor- mon, that had these features, that ever had a single one of them? How do you account for the fact that these two books agree in all these great features, and in all particu- lars, except the religious portion, as accu- rately as any author can reproduce from memory his manuscript, and more accu- rately than most authors, with Dut very rare exception could reproduce their manu- script? Do you claim that by miracle Hpaulding wro*te exactl3^ what Joseph Smith had given to him by the angel twenty years afterwards? XXVII. Do you deny that when a Mor- mon preacher read to a Conneaut audience portions of the Book of Mormon, that ypaulding's old acquaintances recognized his ]SIanuscript Found? Do you deny that Mrs. Davidson declared as she gave the IMS of the Manuscript Found to Mrs. George Clark to read that the Mor- mon Bible was almost a literal reproduction of that manuscript? XXVIII. Do you deny that Spaulding in the seven years prepared several M8 sev- eral drafts of the story? That as James Miller, Miss Spaulding and Rigdon declare that he prepared and sent to the printer for publication a copy of his story? XXIX. Do you deny Mrs. Eichbaum's statement that Rigdon was intimate with Lambdin and hung around the office of Patterson, where Spaulding's j>.IS was taken, until Engles, the foreman, complained of it? XXX. Do you deny the statement of Mrs. S. Spaulding that he took great interest in the story? XXXI. Do you deny the statement of Jas. Miller, Dr. Dodd and McKee that Spaulding said that his MS had been stolen and that Rigdon was blamed with the theft? XXXII. Do you deny the statement of Dr. Winter that Rigdon showed him the MS in 1822 or '3 stating that it was a Bible romance, written by Sj)aulding. a Presby- terian preacher, and left by Spaulding at a printers, and that he had borrowed it, as a curiosity? XXXill. Do you deny Mrs. Dunlap's statement that her uncle Rigdon iiad the MS and spent so much time on it that his wife threatened to burn it, and he replied, ''It will be a great thing some day. Do you deny Jeffrie's statement that 1 Jig- don told him that he took Spaulding's MS from the printers and gave it to Smith to publish? XXXIV. Do you deny thnt Rigdon fore- told the publication of the Book of Mormon years before it appeared, to A. Campbell, A. Bently and D. Atwater — that it was dug out ot the earth, engraved on gold plates, was a history of the aborigines of tills continent, gave a history of the origin of American antiquities — that it said tiiat the gospel had been preached in America in the first century of our era just as the Disciples were then preaching it on the Reserve? XXXV. Do you deny the positive state- ment of Z. Rudolph and other old acquain- tances that Rigdon was frequently absent from home for weeks while the Book of Mormon was being prepared for the press, and gave no account of where he had been? XXXVI. Do you deny the statement of old acquaintances and neighbors of the Smiths, Tucker, Mrs. Eaton, Chase, San- ders and McAuley that Rigdon was seen at Smith's residence before the Book of Mor- mon appeared? XXXVII. Do you deny that Rigdon preached as his peculiar hobbies the pecu- liar features of the Book of Mormon, the community of goods, restoration of spiritual gifts, millenial ideas, his old baptistic op- position to secret societies, etc.. as Green J. Rudolph, Dille and others state? XXXVIII. Do you deny that the Book of Mormon approves of what Rigdon ap- proved of before its appearance, and con- demns what he condemned? XXXIX. Do you deny that where he dif- fers from the Disciples the Book of Mormon differs from them, and that it is peculiarly bitter on those points? XL. Will you tell us: Did Rigdon by mir- icle preach the doctrines of the Book ot Mor- mon before it appeared? Or did he interpo- late his hobbies into the MS he had stolen from Spaulding, when he was preparing it to be used as a pretended revelation? XLI. On what ground do you assail the evidence? Do you deny that' the witnesses so testified? If so, specify what witness? XLII. Do you assail theii character or at- tempt to impeach them? If so, specify what witness? On what ground? XLIII. D . you try to rebut their testi- mony? If so, what witness do you attack? What rebutting evidenee or witnesses do you introduce? XLIV. Do yon attempt tp show defects in their testimony? If so, what witness do you assail? What are the defects in the tes- timony of each? L'ntil Mormons answer these queries let them stop their brazen sneers at the "Spaulding story" that are almost idiotic in their lack of reason or argument. Kelly will not, dare not answer these queries. The Prophet, the three I'd Joseph dare not publish them in his paper and answer them in order one by one. 90 THE P.RADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. KELLEY'S NINTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators. Ladies and Gentlemen :— In the concluding speech of mj'^ opponent on last evening he undertook to show you that he liad been fair in read- ing from his papers as I have been in my argument. I claim that he ought to pre- sent in full his important statements and atfidavits, especially so, since they ought to be in the argument if published, as they are not accessible to but few people ; and that if the statements in full are presented I claim they bear the stamp of condemna- tion upon 'their face. To permit him to read a small portion here, and then run the entire thing in the book would not be fair either, as that would give him an undue advantage in space, (and time consequent- ly) in the discussion. Besides, it would not be his matter in fact and I would have no opportunity of reviewing it here, and a statement or affidavit which he relies upon and wishes his hearers to, in making his affirmative statements good I claim he ought to introduce in full. He turns around and says : " Kelley has done that all the time. Hasn't he read a bit here and another bit there from the Bible?" Now if I did that, without read- ing or introducing sometime the full con- nection, I did not do right. But I deny that I have scrapped in this manner. When I have read to you from the Bible I have read to you the full connection. But this is different from his affidavits or statements in more ways than one. All persons have the Bible at hand so that when a passage is cited they can turn and read for them- selves. Again there is no contest on the Bible here. We have agreed that it is the standard of investigation, and I abide by it as heartily as he. Not so with his pur- ported statements and affidavits. They are not admitted, but absolutely denied, and to come then and stand the test as evidence they must appear in full, with time, place, circumstances, and reasons for making, etc. At best, they are such a doubtful class of proofs that the rules of evidence regard them with grave suspicion Irom any standpoint, and courts pay very little if any regard to them. They are not in their character to be con- sidered in the nature of reliable evidevice. Then we ought to havt- in this discuH.sion a full, fair look at th<-m. Last evening in my introduction of cvideiiot- T read several full statements. There wer»i one or two statements of witnesses that I merely re- ferred to, but not those upon any very im- portant matter. I wish to state another thing before entering upon the argument. I have objected throughout this discussion to his manner of misrepresenting my views to the audience under the cloak of pretend- ing to tell what I believe. Some of you may have thouglit that I was particular about this and that it was simply because I claimed the right to represent my own belief and views and those of tlie Latter Day Saints that I have so strenuously ob- jected. But this is not the fact. The real reason is, because I see my opponent is laboring under a mania. It is an old habit I find of Mr. Braden of misstating or at least of misunderstanding the views of others. He misjudges evidently others from reading their views. I have before me A. Wilford Hall's Aficrocos?)! , one of the ablest journals that is published in the United States ; and the editor, A. Wilford Hall, Ph. B., in reviewing an article of Mr. Braden in the January number, 1884, says : — "We simply state for President Braden's informa- tion, til at we never taught or tlioughtof teaching any such doctrine as he lias aitriVmted to us. We never once iuliinHted or even thouxht that matter was made" out of spirit. We never thought of teaching that God took a portion of his spirit and condensed it into a material world. We never dreamt of teaching that there are but two substances in the universe, much less one, and that these two substances are spirit and matter. We hold, on the contrary, and distinctly teach that there are many essentially different sub- stances in the universe under the general classification of material and immaterial entities, and that, spirit essence belongs among the immaterial substances of nature. How President Braden could deliberately assert and rep< at it in diiferent forms of expression about twenty times that we teach but one substance, — spirit, — and that matter came into existence by the condensation of spirit, is a mystery we leave the reader to solve." Now, I read this to show you that some- times ne misapprehends and misstates other men's meaning, and I want him to be more careful when he undertakes to give my views to the audience, or be patient till I give them myself. If he does not, I shall bring some very serious things against him here, too. When my time was called upon last even- ing I had just finished reading the state- ment of Mrs. Solomon Spaulding, her daugh- ter Mrs. McKinstry, Mr. Howe, and a sec- ond account of Mrs. McKinstry, the only persons of whom we have any account who ever had knowledge sufficient to testify as to the character of the manuscript Mr. Spaulding wrote except Hulburt ; — reading from the statements of the witnesses to show what kind of a manuscript, if any, Spaulding ever wrote. What do these wit- nesses' statements show as thus read, giving them full credit, — and they are all bitterly partizan and prejudiced against the Saints? 1. That the manuscript they claim Solo- mon Spaulding wrote was about one-third as large as the Book of Mormon. 2. Tliat this manuscrijit contained many singular names from the classics and an- cient history not one of which is common to the Book of Mormon, or in any way sim- lar. 3. That the Spaulding manuscript treated of an idolatrous and not a religious people. THE BRA DEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 91 4. That it was a speculation fts to tiie "ten tribes" having coiue to tins country. 5. That neither of the persons who act- ually saw the Bpauldiug manuscript could identify a single word in it as being like the Book of Mormon. 6. That the manuscript, whatever it con- tained, tliey gave to Mr. Hulburt who gave it to Howe," these being the two who were trying to get up a work against tlie Mor- mons. 7. That afterwards Hulburt and Howe wrote back word that they did not use it because it did not read as they expected. Now I will introduce Hulbnrt's statement as published by another enemy of the bock, Mr. Patterson of Pittsburg. Hulburt writes : "GiBsoNBURG, Ohio., Augr. 19, 1879. "I visited Mrs. MHtilda (Spnulding) Davidson at ilon.son, \;dss., in 1834, and never saw her afterwards. [ then receivi d from her a manuscript of her hus- band's which I did not read but brouRht home with me and immediatelv gave it to Mr. E. D. Howe, of Painesville, Ohio, who was then engaged in preparing his booli, 'Mormoiiii'm Unveiled,' I do not know whether or not the document I received from Mrs. Da- vidson was Spaulding's " Manuscript Found,' as I never read it; but whatever it was Mr. Howe received it under the condition on which I tool^ it from Mr.s. David- son, to compare it with the Book of Mormon and then return it to lier. I never received any other manuscript of Spauiding's from Mrs. Davidson or any one else. Of that manuscript I made no other use than to give it, ■with all my other documents connected witli Mormon- ism, to Mr. Howe. I did not dettroy the manuscript nor dispose of it to Joe Smith nor to any other person. No promise was made by m» to Mrs. Davidson that she should receive any portion of profits arising from tr e pnblication of the manuscript if it should bo pub- lished. AH the affidavits procured by me for Mr. Howe's book, including all those from Palmyra, N. Y., were certainly genuine. D. P. Hulburt." With this I refer you to the statement of Mr. Howe, Hulburt's partner in the business of publishing the story, as made by himself, soe Mormoiiism Uriveiled, page 288, as follows : "The trunk referred to by the widow was subsequent- ly examined, and found' to contain only a » ngle manuscript book in Spaulding's handwriting, contain- ing al;ont one quire of pacer. This is a romance purporting to have been translated from the Latin, found on 24 rolls of parchment in a cave on the banks of Conneant creek, but written in modern style, and giving a fatiulous account of a ship's being driven iipon the American coast while proceeding fn^m Rome to Britain, a short time previous to the Christian era, i';;s country then being inhabited by the Indians. This old manuscript has been shown to several of the foregoing witnesses who reognize it as Spaulding's, , he having told them that he altered his first plan of , writing, bv going farther back with dates, and writing N in the old 's(uipture strle, in order that it might appear I. more amnent. They say that it bears no resemblance / to the 'Manuscript Found.'" \ It wns never taken back to Mrs. Spauld- ing, the widow, or to Mrs. MoKinstry, the daughter, from whom it was obtained, and t ic only persons in existence competent of identifying the ' Manuscript Found,' but carried up to a few of the 'old neighbors,' who were at war with the Saints, and who said they heard the 'Manuscript Found,' read twenty-three years before, for identifi- cation. They say, says Howe, it bears no resem- blance to the manuscript. But it is evident that they lied, if they said so, for Howe who read it says : "This is a Romance, purporting to have been trans- lated from the Lat n, found on 24 rolls of parchment in a cane on the banks of Conneaut Creek, but written in modern styls, and giving a fabulous account of a ship's crew being drivrn upon the American coast while proceeding from Rome to Britain a short time previous to the Christian era, this country then being inhabited by tlie Indians." "Found in a cave." This is the very manuscript remember, that they have claimed all the time that ."-spaulding wrote, traced right into Mr. Howe's hands — the one that was "found in a cave," so said. It proves itself to be the Manuscript Foimd, the very one they got, and the very one they made way with, as I will show yo\i, lest it should spoil their little game. The truth of the matter is very clear ; — Hulburt and Howe in their madness had before this, skulked down to Conneaut, and over into Pennsylvania with statements for a few of these ready witnesses who were embittered against the Saints, (for a large number of people had accepted the faith about Conneaut, Mantua and other places, and thus made the sects rage), got the parties to sign their stuff which they had garbled from the Book of Mormon, and afterwards when they got the Spaulding manuscript they went back to see what the trouble was, — it did not read right. As might have been supposed the witnesses were caught ; they could not deny that it was Spaulding's manuscript, too clear a case for that ; Hulburt had been and got it right from the Mrs. Solomon ( Spaulding) Davidson herself: What do they do? In- vent another lie "to get out of the first, by saying: "Spaulding told them that he had altered his first plan of writing by going farther back with dates, and writing in the old scripture style in order that it might appear more ancient." Did you ever ! ! Right out of the book that Braden fats on ! ! ! Spaulding is made to go to each one of these witnesses, or they come to him, that he may tell them he altered his first plan of writing and he a stranger to them as it were, for all the time he was in that part of the country was but two years. Well, had they known his first style? If so, why did they not state something about it before they were caught? And how came it that they never struck upon this modern style while they read the Spaulding manuscript so much, which they try to foist upon the world? A man that will take up and believe this con- tradictory and abominable stufT gotten up by a set of conspiring fanatics and tools more than three years after the publi- cation and sale of a work they are trying by this very means to break down, and with that work right in their hands to draw their names from as admitted in their statements, see ^Vright's, Miller's, Lake's, etc., is doomed to hopelessly fall in with the class of people the apostle speaks of, as living in the last times when such a message of truth as the Book of Mormon contains should b© presented to the people, who would oppose the work, the truth: — "With all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them tbat perish : because they received not the love of ilitJ truth that they might be saved. And tor this cause God shall send them strong delusion that they snonia believe a lie : Thai Ihev all might be damned who be- lieved not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteous- ness." 2 Thes.>i. 2:10, 11, 12. TIIE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Men must examine a message from the truestiindpoint, God's standard : "He that ahideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Bon." Don't brealv God's law by speaking mean and slanderous things against those who dif- fer from 3'ou in religion; there is neither sense nor argument in it. "Speali evil of no one." "Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them;" and know assuredly, that, "whosoever transgresseth [this law] and abideth notin the doctrine of Christ, lie hath not God," So says the apostle John, and so say I! The Book' of Mormon is presented to the world and claims to be the truth; it is presented to the people as such and demands a fair inves- tigation. As in every age of the world when God has sent a message, Satan can't stand to see the word, the truth, take root in the heart ; so he begins on stories, and char- acter, manufaeluring and multiplying scheme after scheine, falsehood after false- hood, until in this instance the Spaulding "Romance," came along, not even claiming to be a thing of truth, but a speculative lie, — theory ; and the people who are too self-righteous and fanatical to believe the truth, at once drink in the theory of the "Romance." The evidence from their own witnesses is complete in showing one thing, that is, that Spaulding never wrote an article of any kind that would in size, Character, st^'le, sense, taste, sentiment, or in any manner compare with the Book of Mormon. But how about "old come to pass," says one. Like the pretended remembrance of the names Lehi and Neplii, the false sto- ry of it was put inio these witnesses' mouths and they thought it a smart thing to say; that is evident to a man who will think. Why should they so persistently call Spaulding "old come to pass?" Turn to the Bible, in almost every part it abounds with the expression. In some parts of St. Luke's gospel it is as frequent as in the Book of iMormon, How could it receive the title of "old come to pass," from singularity, when the expression was already a familiar one? Such a statement is only equaled by the brazenly one put into the mouth of Henry Lake of the La- ban account. "I pointed out to him what I considered an inconsistency, which he promised to correct ; but by referring to the Book of Mormon, I find to my sur- prise that it stands there just as read to me then." Did you ever hear the like my friends? Wh^vp is the inconsistency tliis wise man pointed out, who although he had not seen or lieaid anything in the Spauld- ing Romance in twenty years, pretends ir- twenty minutes reading to detect it by the same passages which Mr. Spaulding had read to him ; only think, just read to him, more than 23 years before. Take an- other uf Braden's witnesses, John N Millei , the fellow who worked for Lake, anothei o*' their holy crowd. Twenty-two years pass- ed away wit.h no word uora the manu- script, and then ho remembers ihe jjame.* Nephi, Lehi, Moroni, Zarahemla, (the en- tire book they have here; the first part, middle, and last part where the name Mo- roni is found) and he has the history so well that Braden says, "the average Mormon preacher," and I suppose he refers to me by this, "could not to-day give it better." No, sir ! But this smart John Miller can give it from having read it in the old jnanuscript twenty 3'ears before. And Eraden drinks it down ! What a wonder- ful Miller this was ! Can't you give us a further clue to his life and services to his country? But stop, my friends ! He fur- ther testifies. Let me read: — "He (Spauld- ing) said that he designed it as a historical novel, and that in after years it would bo believed by many people as much as the his- tory of England." There I Can you beat that ? And yet there is to be no more prophets ! This is Braden's prophet. I might thus take up and show the duplicity, cheek, falsehood and spuriousness of every one of these, said to be statements, but I shall not so dispose of my time. They are all effectually, fully and completely set out and accounted for bej'ond a doubt by any man who wants the truth in another man- ner, and which I shall soon present you. I am asked to answer the question, How will you dispose of them ? "Attack their char- acter ?" What! Don't he yet know me well enough to know, that I will not make of myself a bird of carrion to pass over all proper and respectable ways of testing a matter, to gather from the sepulchre of the dead and rotten ? I too highly respect the Bible and the Christian religion, as well aa m3-sclf, for this. If character is to be the test and that proven by one's enemies, our Bible is not worth a straw ; the entire list of writers will go down in the mire. And should we test the issue of Bible writers on character by the admissions of friends, one half of our inspired men of the Bible would go down. No sir; I have from the first tak- en such grounds, that I could maintain my faith clear through, in the Bible as well as the Book of Mormon. Consistency is a jew- el to be admired. Who is so blind as to not see that if character is to be the test, that is to try the faith of the Saints, and that character proven by their enemies, the same rule must be followed in trying others also. The position i« more desperate than was entertained by ancient heathens. "The good that men do" says Mark Antho- ny over the dead body of Ciiesar, "lives atter them, the evil is oft interred with their bones ; so let it be with Caesar." But Braden says, let us find some evil and perpetuate that. Character ! "What would he accept as good under his rule? Nobody ever lived of prominence in God's work who has not been slandered and berated. Doubtless many things, too, were true against the early Christians; they ivere true 1)1 part; so admitted in the Bible. But I am not a teacher of the doctrine of infalli- ijility in m.ankjnd. I believe with Jesus rlij- Jone are good, (except God), "no, not one.'' Nov' his lojag abuse and misrepre- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 93 eentation of the characters of Mi Smith, Rigrdon and others last evening is entirely foreign to the question under discussion. Suppose they did do wrong and many ab- surd and foolish things ! what weight can that have in determining whether the part God is said to have done is wrong? Try this matter upon its merits. I do not, nor does the church of which Mr. Smith was un- der divine Providence the founder, claim for these n>en perfection. Many of the things that he stated about these men and what they did may be true; but as to the majority t am satisfied they are as false as hell itself. And the list which he calls his " Mormon Chronology," is dotted about oc- casionally with a fact, that he may thereby hide the deformity of a hydra-head, which he hopes to force upon the people But his chronology as a whole is a brazen piece of deception and of false statements, drawn from such works as Howe, Tucker, &c. Suppose I take up Mitchell's history of the United States and read the infamous story recorded against the character of John Wesley in Georgia, charging a crime against that religious teacher more heinous than any ever made against Smith, how would it affect the Methodist religion? Suppose I take John Calvin, who permitted one of his own adherents to be burned at the stake because he differed with him on relig- ion. Suppose I take the case of the great reformer Luther, and the noble Melancthon, and show that they consented to one of their members entering into polygamy, the great Luther actually performing the mar- riage ceremony ! Shall I thrust it in the face of the Lutheran Church upon a trial of their faith? I know this was done by cer- tain parties this last Fall upon the return of the 400th anniversary of the " Pious monk," but how despicably mean and spite- ful it seemed to thinking men and women ! The rule is wrong. We must get upon a higher plane. Who wants to take the offlce of " the accuser of the brethren?" — Gathering and sowing the evils spoken against men. Enter the mission of Satan in tne world ! No, sir; not me. Don't need to ask me, if I will try to hunt up your wit- nesses' character, unless I had those same witnesses where they could face the ones they are accusing, and they in turn could face their accusers. This is demanded in decency. Why! do you suppose if I was debating with an infidel I would i-ake up the past life of Col. IngersoJl? Is that what you call impeaching character? To go and rake up all you can find about a man and peddle it — send it forth — publish it. That is the way they slander men, but not the way they impeach them. Suppose an infi- del should attack the character of the wri- ters in the Bible in the same way, and they often do, would I then resort to such a course? No, sir. Such a contest would be decided upon the ground of who could get hold of and tell the biggest falsehood, and I would engage in no such littleness. But I have already devoted more time to this than it deserved. It has been because I did not know but possibly someone present might think there was a little argument in such a tirade as we heard from the nega- tive last night, and for that reason only, I have noticed it. As for m3'self I couldlis- ten for weeks at such abuse and villi fica- tion if necessary with simply a sense of pitj' and shame for the one who spins it. But I shall now finish my review of the "Spaulding Romance," and every one of his witnesses' testimony, and then each evening I shall have new matters of evi- dence on the question under discusf^ion, and many that have never been presented to any audience. Here I might ask the ques- tion. Do you still want proof that Spauld- ing never wrote a manuscript like the Book of Mormon, in any sense, or feature? The total basis for all of their huge stories and false statements about "Spaulding's manu- script," was this one thing: — Spaulding, who came to New Salem, now Conneaut, Ohio, and remained for about two years, first representing himself as a preacher, then a dealer in real estate, and thirdly un- dertook to erect a "forge," (in all of which he failed, and suddenly left, leaving his debts unpaid, so stated by their own wit- nesses), at one time during his stay at New Salem, told some parties that he had found an old manuscript in a cave on Conneaut creek, which gave an account of a long lost shipwrecked crew on the American coast, and it would be greatly interesting when published, and he would be able to make a raise of enough money to pay all his debts and be independent. He wanted a little more money out of them so he could go to Pittsburg and have it published. He roped in a few and left, but instead of getting up the startling publication, he stayed but a short time in Pittsburg and went to Wash- ington county Pennsylvania, where he died in 1816. He never, however, reported to his creditors and they were left in the suds, waiting for a check from the broken- down clergyman. Twenty-one years pass awa.y, and no tidings. In the meantime the Book of Mormon is published and is making a great excitement in the world, and these duped creditors of Spaulding's begin to think of the startling shipwreck tale, of which Spaulding had toM tliom he would make his fortune; ana tncy ,uot hold of a copy of the Book of Mormon and the base Hiilburt, who had been cut off from the Church of the Latter Day Saints; got out their statements and sent Hulburt after the Spaulding manuscript. This they found carefully laid away in the trunk of Spauld- ing's widow, and it is brought back by them and put into the hands of Editor Howe, of Painesville, Ohio, who reads it and finds no resemblance whatever to the Book of Mormon. Howe says, page 2^8 of his book entitled "Mormonism Unveiled:" "This is a romance, purporting to have been trans- lated from the Latin, found on twent3'-four rolls of parchment, in a cave, on the banks of Conneaut creek, but written in modern style, and giving a fabulous account of a ship's being driven upon the American 94 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. coast while proeeedinsr from Rome to Brit- ain, a short time previous to the Christian era, this countrj'- then being inhabited by the Indians." . , ,, , Here is the Spauldino: tale in a nutshell! The whole thin? entirely different from the Book of Mormon ; the style, dates, names, peoples, and all. The whole thing as foreign to the Book of Mormon as heaven to hades, but it is the little nit from which the enemies of Mr. Smith hatched this terrible " Spaulding Story." This i^ his alibi. How I ask you, does his evidence stand upon the first point ? Did Solomon Spaulding ever write a manuscript like the manuscript of the Book of Mor- mon in any sense ? I say the evidence from his own witnesses is against him and ask him to now meet the issue he has made. But he does not only have to show this, "but to show also : 2nd. That Eigdon and Smith in some way stole it and that Smith used it, 3d. That iiigdon knew of Smith and the Book of Mormon before the book was pub- lished in 1830, and was connected with the two in some way. 4th. That Parley P. Pratt did not bring a a copy of tills book and present it to Kig- don while Rigdonwas a Disciple Preacher, and then and there, in 18:^0, Rigdon first knew the contents of said book. In beginning upon the -second prop- osition, I am reminded of the story that is told of the absent juror. He had been subpoenaed to attend a session of court ; but when the day arriveii and court was called, he was not there ; and the judge abruptly demanded to know tlie reason. The juror's friend arose and said there were several reascms. And proceeded to give them. The first is, he said, that the man is dead. There! that is enough, said the judge, you need not give any more. Now it seems to mn that if I have shown you clearly that Spaulding never wrote such a manuscript a^ the Book of Mormon, or one that had any resemblance to it, from their own witnesses, that ought to be enough on this ; but lest some one may yet have a doubt I will produce some further evidence. First a letter from Sidney Rig- don to the editors of the Boston Journal. "COMMERCB, May 27th, 1839. Mb^srs. Bartlf.t and Suhvan :— T,iere was no man by the name ff Patterson, during my residence in Fiitsburg, who had a printing office: what might have been before I lived there I know not. Mr. Ro) ert Patterson, I w^istoM, had owned aprinting office before I lived in that city, but had been unfor- tunate in business and failed before my residence there. This Mr. Patterson, who was a Presbyterian Preacher, I had a very slight acquaintance with during my residence in Pittsburg; he was tlien acting under an agency in the book and stationery busiiie--s and was the owiier of no property of any kind, print- ing office or anything else, liuring the time I resided in the city. If I were to say tliat I ever heard of the Rev. Solomon Spaulding and his wife, until Dr. P. Hulburt wrote his lie about me, I should be a liar like unto themselves." Rigdon is emphatic, when he talks, you know, necause many of you used to hear him talk. "Why was not the testimony of Mr. Patterson ob- tained to give force to the shameful tale of lies? The o- ly reason is, that he was not a fit tool for them to work with ; he would not lie for them; for ;f he were called on, he would testify to what I have said. This Hiilburt once belonged to the Methodist Church, but was excluded for immoralities. He afterwards im- posed himself upon the church of Latter Day Saints, and was excluded for u-iug obscene language ti> a young lady, a member of said church, who resented his insult with indignation, which became boih her character and profession. After his exclusion he swore — for he was vilely profane — that he would have re- venge, and commenced his work. He soon found assisiance; a pious old deacon of the Campbellite church, by the name of Onis Clapp, and his two sons, Thomas W. Clapp, and Matthew S. Clapp, both "'mp- bellite preachers, abetted and assisted by her Campbel ite preacher, by the name of Adamson le itly, HuDiurt went to work catering lies for the company. Before he got through, his conduct became so scandal- ous that the company tUterly refused to let his ,ime go o\it with the lies he had collected, and he and his associates had made, and they substituted the name of E, D. Howe. The change, however, was not much better." Then he refers in terms to Mrs. Matilda Davidson, but it is not material and I have not it copied in here. I will read it if neces- sary. " A man of character would never have put his name to a work which Hulburt was concerned in. The tale In your paper is one hatched up by this gang from the" time of their expulsion." Rvspectfully, S. Rigdon." From the strong language of this letter it is easy to see that Mr. JUgdon had been maligned by the Campbellites, the people witli%'hom he had formerly been connect- ed to such an extent that it was almost impossible to bear it any longer; and the reason of this was simply because he saw fit ill the honesty of his heart, to step out and embrace what he believed to be a bet- ter and higher religion than was to be had by remaining with his Campbellite breth- ren. Hence it is, that when he speaks, it is with that sternness and force, that was a terror to his maligners. Heretofore they have generally told about Rigdon working' for Patterson, but Braden has seen this go to the wall once, as he did also his "woman preacher story." at Wil- ber, Neb., so he has deftly yclept it this time ; that is better than no fairness ; when you are driven clear to the wall drop it ; and if he was not so eager to grab at some- thing else he would improve in the world much better. This letter of Rigdon 's effectually shows that he never worked in a printing oflice in Pittsburg; that Patterson had no such office when he was there to his knowledge, and was not engaged in the business of print- ing; and, referring to Mr. Patterson, who was at the time a Presbyterian preacher, as a man who would corrobrate this state- ment. Afterwards Patterson does corrob- orate it. Rigdon says, the first he ever knew of the Book of Mormon was in the year 18.'?0, when a copy was handed him by a minister of the Latter Day Saints by the name of P. P. Pratt. (Time called.) THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 93 MR. BRADEN'S NINTH SPEECH. GentijEMen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen : — Mr. Kelley told you last night that Mrs. Smith, the mother of Joe Smith, and some other mem hers of the family brought letters from a Presbyterian church in Vermont and joined the Presbyterian church in Manchester, New York. In the life of Joseph Smith by his mother she says she allowed herself to be baptized in Ver- mont, but refused to join any church ; that she rejoiced when the Mormon church was started, that she then found a church that she could join. Nota Smith ever belonged to a church in Palmyra, Not a Smith ever belonged to the Presbyterian church in Manchester, for there was no Presbyterian church in Manchester until 31 years after the Smiths left Manchester ; not one of the Smith family ever belonged to any church until Mormonism was started, for although very superstitious, they were noted for their neglect and disregard of the church and all things connected with religion. That statement of my opponent is one of those statements some- times said to be made out of whole cloth. My opponent forgets that his talk here will be stereotyped into a book and will stand for generations when he makes such reckless misstatements as he did last night. The reader will read in my argument that I introduced Priest's " Wonders '' to show that the idea that the aborigines of America were Israelites was hundreds of year* old-:r than the Book of Mormon, and a widely believed theory, and that I said not a word on "mounds" or "antiquities" in connec- tion with that book. He will then read Kelley's statement that I introduced it to off-set his argument on antiquities and ask himself. "What does the fellow mean by such reckless assertions?" He will read my statement that if the Nephites were circumcised Israelites they belonged to the same fold as those Jesus "was addressing and could not be the other sheep not of that fold ; or if they liad aban- doned circumcision they were no longer Israelites and the prophecies Kelley quoted could not apply to them, and then read with amazement that I said or hinted that they were not circumcised. I never said so for there nerer were any Nephites to be circum- cised. The reader will read Kelley's asser- tion that I introduced no witnesses, read no testimony, and then turn back and see in different type from my speeches the testimony of 29 witnesses — see that I read the testimony of some witnesses two or more times : that I had read more of Mrs. David- son's testimony than he did : longer por- tions from several witnesses than he did from any that he introduced ; I introduced and read testimony just as he did, and exclaim: "What can the fellow mean by such falsehoods?" He will read Kelley 's assertion that I said that Rigdon worked in Patter- son's printing office at Pittsburg and turn back and read my statement that he did not work there but was in Pittsburg learning the tanners' trade and was in Patterson's office as a crony of Lambdin, one of the printers, and in that way learned of the existence of the Spauld'ing manuscript, which was attracting much notice in the office, and became much interested in it, and stole it, as is proved by witnesses, and exclaim: "Why, what does that fellow by such reckless falsehoods?" He will read my clear proof that Spauld- ing wrote several manuscripts of his Manu- script Found and then read with amazement Kelle3''s reckless assertion that he wrote but one. The manuscript described by Mrs. Spaulding was his first brief draft. It was this that John Spaulding read through; it was this that Mrs. McKinstrey read. The reader will read with amazement the objection that Spaulding's Manuscript Found represented the aborigines of Amer- ica as idolaters, and the Book of Mormon represents them to be worshippers of the one God : when he remembers that I showed that Rigdon changed the manuscript when remodeling it to use as a pretended reve- lation. He will read with amazement Kelley's assertion that Hulburt obtained from Mrs. Davidson the manuscript of the Manuscript Found when she says she only gave him an order to examine a'trunk hun- dreds of miles away in Hartwick, N. Y , to see if it was in the trunk. The reader will read with amazement Kelley's fabrication that Howe said that he received from Hurl- but a manuscript of the Manuscript Found. Howe distinctly and pointedly declares that he did not receive a manuscript of the Manuscript Found but the beginning pages of an entirely different manuscript — the manuscript of the first romaiice written by Spaulding, written before he began the Manuscript Found. In that first romance Spaulding assumed that the Indians round the Great Lakes were descendants of ship- wrecked Romans. He abandoned this theory and began the Manuscript Found, in winch he assumed the aborigines of America and the ancestors of all Indians were Israelites. Howe does not say that he received the Manuscript Found and that the Manuscript Found was not what he ex- pected it to be as Kelly falsely asserts he says. He says that he did not receive the Manuscript Found but the manuscript of an earlier and entirely different story and the manuscript that he received was not what he expected, for it was not the manuscript of the Manuscript Found, which was what he expected to receive. Why did not he re- ceive the manuscript of the Manuscript Found ? " We will a tale unfold" that will explain that. In a letter written to J. E. 96 TPIE BR ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Gaston in 1842, Mrs. Davidson says that shortly after Hurlbut left Munson with the order from her to get the manuscript of tlie Manuscript Found from the trunk at Mr. Clark's at Hartwicke, N. Y., she receiv- ed a letter from Hurlbut, in which he told her that he had obtained from the trunk what he had come for, the manuscript of the Manuscript Found, and that when he had taken it to the parties that sent him, and it had been used for the purpose for which they wanted it, that is published to expose the plagiarism of the Book of Mor- mon from it, he would return it to lier. Hurlbut came to the people at Conneaut and Howe, and lied, and said that the only manuscript he found was the part of the manuscript we have described above. Up to this time he had been very active in get- ting up the book Howe published ; he had spent months and much money in collect- ing the evidence used in it : now he sud- denly abandons all, takes no further part or interest in it and goes to Western Ohio and buys a farm ; when, before he had not money enough to pay his traveling ex- penses. Mrs. Davidson, on reading Howe's book and Hurlbut's statement as given in it was amazed and wrote to him reminding him of what he had written to her and that the Clark's had written that he had got the manuscript of the Manuscript Found. She demanded that he return the manuscript to her. Her daughter also wrote repeatedly. The letters were sent to persons who wrote that they handed them to Hurlbut. He never answered one of them. The Rev. J. A. Clark published in the " Episcopal Record- er" that the Mormons in Missouri said they paid Howe $400.00 for the manuscript. The Rev. Btorrs in a letter published in " Gleanings by the Way" states that Hurl- but boasted that he made $400.00 out of the manuscript. He sold it to the Mormons in Kirtland. These charges Hurlbut never met, but laid under them till his death. This answers the demand why the Spauld- ings did not publish the manuscript of the Manuscript Found and expose the fraud. That is the very thing they tried to do, but the agent by whom they sent the manu- script to Howe, the publisher, betrayed them and sold it to the Mormons. Hurl- but's false and contradictory statements and absurd stories to Mr. Patterson in 1880 proved that he was guilty of what he was charged with and was trying to lie out of it. The reader will read with amazement if not too much disgusted at its stillness the at- tacks on Hurlbut'5 character by Kelley and ask what has the character of the scribe who collected the evidence to do with the truthfulness of the statements of the wit- nesses? He will read in the same waj' the statements over which Kelley so idiotically makes such great eyes and mouths that flowesaid that personally he knew nothing about the facts stated by the witnesses whose testimony he published and ask what odds does it make if the lawyer does Qot know personally the facts his witnesses state? Kelley asks why is not Zebulon Randolph here? Kelley has quoted Howe, Mrs. McKiustrey and several others why are wot they here? Why does he not have them here instead of telling us what he says they told him and by the way Mr. Howe contradicts flatly Mr. Kelley's state- ment in his case. His silly objection puts out of court all his own witnesses. Has not Kelley sense enough to see that in such ob- jections he puts a club in my hands with which I cin beat out his own brains if he has any ? He asks what is the connection between Mrs. Dunlap's statement that Rig- don spent so much time over a certain man- uscript, and Rigdon's authorship of the Book of Mormon? The intelligent reader will see the connection when he reads evi- dence that Rigdon stole the Spaulding manuscript : that he had it in his possession before this time and that he also stated to two witnesses that he also obtained the Spauld- ing manuscript from the printing office and told one of them that he gave it to Smith to publish as the Book of Mormon. Placed be- tween such evidence airs. Dunlap's evi- dence is another link in a chain Mormons cannot break. Hfe asks what relevance in the statement of Zebulon Rudolph and old citizens of Mentor that Rigdon was absent from home for weeks at a time and no one knew where during the three years that preceded the appearance of the Book of Mor- mon? When taken in connection with the testimony that he was seen at Smith's dur- ing the same time as stated by Case, Saund- ers, Tucker, McAuley and Mrs. Eaton the reader will see the force of the evidence. Such, ladies and gentlemen, is the at- tack on our array of testimony; reckless falsifying of evidence, reckless fabrications of what has no proof, and indeed is flatly contradicted by the evidence and weak pet- tyfogging. I confess I have been amazed a't the weakness of the reply. Is that the best that the chosen representative of Mor- monism with all its inspiration, spiritual gifts, illumination and revelations, can do? I have presented the evidence of 29 wit- nesses. Has he attempted to prove that they did not testify? No. That they are wanting in truthfulness? No. Has he attempted to rebut their evidence? No. He has falsified their statements, misrepre- sented them, fabricated rebutting evidence, playing false witness and pettyfogger at the same time. Such is the great Mormon Cham- pion's attacks on the Spaulding story. If my opponent would present one quarter of the evidence I have presented to prove his right to an estate it would be given him, Kelley denies that there is such a GreeK word as "Mormon." Donnegan gives tli^ following Mormon (anglicized Mormon) "A female spectre, a phantom." Other lexicons give the word and define it "a hobgoMin, a bugbear." Spaulding from his knowledge of Greek used the word as significant of the character of his fabrication. Smith and Rigdon wei e too ignorant to know the irony there was in the word and published to the world their new translation as the "Book THfe BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 97 of Mormon" — "Book of Phantom, of Hob- goblin, of Buerbear," the most appropriate title for the fraud and the evil work it has done amonff fools. But think of Israelites over in America who did not know there were such beings as the Greeks in existence, using pure Greek names ! My opponent betrays his ignorance when he asserts that the Greek word is " Mormou " or "Mor- moun," He evidently mistook "Nu," the Greek N. for U. which corresponds to the Greek Upsilon. Mormon must belong to the Reformed Egyptian of Joe t^mith and his disciple Kelley. Alma is a pure Latin word. Nephi is a Greek word. Israelites in America using Greek and Latin words! ANAI^YSIS OF THE BOOK OF MORMON. Having given the history of the origin of the Book of Mormon we shall now analyze the book itself. We have already described what the work purports to be. It was given to the world in the following manner : — Joe Smith asserts that an angel revealed to him the existence and location of certain plates engraved with certain characters; that he obtained these plates and that by inspira- tion, the miraculous power of God, he trans- lated them. These plates had been buried by Moroni about 1400 years before Smith obtained them. They contained an abridg- ment that Moroni and his father had made by inspiration of the history of the abori- genes of America. This abridgment was based on an immense library of plates writ- ten by inspired men during the period of over 4,000 years, beg)))ning with Jared's brother, who was contemporary with the building of the Tower pf Babel. Mormons defend this claim in three ways : first, by an appeal to the external evidences, the af- fidavits of the eleven witnesses; second, that the utterances of the Book of Mormon agree with the teachings of the Bible and are good; tliird, by a most vindictive, ma- licious, infidel attack on the Bible when the absurdities of the Book of INIormon are exposed. The first line of proof displays some craft. They parade the eleven wit- nesses. If we impeach these witnesses as we can and shall do, they can raise the cry of persecution and attempt to rouse sympa- thy. We shall not be deterred from duty by any such cry. As they have introduced the witnesses and staked all on their testimony, we shall impeach them. In reply to the second line of proof Ave shall show that all that is good in the Book of Mormon is felo- niously stolen from the Bible, and is good because it is the teaching of the Bible and not because it was given by inspiration in the Book of Mormon. Because a counter- feit resembles the genuine it is no proof that it is genuine, but that it imitates the genuine in order to deceive, and because a book pretending to be inspired resembles one that is inspired, it is no proof that the first is inspired, but that the counterfeit imitates the inspired book in order to de- ceive. Counterteits imitate every feature of the genuine if they can. Hypocrites and imposters imitate every feature and senti- ment of the good and true. iSome of the most infamous hypocrites have imitated, copied and uttered, the best sentiments that have ever been uttered. The discourses and writings of the most infamous charae- ters that have ever lived have contained the very best of truth and goodness and often not a word but what is true and good. The devil can transform himself into an angel of light, and talk as much truth and goodness as an angel of light. Because he talks as perfect truth and goodness as an angel of light does not prove that he is an angel of light. If the Mormon plea that we must accept a man as a good man be- cause he talks so, be true ; there can be no means of detecting hypocrites and an im- poster, for does not he talk all right? If the devil repeats ton? thedoctrinesofCliristand the truth we must accept him as perfectly good and declare that he has the Father and the Son and is inspired, if he asserts that he is. This claim, the pet argument of Mormonism, is the most ineffable balder- dash that I have ever met. The Mormons reverse the line of argu- ment. They absurdly assert that the claims, the pretensions of a book should determine the character of the book. Common sense declares that we should carefully investi- gate the character of the book to deter- mine whether these claims be true. They claim that we should accept their book a» divine because its author claims to be a prophet, and eleven men assert that he is inspired. Common sense says accept a man as a prophet because the contents of his book prove him to be a prophet. The one sole argument of the Mormon is a constant jabber of one passage. "He that hath the Doctrine of Christ hath the Father and the Son ;" that is, he must be a child of God a good man, and inspired, if he claims to be inspired. Imposter Joe presents to us in his book the Doctrine of the Christ, and although we show that every word that is good was stolen from the Bible, we must believe that he has the Father and the Son that he is a good man ; that he is inspired because he says he is, and that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin because im- poster Joe says so. The devil presents to us a book that contains the doctrine of the Christ stolen from the Bible. According to Mormon logic, because he has the doctrinie of the Christ, no matter how obtained, no matter what his character may be, no mat- ter what his motive may be, in presenting^ it, the devil has the Father and the Son, is a child of God, and if he says that he is inspired we must l)elieve him and accept his book as of Divine origin. When we remember that every good thing in the Book of Mormon is stolen from the Bible, the absurdity of the claim that be- cause the truths of the Bible are in the pos- session of these thieves tlierefore they ar.© inspired and their book of Divine origin can hardly be appreciated. To claim that the thieves were good men is an insult to com- mon sense, but to claim that they were in- spired of God in the theft, because they m THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. stole the Divine utterances of the Bible and mendaciously presented them to the world as their own inspired utterances is idiocy that is almost sublime in its magni- tude! Priapus Young presents us the un- varnished Mormon argument when he de- clares " The Doctrine the Prophet Joseph (eacheg i» »!! I "careabotit. Bring anything against that it you can. " As for anything else i "don't r-areif thel'rophet Joseph " act(.'d like thedevil. H.' biought forth a docfine that " will save us if we will abide liv it. He may liave got "drunk every day of his life, slept with liis neigh >'or's "wile cve-v iiiglit, ran horses and gambled every day; " I care nothing about that, for 1 never embrace any "man in my faith. The doctrine the Prophei Joseph "produced will save \on snn me, and tlie whole " world." If you can ''n'^ any fault with his doctrine, "fiuditi'' Kelley is not as frank and as honest as Priapus Young, but that is what he means when he jabbers " He that hath the Doctrine of the Christ hath the Father and the !Son." We will admit this much. If the doctrine in the Book of Mormon be true we should accept it as truth, because it is truth. But that does not prove that Joseph Smith was even a good man, for the Devil can utter truth. It does not prove that his book is true in its historic statements, nor that it is what it claims to be — a history of the aborigines of America; for the biggest fraud ever concocted may contain good doctrines, stolen from the Bible or other sources If Joseph Smith was a good man, his assertion that lie was inspired, even if his doctrine were true, would uol necessarily be true; for many a good man has been decieved and tiiought he was inspired when he was not and that his talk was revelation when it was not. This whole line of argument is the most absurd and idiotic that has ever been pre- sented to a thinking people. There are several queries to be settled. Even if the moral and religious ideas of the Book of Mormon be true, Avho presents it to us, a good being or an evil one? Is it presented honestly or hypocritically? Is it genuine or counterfeit that has stolen the features of the genuine in order to deceive. If it claims inspiration, is the one claiming in- spiration one that would be choseii of God as a medium for inspiration Is he honest ox is he hypocritical? If honest, sincere and good was he mistaken or is his claim true? Then what is the character of the pro- posed revelation ? The third line of argument is not only maliciously hostile to the Bible but is a gross fallacy. If Mormons could prove every , word of the Bible to be false and thfit the Bible had every fault that we find with the Book of Mormon, it would only overthrow the Bible. It would not establish the divine origin of the Book of Mormon. Proving ■that Webster's dictionary is full of faults does not prove that a book that contains those faults is correct, but on the contrary, it destroys Webster as authority. When the vile character of Joe Smith and the founders of Mormonism is exposed Mor- mons point to tiie character of Baalam, Saul, King of Israel, Jonah, and Caiphas. If they are willing to place Imposter Joe in the same category as Baalam with his greed of gain and evil character, Saul with his murderous hatred and vile character, .lonah with his rebellious wicked character, Cai- phas with his murderous sectarian hatred ot Jesus, we will remind them that though God did, in the dark surroixndings of those days use those persons for certain unim- portant purposes, he did not make them founders of dispensations, much less the last one, and the one that is. the fulness of the Gospel. For such purposes he chose a Noah, an Abraham, a Closes, an Elijah, a Paul, and a Jesus the Son of God. If the Mormon points to the sins and er- rors of Noah, Ijot, Abraham, and others that were children of God, or inspired ac- cording to the Bible, when we point out the sins of Joe Smith and the founders of Mormonism we wish to remind him that Noah's drunkenness was accidental and the Bible does not say it was repeated There is not one particle of proof that Noah knew what would be the effects ot fermented grape juice until he was made drunk by it, or that he ever repeated the act. Lot's incest was not voluntarj' ; there is not one scrap of evidence that Lot was inspired. ; the Bible does not say that he ever was. Abraham's acts were the sins of his age ; his polygamy was rather the act of Sarah and in accordance with the (aistom of the day than a wilful sin of Abraham. There is no proof that Abraham knew that he was doing wrong. The sins of Isaac and .Tacob were the sins of their times, resulting from the evil advice of others. David's sins were the sins of his age ; he was terri- bly punished tor them. Solomon was not a child of God or inspired after he sinned. Paul's sins were those of honest bigotry; he was a grand character, honest and manly even in his persecution. Peter's sins were those of cowardice and disappointment, inasmuch as the Messiah did not act as he expected he would. These persons re- pented. Their sins were the sins of their age. They were in advance of their age. They were great characters notwithstand- ing their sins. In the case of Joe Smith w© have one who tells us that he examined all religious parties. He found that all had apostatized. None were good enough for Joe. He was the chosen instrument of heaven to found a purer system than the world had ever seen. He can not be placed on a level with Noah, Abraham, David, or Paul and their surroundings. He came after eighteen hundred years ot pro- gress under the gospel of Christ. He appeared in the purest Christian surround- hina of this century. He was to give to the world a religic.m that stood related to apos- tolic Christianity as that stood related to Judaism, " the iullness of the gospel." His system was to be as much above his surroundings as Christianity was to its surroundings when it appeared. God in selecting Noah, Abraham, Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist and Paul, selected the grandest characters in their age. He did THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 99 this in the dark surroundings of former dispensations. Wliat would hedoiu select- ing' a person for a mission that Smith pre- tended was committed to him, and in the surroundings in which Smith appeared Smith should be as much superior to Noah, Moses and Paul as his surroundings were superior to tiieirs, and his mission higher than theirs. The Book of Mormon should be as much superior to the Bible as the New Testament was to the Old Testament. Its inspired author, its surouudings should be as much superior. That is what Mormons claim for it. This argument of Mormonism is merely the silly retort of the sneaking boy who when caught in lying or theft and exposed, hangs his head and mutters, " Well I don't care, you're another." It is as full of infi- delity as Ingersoll's attacks on the Bible. Unable to lift their contemptible false pro- phet to the skies, the level of the Sons of God, they would, with the malice of fiends, drag the angels of religion down to his vile level. When we expose the ignorance, the illiteracy, the contradictions of their vile imposture, the Book of Mor- mon, they assail with all the malignity of infidelity the character of the Bible. If their foul imposture is exposed, they strive with the malice of Infidel hate to befoul the Bible by loading it with the same faults. When we expose Impostor Joe's blasphem- ous interpolations and change of the text of the Bible, we are treated to a malicious re-hash of old exploded infidel attacks on the authenticity and genuineness of the Bible ; we have a malicious infidel attempt to drag the Bible down so low that Impos- tor Joe's corruptions of it will be of no more consequence than changing one of the thousand versions of nursery tales. We have in Mormon writings, in the preface to a pretended inspired translation of the Bi- ble as malicious infidelity as can be found in Ingersoll's writings. In the defense of Impostor Joe and his illiterate blundering frauds can be found as cowardly malicious attacks on the Bible, Bible characters as can be found in any infidel production. It is time that the sheep's clothing was strip- ped oflf of this imposture that claims to be the fullness of the Gospel of Christ, but shows its hatred of the Bible when its real character is exposed. Judging from its attacks on the Bible, the purity of its text, the proofs of its origin, the character of its prophets, and the literary character of the Bible. Mormonism is the vilest system of infidelity extant, for it is the most hypocritical. Pretending to restore the Bible in its purity, Christian- ity in its primitive power, it bedaubs in its slanderous assaults the Bible as a book, its evidences, its literary character, the char- acter of its prophets, and tries to drag them to a level with Joe Smith and his frauds. As the Book of Mormon is so largely sto- len from the Bible, tne xVIormon in his infi- del attacks destroys his own book when he destroys the Bible. It is not enough that the Book of Mormon be as good as the Bible, it must be far better. The same cir- cumstances cannot be urged in its defense that can be urged in defense of the Bible. But few of the writers of the Bible tell us they were inspired, the writers and speak- ers of the Book of Mormon are constantly telling us that the Spirit of the Lord has told them that it is talking through them. There is scarcely one that does not inform us of his inspiration. Not only so but these inspired persons were inspired above all writers and speakers of the Bible except the apostles of Christ after the day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit was not given in the name of Jesus and- in all his fullness until that time, but Lehi and Nephi, the first writers and speakers of the Book of Mormon, had the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus 600 years before .Tesus came, as fully and completely as Paul. They had revelations 600 years before Christ that were as perfect and com- plete as any given to the apostles, in fact more complete. The apostles did not settle by revelation every subject of religious controversy of the nineteenth century as positively and completely and dogmatically as any controversialist could do it. The in- spired men of tiie Book of Mormon did so and were inspired far beyond the apostles. But few of the Bible writers were told to write what they wrote; nearly every writer of the Book of Mormon writes in obedience to a personal divine command. But few of the writers of the Bible were cautioned to take steps, very careful pre- cautions to preserve what they had writ- ten ; nearly all of the writers of the Book of Mormon were so warned and commanded. We have no instances of men being inspired to revise and correct the books of the Bible; such was constantly the case with the Book of Mormon. Not a particle of the Bible was preserved by miracle; each and every portion of the Book of Mormon and the authorities on which it is based were so preserved. Again, the Book of Mormon stands related to the New Testament as the New does to the Old : it contains the " full- ness of the Gospel," or which the New Tes- tament is but an outline. There were churches and all the teachings of Christ among the Nephites for hundreds of years before Christ as perfect as ever existed among the Israelites after he came, and of course the revelations to such a highly favored people must have been as much more perfect and complete. The Israelites in the old continent had only vague out- lines of the gospel in their revelations. The Nephites had the Gospel as perfect as the Apostles had it. The Israelite prophets had to study what their own utterances meant. The Nephites had all the words, acts and teachings of Christ and his Apos- tles in the very language of Christ and his Apostles. The Nephites enjoyed for hun- dreds of years "the fullness of the Gospel," while the Israelites on the old continent were in the darkness of its dim twilight. The writers, speakers and actors of the Book of Mormon ought to excel those of the Bible as much as their condition excelled that of the writers and speakers of the Bible. 100 THE BRADPjN and KELLEY DEBATE. MR. KELLEY'S TENTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen: — Wheu my time was called I had just read the statement from their own history with regard to Mr Rigdon, and made a few hurned comments upon the same and passed to a review of his work as a minister to the time when Mr. Pratt call- ed upon him with the Book of Mormon. Up to this time Pvigdon had been an en- thusiastic and constant laborer in the "Re- form Movement," as it was then called, as is fully setout in the history of the Disci- ples themselves, and his time so occupied in his ministerial labors that it was not pos- sible for him to have left his work and du- ties to visit Smith who at this time lived, by the nearest way of travel, 250 miles dis- tant in the uncultivated interior of the State of New York, and when there wore no pleasant and easy lines of travel as now. The Disciple, (Campbellite) history sets forth, that Rigdon was their standing min- ister for the year 1825, at Bain bridge, Ohio, for the year 1826 at Mentor and Bainbndge. for the year 1827 at Mantua; for the year 1828, at Mentor, and this year is the time when lie met Alexander Campbell at War- ren, Ohio, at their assembly, where the fa- mous passage at arms took place between Campbell and Rigdon ot which so much has? been said. The next year, 1829, Rigdon con- tinued the work in Mentor, and at Euclid, and founded the church in Ferry, Ohio, Aug. 7th. The next year. 1830, he'continu- ed as their minister, (and the ablest i)f them all.) at Mentor, E.:clid, Kirtland. and oc- casionally at Hiram, Mantua, Perry, and Paiisville, and using the wordi? ot their own history, which shows a disposition to bemean him all possible, because hf mady up his mind the Discipiess did noi have the truth, he is shown to be the leadei oi them. It says Sidney Rigdon was an orator of no inconsiderable ability In person, he was mil medium height, rotund inform, oi (•oiimenance,!while.^peaking, open ami win- ning, with a little east of melancholy His action was graceful, his langiiajie copiou,>, fluent in utterance, ■with articnlatiiin clear and musical. ' Oh ! This is the pompous old Rigdon thatBraden is talkino- about is it ? This is the fellow from whose crown Bro tScott. plucked a feather, and pulled off' of Ahas- ueras' horse. Here Riirdou is trace KELLEY DEBATE. ioa Saunders, Lorenzo Saunders, was back here some time ago, and I was askinof him about it. At first he said he did not remember of eeeing Rigdon until after 1830 sometime; but after studying it over a'while he said it seemed to him that one time he was over to Smith's and that there was a stranger there he never saw before, and that they said it was Rigdou. I told him about Cobb, of Utah, and asked him if he would send Cobb Ills affidavit that he saw Rigdon be- fore the book was published, if ne (Cobb) would write to him ; he finally said he would, and I wrote to Cobb about it, and gave Saunders' address, and after a long time I got a letter from him saj-ing he had written three letters to Saunders and could get no answer. I then sat down and wrote Saunders a letter myself remindi'ng him of his promise; and wrote to Cobb also about it ; and after a long time Cobb wrote me again, that Saunders had written to him , but I have never learned how satisfactt.ry it was, or whether he made the affidavit or not. Q. Is that Saunders a brother of thd Saunders living down here, Orlando Saun- ders? A. Yes, sir ; they are brothers. Q. Is he older or younger? A. Younger; about fifteen yearsyounger. Q. Then he must have been quit*' young before the Book of Mormon was publisned? A, Yes, he was young. Q. This Saunders down here don't talk like a great many people ; he seems to think the Smiths were very good people : we have been there to-day. A. Oh I don't'think the Smiths were as bad as people let on tor. Now Tuik^i in his work told too many big things : nctudy could believe his stories Q. What kind of a man was Martin Har ris? A. He was a very honest farmer but very superstitious. Q. What was he before his name was con • nected with the Book of Mormon? A. Not anything I believe. He was a kind of skeptic. Q. What do you mean by his being super- stitious? Was he religious? A. Well, I don't know about that • but he pretended to see things. Q,. What do you think of tht> Book of Mormon as a book ; you are well posted in it? A. Oh, there is nothing taugbi in the book but what is good ; there is oc dtnying that ; it is the claim o/ being fior** Ood that I strike at. Q. Well, is it any more wonderful than thai God gave the Bible? A. >.o, not a bit, and there is a good deal more evidence to show that that is divine than there is for some of the books in the Bible. Why, it is all nonsense to think that Mo-es wrote some of the books attributed to him in the Bible. Q,. Then you don't believe the fish story, either, Mr." Gilbert? A. No, nor that Jonah swallowed the whale. Q. How about Sameon catching the three hundred foxes and the firebrands? A. Yes; that is a good one; you fellows will do. Q. Much obliged, Mr. Gilbert, A. You are quite welcome ; I wish I could give you more than I have." Next I refer you to the statements made b3'^ three of the Jackaways at Palmyra, es- pecially to show you about the stories of money digging, how they started, &c.*, and that they had no foundation in fact. The following among other questions were asked these parties : Q. "Where was Joe when he was translat- ing his book? A. At home; it was translated in the farm house. Q. Mr. Gilbert across here, said it was done in a cave ; now j'^ou don't agree. What does Tucker say? (reading Tucker.) A They all diflVr. Now Tucker ha«» a statement from Willard Chase in his book, and Chase said Tucker never called on nim at all to find out what he knev/. Lady.— Yes ; ( have heard Willard Chase say Tucker never even asked him for what he knew and Chase lived next door to him, too. Chase !.■; now dead, Q. Well, did you ever see HuJburt or Howe, who pubhshed a work against the Mormons? A. Yes ; Hulburt came around first. 1 be- lieve, soon after the tning started, ana they had gone to Kin land. Ohio, trying to find things against them, and there have been a good many around trying to connect Sid- ney Riiidon with them." Q "How tar aid you live from town when the Smiths were in this country? A One-half mile south of Palmyra. Q, Were you acquainted with Joseph Smitn and his early folJcwers ? A. Yes, I knew them; seen them a maoy a time — old Joe and young Joe. Q. How far did you livt frcor. them'/ A It wa.« about a mile. Q. You knew about their digging for money, so Mi . Gilbert said ; he sent us to you . A Oti yes; i can show you the places now there are three places over there where tiiey dug. Q Well, we want to see them. Did you help them dig? A. No. 1 never helped them. Q. Well, you saw them digging? A. No; I never saw them digging. Q. How do you know they dug the holes you refer to ? A. 1 don't know they dug them, but the holes are there. Q. Did anybody else dig for money at that time there? A. t believe there were some others that dug, but I did not see them. Q. Do you know any of them ? A I oiily know one now ; he lives up at Canandaigua." I next introduce the evidence of Dr. John StaflTord, of Rochester, N. Y.. son of Wil- liam Staftbrd, made so conspicuous by J04 TKK BRADETJ AND KELLEY DEBATE. Tuekei In his work against the Mormons. In answer to a question as to the character of Joseph Smith, Dr. Stafford said : " He "was a real clever boy. What Tucker gaid about them was false, absolutely. Q. Wliat about that black sheep your father let them have'? A. J have heard that story, but don't think my father was tnere at the time they say Smith got the sheep. I don't know anything about it. Q,. You were living at home at the time, and it seems you ought to know if they got a slieep, or stole one from your father? A. They never stole one, I am sure ; they mav have got one some time. Q. Well, doctor, you know pretty well whe'vher that story is true or not that Tucker tells. V>'^hat do v'ou think of it? A. T don't think it is true. I would have heard more about it if it had been true, I lived a mile from Smith's. lam 76 years old. Thev were peaceable among them- selves. The old woman had a great deal of faith that their children were going to do something great. Joe was illiterate. After they began to have school at their house he improved greatly. Q. Did they have a school at their house ? A. Yes, sir ; they had school in their house and studied the Bibie. Q. Who was their teacher? A. They did not hrtve any teacher ; they taught themselves. Q. Did you knuw Oliver Cowdery? A. Yes'; he taught school on the Canan- daigua Road, where thr* stone school house now stands, just three and a half miles from Palmyra. Cowdery was a man of good character." Thomas Taylor at Manchester said Avhen interrogated about Mr, Smith and family as follows : "Yes; I knew them very well; they were nice men, too; the only trouble was they were ahead of the people, and the peo- pleas in every such case, turned out to abuse them because they had the manhood to stand for their own convictions, Q,. Wiiat did the Smith's do that the people abused them so? A, They did not do anything Why! these rascals at one time took Joseph Smith and ducked him in the pond that you see over there, just because he preached what he believed and for nothing else. And if Jesus Christ had been there they would have done the same to bim. Is'ow I don't believe like he did ; but every man has a right to his religious oninions. and to advo- cate his views too; if people don't like it, let them come out and meet him on the stand and show his error. Smith was always ready to exchange views with the best men they had. Q,. Why didn't they like Smith? A. To tell the truth, there was something about him they could not understand ; some how he knew' more than thej' did, and it made them mad. Q,. But a good many tell terrible stories about them being low people, rogues and liars, and such th\ngs. How is that? A. Oh ! thev are a set of liars. I have had a home here'i and been here, except when on ousiness, all my life— ever since I came to this country, and I know these fel- lows ■ and the.y make these lies on Smith becau^-e tliey love a lie better than the truth. [ can take ton to a great many old settlers who vvili substantiate what I say, and if you want to go, come to my place across the way, and I'll go with you, Q. That is very kind Mr. Taylor ; but we are first going to see these fellows, who, so rumor says, know so much aaainst him? A, All right ; but you will find they don't know anyt^riiiig against those men when you put them down to it ; they could never sustain anytliing against Smith." 1 have read you the foregoing interviews for the reason that they were taken down as they came from the lips of the parties and may be relied upon. To my knowl- edge there has never been a single contra- diction of one of these statements by a single one of the partie.s whose testimony I have just read except Gilbert's, and at the proper time if the question is raised I will examine his. This thing which they got up about the Saints is an entire frau'd, and T will prove it by comparing the work, that from which my oppoiit-nt draws his testimony, this Howe and Hulburt history, with our works, and show you that they nave deliberately garb/fid and fcdsijied, and most mischiev- ously perverted our works. Where our works are plain and distinct, they have, in order to make them ridicu- lous, taken out words and clauses, taken out entire sentences, to present the teach- ing as bad. Yet, this is the book that h© has commended to you and been reading his statements and affidavits from. I will show you further in the discussion that what are called affidavits or statements of John Spaulding and Martha Spaulding were never made by them, and that in fact he has no such : and if I don't prove all of this, then I want you to denounce me be- fore thia audience. Mr. Braden ; AVhy, you are getting ex- cited, my friend, Mr, Kelley: Not at all, not at all, Bro. Braden, 1 am emphatic and positive in my positions, and if you have any evidence, bring it on. Entering upon an examination of this work of Hulburt and Howe, 1 cite you first some of their /a/^e reprefentaf ions and sjyu- rious quotations, contrasting what they pre- tended to quote from our works with the true reading. 1. Howe, page 27 says: — "He repre- sents Nephi as making plates in the wil- derness with no ore," Book of Mormon, Palmj^ra Edition, page 43, shows the plates were made after the people arrived upon this continent, and after they had found ore with many other things, 2. Howe, same page, "Has a command- THE BRADEN AND KELKEY DEBATE. lOS tnent from tbe Lord to make plates for the special purpose of makintr a record of his owu ministry and his owu people." Book of Mormon, o^ge 17 • "I have re- ceived a commandment from the Lord that I should make tnese plates for the special purpose that there snould.be an account engraven o( the ministry of my people.'' 3. Howe again ; "Our hero introduces himself i*s a minister.'' Book of Mormon, page 17: "And now I, ^ephi, proceed to give an account upon these plates and of my proceedings and my reign and ministry." 4. Howe, page 32. "It brought them all safely on the borders of the Red sea, with the exception of Ishmael." Book of Mormon, page 42 "And we did sojourn for the space of many years, yea, even eight years, in the wilderness. And we aid come totht laud which we called bountiful, because of its much fruit. And we beheld the sea, whicn we called Irean- tum, which being interpreted is many wa- ters." Notice — There is no Red sea about it. 5. Howe, page 35: * Whether the ship was propelled by oars, or oy a current, or by the wind, or by the power of the spin- dle, we cannot inform our readers, /or it is not slated.'^ Book of IStormon, page 48 : "And it came to pass that after we had all gone down into the ship duiid taken with us our provi- sions and things which had been com- manded us, we did put forth into the sea, ^nd were driven forth before the wind to- wards the promised land." 6. Take another specimen of his professed truths : Howe, page 38, states that there is an exact copy of the 48th and 49th chapters of Isaiah to be found in the Book of Mor- mon; and that they are introduced with the same words that commence the chap- ter in the Bible, intending thereby- to show that they were copied from the Bible after it was divided into chapters and verses. This is wilfully false ; for on comparison, it is found that tiie wording of the prophesy is different in its very introduction, and there are numerous differences between the two books, in words, sentences and verses. Neither can one tell where the division for a new chapter should be made in the read- ing of the Book of Mormon, save by noting the last word found in the 48th chapter of Isaiah, until he gets to the close of the 49th chapter, where the subject of the«o two chapters ends, and a new subject is intro- duced, and there the writer of the Book of Mormon left off writing. The claim is false, and made obviously to deceive. They are not alike, as claimed by Howe. Book of Mormon, page .52 to 56. 7. Again Howe says, page 42 : "The Nephites warred with each other until they exterminated the whole race except three, who were immortalized." Book of Mormon, pp. 493 to 496 : "Yea, even all my people, save it were those txoeniy and four who were with me, and also a few who had escaped into the south countries, and a few who had dissented over unto the Lamanites, had fallen and their flesh and bones and blood lay upon the face of the earth " 8. By way of an argument it is again stated: Howe, page 44. ''The Book of Mormon is hara to understand." "AVould it not be reasonable to conclude that any book: whose author was the Holy Ghost, would be clear and perfect in all its parts — so plain that the wayfaring man need noterr." I suggest that Mr. Braden try John's Revelation by this rule, and see how long ne can endorse his backer Howe. But I proceed with the contrast. 9 Howe, page 52; "We are likewise told in the same discourse that the plates or book would be sealed up, and should finally be found by an unlearned man, who should see then, and show them to three others." Here is found the great bugbear, sought to bt kept before the people to deceive. How different, however, it is from the true reading. Book of Mormon J page 110: "Wherefore, at that dfly when the book shall be d«- livered unto the vian of whom I have spoken, the book shall be hid from the eyes of the world, that tli yes of none shall behold it, save it be that three wi ne'sses shall behold it. by the power of Qod, besides him to whom tlie book shall be delivered, and they shall testify to the trtith of the book and the things therein. And there is none others which shall view it, save it be a /ew according to the will of God, to bear testimony of his word nnto tlie children of men." 10. Another illustration, Howe, p. 65: "And if Christ had not risen from the dead or have broken the bonds of death, that the ^rave should have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection." He endeavors to prove by the tense of the verb here, that it was written after the cru- cifixion of Christ, and to deceive quotes only a part of the text. Book of Mormon, page 169: "And now if Christ had not come into the world, speak- ing of things to come as though they had already come,"&c. Tliis he deftly leaves out. But again, 11. Howe, pp. 68, 69: Mosiah causes all records to be revised, and "transcribes" the plates of brass brought out from Jerusalem." Book of Mormon, page 216: "Now Kins Mosiah had no one to confer the king- dom npon, for there was not any of his sons which would accepi the kingre them in a cloud." Book of Mormon, pp. 541, 542, and 48 : "The Lord did go before them, and talked to them while he stood in a cloud, and gave directions whither they should travel." 15. Howe, page 90: "They make a hole in the top to admit air and one in the bottom to admit water ; in each hole was put a molten stone, which when touched by the finger of Jesus became as transparent as any glass and gave them light under the mountain waves. Two of these stones were sealed up with the plates according to a prediction before Abraham was born. "Thou shalt make a hole in the top there- of and in the bottom thereof, and when thou shalt suffer for air, thou shalt un.stop the hole thereof and receive air. And if it so be that water come in upon thee thou shalt stop the hole." " And he did put forth the stones into the vessels which are prepared, one in each end thereof.^' Howe, page 90: "The Lord commanded him that he should seal up the two stones which he had received and show them not." Not a word about Abraham. 16. Howe, page 124: "Even their wine they used for communion they were ordered to make from cider and other materials." Book of Covenants, page 102 : " You shall not purchase wine, neither strong drink from your enemies, wherefore you shall partake ol none save it is made new among you." Nothing about cider and other materials as said by Howe. 17. Aaain, Howe, page 129: "If thou lovest me, thou shalt serve me and keep my commandments ; and behold thou shalt con- secrate all thy properties, that which thou hast, unto me, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken." The true reading of the Book of Cove- nants, page 143 : " If thou lovest me, thou shalt serve me and keep all my command- ments. And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy 2^ropertie8 for their support, that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken ; and inas- much as you impart of your substance unto the poor, ye will do it unto me." Howe says, "Thou shalt consecrate all thy properties, that ivhich thou hast, unto me." Tne truth is they were required to cdnsecrate of their properties that which they were able to donate for that purpose ; and the promise was, " inasmuch as ye im- part of your substance unto the poor, ye will do it unto me." (Time expired.) THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 107 MR. BRADEN'S TENTH SPEECH. GentTjF.men Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen: — Tlie Books of the liible were written on papyrus, parchment, perishable material ; and they had to be copied and re- vised to preserve them ; and this was done by uninspired men liable to err. The Jiook of Mormon was engraved by inspired men, on plates, imperishable material, and needed no copying. If the Bible was revised or arranged, it was done by uninspired men. The Book of JNIormon was revised, abridged, by inspired men. The manuscripts of the Bible were written, preserved, and handled by uninspired men. The plates of the Book of Mormon were engraved, preserved and handled by inspired men. The Bible has come down to us without any miracle in its production, except in the inspiration of its inspired men. The Book of Mormon was written by miracle, preserved by miyacle, its existence revealed to Smitii by mir- acle. Our translation as made by uninspired men. They had to determine which of the various readings is the true one, which of the various meanings of Greek and Hebrew words is the right one in each passage, then the meaning of the passage, from the mean- ing and use of its words, its context, its grammatical structure, and this was the work of uninspired learning. But Smith had to compare no various readings. He had the exact words, that the inspired Mormon en- graved. He did not have to search lexicons, and grammars for meanings and uses of words. He looked into his interpreter and God himself by miracle caused the word to appear before Smith's vision. If there is any mistake God made it — not Smith. The only chance for error was that Smith could not read the word correctly, or that his scribe did not understand the word as Smith gave it to him ; but as Smith was inspired he could make no mistakes and as Cowdrey was directly called and qualified, according to the revelation in the Book of Doctrines and Covenants, he could make no mistake. We can see how mental peculiarities and lack of education could affect the writers of the Bible, and understand that they should appear in the books of the Bible ; but Smith's illiteracy, nis mental peculiarities, and style, ought not, could not, appear in the Book of Mormon, for God, by miracle, placed the word before Smith, and all Smith did was to read it and repeat it to Cowdrey, and all Cow- drey did was to write it. Smith and Cow- drey had no more to do with the words, style, truth, literary character, of the Book of Mormon, than a speaking trumpet, or a telephone, or phonograph have with what a man utters through them. The angel Moroni declares in the inspir- ed preface, which is a direct revelation from the angel God authorized to give this revelation to the world, that it is "written by "way of commandment and by the spirit of "prophecy and revelation, written and seal- "ed, and hid up by tlie command and inspir- "ation of God ; to come forth by the inspira- "tiou and power of God; and tlie interpreta- "tion (by Smith) was by thegKt of God." It was all done by inspiration, by (iod him- self. Not only so, but the three witnesses' testify "We know that the records havt "been translated by the gift and power of "God for his voice declared it unto us, "wherefore wf5 know of a certainty that the "word, the Book of Mormon 'is tree." Why? Because God's voice declared that it was true. The only opportunity there is for human error in the Book of Mormon, is in typo- graphical errors, and there can be none of these, for it was proof read by inspired men; and the caveat that it is pretended "Moroni issued in the preface "If there be fault it be themistakeofmen," is a deliberate lie, since God inspired the speakers, actors, and wri- ters, as fully as he did the apostles, since he inspired and superintended all copying, since he gave every word hiinself, by direct miracle in the translation, as Moroni himself tells us in the same preface, since he said, with his own voice, to the three witnesses that the translation was his own work; and that the Book is true. There can be no mis- take of man, for man had no more to do with it than a telephone has with what it utters. The statement of Moroni is as remarkable for its morality as for its grammar "If there be fault it be the mistake of men." The Almighty, in his lastand most perfect reve- lation, sends out faults, a bundle of false- hoods with the truth that he gave to the world word by word by Joe ; and which he commanded the three witnesses, with his own voice, to declare all nations and tongues to be true. We are now ready to examine this revela- tion we affirm : 1. That God would not give, in so wonder- ful and entirely miraculous a Planner, a book that did not commend itself to the common sense and reason of men, as worthy' of him, and divine. 2. He would give it in a manner worthy of himself and such a miraculously given book. 3. The person through whom it was given would be worthy of such a wonderful mission. 4. The surroundings should be worthy of such a work. 5. Its utterances should agree with all established truths. 6. They should agree with other revela- tions in the Bible. 7. They should agree with other revela- tions in the Book of Doctrines and Covenants and all other revelations of Joseph Smith, or any other inspired men. 108 THE BRADEN AND ItELLEY DEBATE, 8. They should agree with the inspired trnnslation of Joseph Smith. !). They should agree with themselves. 10. They should be as much superior to the Bible, as their origin was superior to the ori<>in of the Bible. The first edition of the Book of Mormon had on the title page written by inspira- tion, "Joseph Smith jr., Author and Propri- etor." Joe's egotism led him to tell the truth, a part of the truth, for he did not give credit to Spaulding and Rigdon, but he fearfully contradicted the declaration of inspiration, in the Book which declares that Mormon and Moroni are the authors. Inspired Joe noticed this contradiction and •orrected it in all later editions. According to this inspired title page, Jehovah gave, in the most miraculous manner possible, a revelation higher and better than all he had ever given before for the salvation of the human race and constituted ignorant, lazy, loafing, lying, drinking, swearing, lewd, fortune- telling, money-hunting Joe Smith its sole proprietor and sole sharer of its profits. He gave to Imposter Joe, under the seal of R. R. Lansing, District Clerk of Northern New York, the sole right to vend this revelation tnat is the fulness of the Gospel. In the introduction to the first edition it seems that the Mormon God had not found out what Lucy Harris did with the 116 pages that she burned. The Mormon God issues a long manifesto to guard against a trick that no one ever dreamt of trying. The Mormon God undertakes to circumvent any persons trying a trick that never was imagined, by telling Joe to publish a deli- berate lie. He is to translate the plates of Nephi, until he comes to the same event as the one with which the translation from the plates of Lehi in the stolen pages ended, and finish with the plates of Lehi. He then is to publish the whole as a translation of the plates of Nephi, and tell a lie. How did Joe know when he reached that point, as he did not have the plates? Why could not the Mormon God re-translate from the plates of Lehi, as well as translate from the plates of Nephi, since he had both? The truth is that Lucy Harris burnt the 116 pages of Spaulding's Mormon Manuscript No. III., and that much was gone beyond recovery. Rigdon had to re-model a portion of Mormon Manuscript No. IT, to take the place of what had been burnt. We will now begin our analysis of the matter in the book itself. On page 1 , Nephi, an Israelite born and reared in Jerusalem, as his fathers before him had been for gen- erations, tells us that he writes his record in the language of his fathers, which con- sists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians. There are fonv ridiculous blunders in these few words. I. The writer evidently meant to imitate Stephen, who says "Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians." He gets it the learning of the Jews, when they were inferior to the Egyptians in learning. He meant, perhaps, the learning of the Egyptians. II. The term Jew is not iu tho original of the Bible. It is an English nick- name, just as "Yank" is a nickname for Yankee. The term Judahite or Judean was not national, the name of a people till after the return from captivity. III. The preposterous idea that an Israelite raised in Jerusalem, where only the Hebrew was spoken — whose fathers had lived in Jerusalem, where only the Hebrew was spoken — could say that the language of his fathers was Egyptian, a language that the Israelties abhorred, as they did everything Egyptian. Tho superstitious reverence of the Israelites for the Hebrew is well known ; yet the language of Nephi, Hebrew of He- brews, was Egyptian. IV. The idea that Jehovah spoke to an Israelite in Egyptian, when he never used in his revelations to them any language but the Hebrew. It also contains a falsehood, for Nephi's fa- thers were not Jews, but Mannassehites ; the learning of his fathers was not that of the Jews. We could drop the Book of Mormon right here. None but an ignoramus like Rigdon, an ignoramus in biblical literature, would have committed four such blunders as those we have given. No Israelite ever did. On the succeeding pages, from 2 to 9, we are told that Lehi was compelled by persecu- tion to flee from Jerusalem, leaving every- thing behind, and taking nothing but his family, some tents and provisions. By com- mand of the Lord Nephi is seen returning to Jerusalem to obtain certain plates in the possession of his kinsman Laban. Nephi oflTers Laban his father's property for the plates. Laban refuses, and drives Nephi and his brothers out, taking their property; by violence. Nephi returns, makes Labar drunk, murders him, lies to his servants gets the plates and returns to his father who has a shouting time over the results o ' murder and lying. This account is full o? absurdities and contradictions. I. It asserts that the writing material of the Israelites was metallic plates. They used papyrus, tanned leather, parchment, vellum, linen smeared with gum, tablets smeared with wax, but never used metallic plates. We read of metallic plates but once in the Bible — in the Book of Job, who was not an Israelite, and nearly 1,000 years before this time. II. The idea that God approved of Nephi's making Laban drunk, murdering him, lying to his servants, and robbing him of his property. III. On page 8 we have a talk of a Church and Brethren 600 years be- fore Christ. Sidney Rigdon's gross ignor- ance is manifest in such a blunder. Let us see what these five men carried away : (a.) The books of Moses on metallic plates. (B.) The records of the Jews from the begin- ning. That is, all who spoke Hebrew were called Jews, from the beginning. As well say that all who spoke English were called Yanks from the beginning. This would take an enormous pile of plates, (c.) The writings of all of the prophets and writers of Israel from the beginning. All the Old Testament written before Zedekiah. All THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 109 the books it mentions that were used in writing: the Books of Kings and Chronicles. All the works of the prophets mentioned in the Book of Mormon, but not mentioned in the Bible. Doubtless many prophetical writings never mentioned, (d.) Genealogi- cal tables from Joseph to I>aban. All this voluminous literature, which would have made a wagon-load if on parchment, was engraved on plates and not on papyrus, the only material then in use, and was carried off by five men, who were dodging round to save their lives, when it must have re- quired a caravan of teams to have hauled it. This rigmarole represents copies of the Pentateuch and the Scriptures as being common, well known, in open use with their tables of genealogy. Not a hundred years before they were almost unknown ; and in the days of Zedekiah's father so little were they known that reading a copy found by accident revolutionized the nation. Tliis enormous load of plates was carried by Lehi in all his jouri'eyings. Laban's sword was steel, when it is a notorious fact that the Israelites knew nothing of steel for hundreds of years afterwards. Who but as ignorant a person as Kigdon would have perpetrated ail these blunders? When Lehi saw that caravan-load of plates, got- ten by making the owner drunk, by murder, robbery and lying, he revelates and pro- phecies that these plates of Laban shall go forth to all nations. As not a single plate of Laban has ever gone forth to anybody, the Mormon God was mistaken when he inspired Lehi with that prophecy. On page 14 we have a beginning of a se- ries of violations of the most positive re- quirements of the law of God. Manasse- hites begin offering sacrifices in flagrant violation of the law of God. On page 16 the Mormon God commands Nephi to make plates to receive the record of the ministry of his people. Although Lehi had brought with them only tents and provisions, Nephi digs ore, smelts it, casts plates, makes tools to do all this, and engraves on them in a wilderness where a dozen persons are alone with only tents and provisions. From page 17 to page 32 Rigdon makes >.ephi and Lehi talk like preachers of the nineteen century. They foretell the history of John the Bap- tist, Mary the mother of Jesus, and the ministry of Jesus, giving the names of per- sons and places with great minuteness; also what they should do and 8aJ^ The prophets of Israel never did any such proph- ecying. They rarely give names of persons or places, and never foretell the exact lan- guage persons will use. Rigdon makes Nephi and Lehi discourse like Disciple preachers. They discuss all the leading topics of the gospel as Disciple preachers do, and discuss many themes of modern theol- ogy. They plagiarize Paul's parable of the olive tiee. Lehi declares he has the Holy Spirit in the name of Christ and through faith in Christ SOU years before (.'.irist came. Rigdon airs one of hs hobbies that he re- tained from the Baptists and in which he differed from the Disciples. John tells us that the Holy Spirit was not given in that way till after Jesus was glorified. Jesus declares that the Holy Spirit would not be given in his name till after his ascension, but r>ehi knew better than Paul and Jesus. Paul declares that these gospel themes were mysteries until the apostles of Jesus re- vealed them. Paul was mistaken, for Rig- don tells us that Lehi and Nephi knew all about them 600 years before I'aul lived. Not only so, but God revealed to Lehi and Nephi far more than he ever did to the apostles of Jesus. He revealed to them all about the Romish Apostacy, its errors and crimes, the peculiar doctrine of Luther's reformation, settles several questions of modern theology, and always in harmony with Rigdcm's ideas. One of the most monstrous absurdities in the Book of Mormon is the Liahoni. Lehi's brass director or compass. We are told that Lehi had given to him by miracle, direct from the workshop of the Mormon God doubtless — a brass ball of curious workman- ship. The reader will admit that it was of most curious workmanship when he hears it described, " and it was of fine brass, and within the ball were two spindles, and one pointed out the way we should go in the wilderness." How could they see the two spindles inside of a hollow brass globe? "One pointed the way they should go," Of what use was the other? It pointed the way they should not go, I suppose. Piige 86: "Thesespindles (inside of a brass globe) worked according to the faith of the pos- sessor." If they worked as the possessor wanted them to point, of what use were they? How did they see how they pointed if they were inside of a brass globe? By faith and the power of God I suppose, as Imposter .Toe saw the translation of the Book of Mormon in the crown of his old hat as he was peering into his stolen peep- stone; but as the possessor kliew they pointed the direction he wanted them to point, it did not make any odds whether he saw them or not. "On these spindles was written " — on two fine spindles inside of a brass globe where nobody could see — "a new writing." It must have been an ex- tensive writing that was all on two fine spindles, "Plain to be read." Yes it must have been very plain on two fine spindles and inside of a brass globe where nobody could see, " and it gave us instructions con- cerning the ways of the Lord," all on two fine spindles and inside of a brass globe where nobody could see; "and it was writ- ten and changed from time to time" — yes all on two fine spindles or needles inside of a brass globe where nobody could see it. Then Sidney remarks with exceeding unc- tion, "Thus we see that the Lord accom- plishes great things by small means." Yea, verily, Sidney; and when the Lord gave the fulness of the gospel to the world through such a lying, extravagant ignoramus as you, in such balderdash as the above he ac- complished the greatest work with the smallest means ever tried. Next^ephi is told to build a ship and 110 THE BRADEN AND KJELLEY DEBATE. showed in a vision where to find material. Lehi left Jerusalem with nothing but tents and provisions, for he fled for his life and is away in a wilderness and without tools. N - phi alone.for the rest opposed and ridiculed him, and there were only 15 men and wo- men in all, digs ore, builds furnaces, forges and machine shops, smelts ore, casts im- plements, forges, tools, "every tree to cut down," cuts the trees and builds the ship "all his own self," as the boyboasted he accomplished his task. But then Nephi tells us that he did not construct it after the fashion of men, but after a manner that the Lord showed him. lam so glad tiiat he told us that, or we might not have be- lieved his story. I suppose the Lord's plan or patent on ships don't require any work. What a pity that he did not leave the plan, by which one man can, all by his own self, do the work of hundreds and in next to no time. If it be said that this was done by miracle, then what need of Nephi's doing anyth'Mig? Why was not the ship fur- nished ready made, like Lehi's wonderful brass compass? Lehi and his host set sail in this wonder- ful ship made after the Lord's plan. Not- withstanding this wonderful series of mir- acles that Neplii had worked before their eves, Nephi's brethren rebel and bind him, and "lo and behold," to use the celestial language of this Divine translation of Re- formed" Egyptian, the wonderful brass compass gets balky and refuses to work, and the rebels know not whither to steer the ship, "inasmuch that there arose a great storm, yea, a great and terrible tem- pest." A wful,'Sydiiey! perfectly awful! Now whether the tempest so great and terrible, was caused by the compass ceasing to work, or by their not knowing which way to steer, is not plain, but the language de- clares "it was one or tother." The ship is driven back ; now if they did not know which way they were going how did they know whether it was driven back, or for- ward, or sideways. Nephi is released and the co'n pass points — the way they should go? No, the way Nephi wants it to point. That compass was as valuable as the Cali- fornia hog scales. It is said that out there they used to lay a rail across a log, put the hog on one end and a pile of stones on the other, until they balanced, and then guess at the weight ot the stones. If it be said that .Nephi knew whntrourse they ought to go. then of what use was the compass to him? If the compass showed him, how did he know when il cc^.-ta lu Work? And how did it show him when he made it point the way that he wanted it to point? That compass was as serviceable to Nephi as the man's snullers who snufled the candle with ids fingers and put the snuff into the snuflers. H inally they reach thf> land of promise, and they find in the wilderness both the "cow" and the "ox." Now ht-re is a miracle which ends all cavil as to the divine origin of the Book of Mor- mon. Cow and ox cannot mean two differ- ent species of animals, and as one is sufii- cient to designate the genus bos,' ox means the male upon which an operation has been performed to change him from a bull into an ox. Now, as man had not been in this land, we have the blasphemous ludicrous insinuation that the miraculous power of the Almighty had been exerted to change these animals from bulls into oxen to pre- pare them for Nephi's use. Now we know of a certainty, Sidney, that the Book of Mormon is of Divine origin. While they were in the wilderness before building the ship Nephi was told to make brass plates. One of two things is certain, either he had to dig up copper and zinc, smelt them and manufacture brass plates, and that with- out tools to do it, for they had fled from Jerusalem with nothing but tents and pro- visions, or he wrote on nothing or made the plates out of nothing. Onlaruiingin America, the Mownon God is so CHI fill about having Impostor .loe get these plates that he orders Nephi o make some more plates— gold, silver and copper are mentioned, but no zinc; hut Nephi has got used to making things out of nothing, and it was no trick at all for him to make copj) r without zinc, build furnaces, work mines and make machine shops without tools, and nothing to doit with. On page 44 it is declared that the dark- ness at the death of our Saviour should cover the whole earth and last three daj's. The Bible says it was only over the land in which he was crucified, and was only three hours ; but hyfalutin spread-eagle Sidney never did things by halves ; he had it over the whole earth and three whole days — none of your cheap little miracles for Sid- ney ; they might do for the Bible, but they wont answer for miracles in the "Fulness of the Gospel." On page 56, Lehi, in a sermon, quotes whole sentences of Paul's writings more than 600 years before Paul wrote: — "By the law no flesh is justified. He offereth himself a sacrifice for sins which layeth down his life according to the flesh and taketii it up according to the spirit that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead being tlie first to rise." Which shall we believe, that an Israelite in the wilds of America quoted Paul's language, whole sentences, 600 years before Paul was born, or that the Disciple preacher Rigdon inter- polated Paul's language into the romance he stole from Spaulding when he was re- modelling it to be used as a pretended new revelation? From pages 59 to 60 is a pretended proph- ecy of the Patriarch Joseph concerning Im- poster Joe. "He is a choice seer." Verily he was ! He shall bring forth the Nephite Word of (jod. He will be of the seed of the Patriarch Joseph, the Son of Jacob. His name shall be Joseph. His father's name shall be Joseph. Now here is adilemnaa. The Nephites vvere all exterminated ; the only descendants of Lehi and .Joseph in America are the Lamanites. They were cursed with a skin of blackness and became THE BRADEN AND KELLER DEBATE. Ill Indiana. Did Imposter Joe come from the Nephites that have not existed for 1400 years, or from the Indians? Of wliat tribe is he tlie "dig injun?" Perhaps lie is one of the three Nephites that never died . The Patriarch Jos*^pli prophesied of Sidney Rigdon also. The Lord was to raise up of the fruit of the loins of the Patriarch Jos- eph a spokesman for that seer. Again we are in trouble. Did Sidney Rigdon come from the Nephites that have been extermi- nated 1400 years, or is he "Big Injun" of some tribe of Lamanites? Perhaps he is j one of the Nephites that never died, and Imposter Joe's father, who was of the seed of Joseph, was the third. Is this prophecy or is it a fraud of Sidney Rigdon? Page 62 we have a long soliloquy that Neplii engraved on the plates made up of patches of the Psalms and Jeremiah badly put together. Then Nephi marches off into the wilderness with all of the company except two sinners, Laiiian and Lemuel, and their rebellious seed, who remain be- hind and are cursed with a skin of blackness and became Lamanites — Indians. Nephi and his company, however, keep the law of the Lord according to the statutes of Moses. We shall see how well they do it. Now we encounter a blunder that is sufficient to brand the Book of Mormon as the most blunderingly constructed fraud, the most transparent lie ever told. The largest estimate that we can possibly put on this company, will not make it more than ten married couples — all of whom, ex- cept Lehi, are married after leaving Jeru- salem ; yet, already they are divided into two nations, and Nephi teaches one of these mighty nations how to malve weapons and defend themselves against the mighty na- tion of Lamanites, two men, two women, and their children born during twenty years. This mighty nation of Nephites composed of not more than eight adults, four men and four women, and their children born during twenty years, erect in the wilderness of America a temple like unto the temple of Solomon ; they work in iron these eight men and women, erect furnaces, forges and machine shops, work in copper and gold, yes, and in brass and steel, which Mormon inspiration tells us are native ores. The origin of the American Didians has puzzled all ethnologists ; but Sidney Rigdon ex- Slanifies the whole matter. To prevent the ephites from mixing with the wicked Lamanites, the Lord wrought a stupendous miracle — he cursed the Lamanites with a skin of blackness. There now you have a great scientific problem solved by inspira- tion. I commend this wonderful scientific explanation to Kelley as the crowning evi- dence of the Divine origin of the Book of Mormon. After asserting that they kept the com- mandments oi' God, according to the law of Moses, Nephi coolly tells us that they erected a temple in America instead of at Jerusalem — coiisf-ciated priests (Hit of the tribe of Manasseh instead of Levi. And these usurper priests offered sacrifices in the wilderness of America instead of at Jeru- salem in a temple built in violation of God's law. God blessed these sacrilegious viola- tors of his law far aVjove the most favorite obedient Israelite in Palestine, revealed to them the Gospel, and conferred on them its blessings as fully as on the most favored apostles of Clirist 600 years before Christ came. God terribly punisher« von to advocate the divine sanction claimed for the Book of Mormon, because I thi wv !l is (ilod's truth ; I not only think it is true, but I am confident — I know that it is as claimed. I do not give you my per- sonal knowh dge, however, that you may take it for evidence in this discussion ; but I offer you the knowledge from God'sword, and if that is in accordance with my posi- tions, I wish you to take that. This evening I shall first take up and con- clude my review of the kind of evidence Mr Bra»ien has oflfered you to prove his case, and asked you to rely upon, viz: through the book of witness, (he says law- yer), Howe. Don't deceive yourselves, ray friends, by imagining that he is a lawyer. 1 have never known a lawyer yet, who would de- liberately publish fortruth what purported to be extracts from the works of a body of people in order to bemean them, and to ac- complish this end would publish garbled, wicked and lying statements. I have known of many low and mean things resorted to by priests and people in order to try to make the Saints out monsters of crime and ini- quity, but not many so brazen and impu- dent as to deliberately pretend to make a quotation from their books and then cor- rupt it, in order to keep it from knocking in the head their malicious scheme. When I concluded last evening I was contrasting Howe's spurious quotations with the genuine, on the charge that he was trying to make out, that th3 early au- thorities of liie church were after the peo- ple's property. Howe, as I was before reading, pretends to quote: "Thou shalt consecrate all thy properties, that which thou hast, unto me." Page 129. The true reading is, and I read from the first publication of the Rook of Covenants, here in Kirtland, published five .years be- fore Mr. Howe's work : " Thou shalt remem- ber the poor and consecrate of thy proper- ties for their support, that which thou hast to impart unto them." Sec. l.S, par. 8. 18. Again, Howe says : " He (the bishop) shall appoint every man a steward over his own property." Here Howe, to carry out the evil purpose of misleading the reader, misquotes and makes the bishop appoint a steward for every man. The record is : " Everyman shall be made accountable unto me [Christ], a steward over his own property." In the record a man is made a steward over his own by Christ, and is held respon- sible by Christ the head of the Church, and to no one else. 19. Again, Howe: "He that sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out, and shall not receive again that which he has conse- crated unto mo ; for it shall come to pass, I will consecrate the riches of the Gentiles unto my people which are of the house of Israel." Here he wants to prove the lying asser- tions so often made that the Saints expected to get other people's property. A false as- sertion, as I have before stated. Hear the record upon this : '• He that sin- neth and repenteth not shall be cast out of the church, and shall not receive ogain tliat which he has consecrated unto tiie poor and needy of my church, or in other words, unto me ; for as much as ye do it unto the least of these ye doit unto me; for Twill consecrate of the riches of those who em- brace my gospel among the Gentiles, unto the poor of my people who are of the house of Israel." Then is there any foundation for the as- sertion that has often been thrown to the world by these perverters of our faith, that we expected to consecrate of the property of the Gentiles? It is so represented by tiiose who have perverted the faith, and have garbled it, in order to misrepresent us to the world. The rule laid down and the notice given as to getting back donations of property made, is pre-^isely according to the law of the land, and differs as to other denomina- tions in this : The Saints are plainly told before giving they cannot expect to get their properties back if they should at some futue time be severed from the church ; on the ground that it will have likely been disposed of, for the purposes for which it was given, to wit: the poor and needy. Thus every man is put fully upon his guard when the gift is sought that he may not be deceived. Whereas, in other churches they take the monies without ever hinting that they can't get them back if the donors are cast out afterwards. And because they have not been given back when asked afterwards, I have known, and doubtless all of you have, a large number of law-suits against other churches to retjlaim such properties and donations, on the ground of bad faith. The custom of the Saints is fairer and less likely to deceive than any other church with which I am acquainted. The jjeople are fairly and fully notified before they give to the church that they cannot get anything back that they give to the poor or for the good of the church. But are you notified by anybody else in that way? Notice is fairly given that a man shall account unto Him (Christ) and render in the final day of summons 114 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. as to the stewardship over his own prop- Every man was recoofnized a steward over his own property, to do as he pleased with it. But Mr. Howe makes it read the bishop appointed men stewards over the property of others. Mr. Howe says, " that after the bishop received the property of the church, that it cannot be talien from the church." The revelation says, that while men are acting as stewards over their own property, and shall see fit to conse- CJ-ate "of them" unto the " poor" etc., and the bishop shall receive" testimonies" con- cerning the consecration of the properties of the church, they cannot be taken from the church. The revelation leaves every man free to do as he pleases with his prop- erLies; to be his own "steward," to give to the poor as he may feel prompted ; but when once given, it cannot be withdrawn; while Mr. Howe teaches that the bishop appointed mrn stewards over their own property and that they were required to consecrate ^^ all of their properties," etc. I)o you discover a disposition here to be fair, or present only facts? 20. Continuing upon page 130, Howe in order to make his case out against the Saints, attacks with the same wicked and vehement spirit Jesus and the earl^' Chris- tians. He says ; " If Smith and all his wit- nesses were to now come forward and say that his pretensions were a wicked decep- tion, they (the Saints), would not believe a word of it — because [they claim] the Spirit •had shown that it was true." " Here," he says, " Is the sure refuge, the fast hold of every imposter. This something which is the Spirit or Holy Spirit, has been the standing, unequivocal, incontrovertible and true witness for at least twenty-four false Messiahs, for Mohammet who is consid- ered the prince of imposters, and for nearly fifty others who have come with pretended commission from heaven." Here is fairlj' shown the grand sequel of Howe's bitterness against the Saints : They claim that there is such a thing as " the Spirit'^ or " the Holy Spirit ;'^ and whoever in the world's history according to Howe, 'has made such a claim, was a deceiver and an "imposter." How do you like your witness now who attacks the Savior, Christ, as vehemently as he does the Book of Mormon ? 21. Again, says Howe: " His [Smith's] predictions are always found far oft' equiv- ocal, and ambiguous, and always relate to some events which everyone supposes to be quite probable." Then hegoeson to falsify as to what some of these prophecies were as has been proved was the manner of his other <; bling.. But let us examine Smith's statements and show the roguery of the assertions : 1. Tliat his "name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds and tongues ; or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among allpeo])le." Is there anything ambigious or equivocal about that? And again, page 105, Book of Mormon ; "And because my words shall hiss forth, many of the Gentiles shall say, A Bible, a Bible, we have got a Bible and there cannot be any more Bible." What do you see equivocal or ambiguous about this? The Book of Mormon was published to the world under the title of the Book of Mor- mon. The title of Bible is not by it, nor by its friends, ever been claimed for it ; neither by them the term used for the plates from which it was translated. Yet, the predic- tion is a literally true one ; it is far and near, by the enemies of the Saints, called a Bible, and perhaps there never was more than a dozen, if even so many as two, Campbellite preachers in the state of Ohio, who did not thus in calling it the Mormon Bible con- tribute to the truth of the prophecy in regard to it, at the same time they misrepresented the people and denounced the ,whole thing as false. This prophecy was given or the statement made by Joseph Smith two years before the book was published and sent to the public, that when the book should go to the world the people would say. "A Bible." What do you see equivocal or am- biguous about this? ..._ Another one. Rook of Mormon page 496: " And it [ the book] shall come [forth to the world], in a day when the blood of the Saints shall cry unto tlie Lord because of secret combinations and the works of dark- ness." Where is theambiguity here? How did Mr. Smith know, or how could he fore- see, except by the illuminating light of heaven, that in this land with a constitu- tional guarantee of religious freedom, his people should be slain by wicked hands ; that men who had warred for freedom in the great revolution should be hewn to the ground by religious bigots without mercy ; that men, women and innocent children should be butchered without mercy ; and finally that a state should be permitted to rob thousands of its citizens, and banish them as exiles, to die upon other territories through the hardships and rigors of a fear- ful winter. Aggressors did you say? Turn to the official address of Major-General Clark of the forces that were sent to aid the mob in Missouri when the Saints were defending their liomes and their wives and children against the efforts of the grandest set of rascals the world ever saw, to drive them from the state, and then say aggressors if you dare! Says he, to as faithful and true men and women as ever graced God's* earth, as good and noble citizens, and as loyally patriotic as the Republic ever produced, as they were then deprived of the comforts of their hearth and homes: and encamped upon the bleak prairies of north Missouri : "It now devolves upon you to fulfill the treaty that you have entered into, th"e leading items of which I now lay before you. The first of thes^e you have already complifd with, "which is that you deliv'er up your lead- ing men to be tried according to law. Second, that you dt'liver up your arms— this ha- been attended to. The third is that yfiusign over your propeitifS to defray the expenses of this wat — this you have also done. Another thintr yet r inains lor y<>u t» comply with — that i~ that you "leave the State forth uith; and \vhatever your fteliuirs concerning this affair, whatever your innocence, it is nothing to me." THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. lis Can you point to a grander outrage in all the annals of the world's history tlian tliis against a people? "Whatever your inno- cence, it is nothing to me." You shall not even be permitted while you are in the midst of the mobocrats to retain tlie arms with which you could defend yourselves from their vengeance of death. "No, like them of old they cry out, "Crucify him ! Crucify him! But release unto us Barrabas," the robber. I cotild mention the relatives who have been in the lialls of Congress of men who were hewn down there, and as al)le men as there are in America to-day, if I would take up my time to do so. And yet, such actions are defended here by a pious-mind- ed, high-toned elder of the Campbellite Church. Ladies and gentlemen, I begin to see why it was that wl)eii they could not cope with Mr. Smith and Bigdon over at Hiram, in argument, they "got rid of them" by the old way of applying the argument of "tar and geese feathers." But let me tell you here and now, that if ever in my life-work I shall meet with such a case of rapine and oppression, or unlaw- ful vengeance against any people of any denomination, or any party, whether Chris- tian or infidel, I shall notfail to exert every power within me to protest against it ; and it is a cardinal principle of the faith of the Saints, and ever has been, tliatthey should be as ready to stand for and defend the rights and privileges of others as them- selves. I know how Col. Lovejoy and an associate was shot down in the streets of Alton, 111., because hedared to express his political opinions and stand for the princi- ple of the freedom of the press in this coun- try ; and it was alike evil and covKirdly creiv that has been defended in this con- troversy by the negative, who destroyed men and women for religious ojDinions' sake. But to return to tlie examination of Howe, as a witness (lawyer), and the Bpaulding romance. Tlie prophecies he says are so ambiguous. Take another, same page: "It shall come to pass in a day when there shall be heard of fires and tempests [tempest is a violent wind as the now familiar cyclone], and va- pors of smoke in foreign lands [like to the great disturbance of the earthquake last fall, which the scientific say so filled the atmospliere of the world that it has occa- sioned the crimson red phenomena of the sun's ai>pearance], and tliere sliall also be heard of wars and rumors of wars, and earthquakes in diverse places : yea, and it shall come in a day when there shall be great pollutions upon the face of the earth ; there shall be murders and robbings and lyings and deceivings,and whoredoms, and all manner of abominations, when there eball be many who will say, do this, or do that, and it mattereth not for the Lord will uphold such at the last day." I could in this manner read to you the entire hour, of the certain, unmistakable and definite prophecies in tliis book, many of which have already had a complete and literal tulfillment. Why is it, then, that this deceiving work of Mr. Howe is sent forth to the world? No wonder he don't want to put Mr. Howe upon the stand for examination. I will ask him where he got his compilation from, and if he did not know he was misrepresenting the faith of this people. 1 have met many men in my time wlio could stand up and with all the powers of dissimulation of innocence and modesty tell to others what I believed ; pretend to give my belief from the Bible and other books, when there was not a shadow of truth in what they were saying. Turning over the book I shall pass at this time tne terrible mess set out in the letters of Ezra Booth, and notice the pretended affidavits of Peter Ingersol, Wm. Stafford, Barton Stafford, purporting to be signed before a judge of the Court of Wayne county N. Y., Thomas P. Baldwin, which upon the face is shown to be a huml!)ug, foi there is not one in due form of law had the ©fficer prop^ly signed, and had there been such ; but upon dilligent inquiry I failed to find that even the officer existed as such. Having my doubts arroused as to the mat- ter through an article in the Chicago Inter- Ocean a short time ago, I wrote to the clerk of the courts of Wayne county, N. Y.^ and. received the following reply : "Office of the Clerk of Wayne Co., N. Y., Johm McGoNiGAL, Ci.F.RK. I.YoNS. N. Y , Feb'y. Ist, '81. E. L Kri-LEY, Esq., Dear Sir:— Yours of the 31st instant dniy received, anil in reply wili say that I have looked for the name of Thomas P. Baldwin as an officir in the county and fail to find his n.r.ae at all. I,"(>ked back to the time the CDiiniv was organized, (18-23). Very Kespectfully, John McGonigal. Again, not quite satiflsed, tliinking per- haps he might be mistaken, I wrote to him again, asking him who was the County Judge in i^oo, wlien these purported affida- vits of Mr. Howe say that they were signed by Thos. P. Baldwin County Judge. He answers me February 7tli, 1884: "In reply tn your favor of the 6th ult., will say that David Arue, Jr., was County Ju'ige in 1833." Very Kespectfully, John McGonigaIi. [Since the conclusion of the debate of this proposion, the clerk lias written to Mr. Braden stating that lie overlooked the officer when examining the records at my request. And upon this I claim notliing upon tlie point that Baldwin was not a Judge. — Kelley.] Do you blame me, then, ladies and gen- tlemen, for stating before you I cannot take as evidence anytliing that has passed througn such hands as Mr. Hulburt and Howe, unless I have tlie original statement to compare, or it can be proven outside in some way thai these statements that he has been referring to — iiut never reading in full to you — are unaltered and genuine? Here is wliere he gets his John Spaulding, Mar- tha Spaulding, Henry T^ake, John Miller, Aaron Wii^lu, Oliver Smith and Nalium Howard. l)o y u want me to swallow their contradictory, self-accusing, wlioly improbable, malicious falsehoods, rather than accept the truth of God? Could any- 116 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. thing pure and immalculate have passed through that sewer of filth and come out worthy of the palate of decent men and women? Answer for yourselves. But I proceed further with the examination. I now call your attention to the letter of Mrs. Matilda Davidson, another of his witnesses, to a Boston newspaper and published May. 1839, this a person too, better informed upon these matters, who had a better oppor- tunity to be so than all the others he has re- ferred to ; and she also manifests a terrible feeling against the people that I represent. Bhe says, "That any sane person should rank ithigher than any other merely human composition is a matter of the greatest astonishment, yet it is received as divine by some who dwell in enlightened New England, and even by those who have sus- tained the character of devoted "Chris- tians." Yes, and right here I might say, that when I traveled through "enlighten- ed New England" but about four months ajro, I found many churches of the same peo- ple, and hundreds of good, faithful. God- fearing and worshiping men and women in them, all the way from Providence, R. I., to Addison, Me. But she continues, and I read extracts, for the letter is very long and in great part but conclusions which are in, no sense evidence, and which would not interest you: "It [the manuscript] claims to have been written by one of the lost nations anout forty years before this, six women left Jerusalem— but one was then married. Their posterity, in about forty years, have divided into two nations, and one nation has built a temple like Solomon's, built cities, and even the in- spired Jacob can not engrave one hundreth part of their exploits on his plates. Siilney never did things by halves when he mounted King Ahasuerus' horse. On page 1)9 King Jacob, alias Sidney, preaches, and has a perfect knowledge of the atonement and modern theological spe- culations concerning it, and the resurrection and the world to come. The Apostle Paul declares that these things were mysteries, hidden from even the angels, until revealed to the world by the apostles of Christ. Poor Paul did not know what the Lord had done for the ancestors of Tiuposter Joe, and manuscript-stealing Sidney in the wilds of America, 600 years before his day ; although they habitually trampled under foot nearly every precept of his law. King Jacob, a//as Sidney, now gives a parable from the Mor- mon prophet Zenos. The terse, beautiful parables of out" Savior concerning the un- fruitful tree, the husbandman and his vineyard, and Paul's parable of the olive tree, that would cover not a page of the Book of Monuon, are diluted, caiicatured, and mixed and spread over eight pages, as only hifaluting Sidney could do it. In his awkward attempts to imitate the authorized version in style, he begins thirty sentences on theseSyages with " and it came to pass,'' thirty-one with " Behold.'' "Beheld " and " Beholdest " occur nearly a score of times each. "Wherefore" and " thereof " nearly as many times. These cant words of the writer compose a large portion ot the parable from Zenos, An eccentric, illiterate char- acter, popularly called Lord Timothy Dexter, wrote a book and compelled the printer to print it exactly as he wrote it. There was not a capital letter, nor a mark of punctuation, nor any division of matter into paragraphs or sentences in it. The book was eagerly bouglit up as a curiosity. In printing a second edition Dexter stated in an appendix that some had found fault with his book, because there were no capitals or punctuation marks in it ; and for their benefit he added the appendix. Then followed many pages, some covered with capital letters, in all conceivable styles, each style having several lines given to it. Then followed whole pages of commas, then serai colons, until every conceivable printers' mark was printed in this way. The author remarked at the close that each reader miirht take as many and such capital letters and punctuation marks, as he pleased, and place them to suit himself. I would advise the printers of the Book of Mormon to print several thousands of " And it came to pass" — "Behold"—" Wherefore"— "Therefore" — "Thereof" and other cant words, and let readers do, as Lord Timothy Dexter advised nis readers to do, select such cant words as they pleased, and as many as they pleased, and place them where they pleased. Let us quote a sentence or two of this " Fulness of theGospel," that is to the New Testament as the New is to the Old. "And it came to pass that he pruned it. and digged "about it and nouiislied it according to his word" (nourishing a tree according to the word!) "And it "came to pass that after many days it began to put ' foith somewhat, a tender little branches." Who doubts that it took inspiration to bring forth that sentence ? Again, "Ye shall clear away the branches which brings "forth bitter fmi', according to the strength of the "good, and the sizeth reof, and ye shall not clear the "had thereof, all at once, lest the root.s thereof be too "stro'ig for the graft thereof, and the graft thereof "pi-rish." As Imposter Joe declares in his revela- tions about stores and land oftices "Lo here is wisdom." The wisdom of God is manifest in such stuff' as that, doubtless! Who dares to doubt that it took the highest display of inspiration ever made among men to indite such twaddle as that? Seriously is it not transcendant blasphemy to even suggest that Jehovoh inspired a man to steal the sublime parables of the Son of God, and the Great Apostle to the Gentiles, hundreds of years before they were uttered, and to torture their terse and beautiful language into such balderdash as that, then inspired another to engrave it on plates which he preserved miraculously, and then sent an angel to Imposter Joe to tell him where the plates containing such stuff were to be found, and put the climax to this series of miracles, by doling out to Imposter Joe, as he peeped through his his stolen peep stone into the crown of 'ns old hat, this gibberish, word by word, so precious was this " fulness of the Gospel," the power of God unto Salvation? £n the next chapter Jacob explains this wonderful parable of the Mormon prophet Zenos, in what would be a good Disciple exhortation, if there were more sense in it, it, and closes with this characteristically Rigdonian sentence "Finally Brethren I bid you farewell, until I shall meet you be- fore the pleasing ' bar of God,' which bar striketh the wicked with awful dread and 'fear.'" The Nephite Jacob, .500 years before Christ, knew all about the English legal idea or phrase "bar," at which a criminal is arraigned. He knew all about THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 121 the general judgment, hundreds of years before it was revealed by Christ and his apostles. What a consistent metaphor is the expression "the pleasing bar of God *' which strikes with awful dread and "fear." King Ahasuerus' horse got away with Sidney's good sense that time. In the next chapter we have a debate between Jacob and a Deist, in which the mediatorship of Clirist, theattonement, and kindred New Testament ideas and modern theological speculations, are discussed, very much after the manner they were, m controver- sies between Rigdon and a sceptical Justice of the Peace in Beaver county, Pa , to which my father listened about sixty years ago. There is an awkward caricature of the miracle of Paul's striking Ely mas blind, and there is more talk about " plates" and how they were to be kept, so that no reader of the Book of Mormon could have any doubtabout Imposter Joe's plates. On page 137 we have another miracle. Mosiah, a Nephite, discourses to the people of Zarahemla — Judahites — who left Jerusa- lem eleven years after Lehi's departure They had lost all knowledge of God, and were atheists, for they denied his existence, and their language had become so changed that they could not understand Mosiah , yet these atheists, who could not understand Mosiah, rejoiced exceedingly when he told them what they did not believe, and what they could not understand. Now we will call attention to one of the most gigantic of blunders in this bundle of blunders, the Book of Mormon. We are told, on page 137: ^ " And it came to pass that after the people were taught the language of Mosiah Zarahemla (their chief) gave a genealogy of his fathers according to his memory, as they were written, (what the fathers!) but not on the.se plates. And it came to pass that the peo- ple of Zarahemla (the chief) and Mosiah (the chief) did unite together, and Mosiah (the chief) was ap pointed to be their King And it came to pa,«s in the days of Mosiah there was a large stone brought unto him with the engravings on it. and he did interpret the engravings by the gift and power of God. And they gave on account of one Coriantamut and the slain of his people And Coriantamnr was discovered by the people of Zarahemla (the Chief) and lie ilwellfd with them (the subiect of the chief Zarahomla) for the space of nine moons " If this language means anything it means that Coriantamur died among the subjects of the chief Zarahemla in Zarahemla's time. That was about 150 years before Christ. Turn to the Book of Ether and we learn that Coriantamur was the last of the Jared- ites, who were all slain but Coriantamur 600 B. C. Mormons may take which horn of the dilemma they please. If the Jaredites were slain before Lehi came to America, Coriantamur was 500 years old when he came among the subjects of King Zara- hemla. Or the Jaredites and the Nephites inhabited the same country for 450 years, living together, knowing nothing of each others existence ! King Benjamin, aliaa Rigdon, declares in a sermon, 150 years before Christ, " Behold I come to declare unto you glad tidings of "gieatjoy. Behold the time lometh when the Lord " shall come down from heaven with power, and s^hall " dwell among the children of men, in a tabernacle of " clay, and shall go forth amongst men, working mighty " miracles, such as healing the »ick, raising the dead. •' causing the lame to walk, the blind to receive their 'sikjht, the deaf to hear; and cnring all manner of •• (iixeases. and shiill cast out devils and evil npirita 'which dwelliu the hearts of the children of men: j And tie shall suffer temptaiions and hunger, and ^' thirst, and fatigue and pain of body even more than • man can suffer, except lo be unto death, for behold ' blond Cometh from every pore"— (You see King Ben- ianiiu knew all aboui the phy.siology of the blood 2000 years before Harvey) " so great hhiill be his anguish " for the sins and abominations of his people. And " he shall be called Jesus (Miri.st, the Son of God, the ■' father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things, "from the lieginiiintr, and his inotht-r shall be called "Mnry. and lo He Cometh to his own that salvHtion "might come to the children of men, even through " faith in his name, and even after all this, thcv shall " consided Him a man, and say that He haih a devil, " and shall scourge Him, and criicifv Him, and Heshali " raise the third day from the dead, and behold He " standeth to judge the world." Did Isaiah, who stands among the proph- ets of the Old Testament, as the prophet of the Messiah, ever utter such prophecies as these? Rigdon interpolated the his- tory of Christ, as he took it from the New Testament, intoSpaulding's romance, when he was remodelling it so that he could make a "big thing out of it" as a new rev- elation Benjamin, alias Rigdon, proceeds. Re- member Benjamin is an Israelite, living un- der the law, 150 years before the birth of Jesus . 'Salvation cometh to none except it be througb repentiince and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ There " shall be no other name gi ven under heaven, nor any " other means whereby solvation can come unto the "children of men, only through the name of Christ. " Except they humble themselves, and become as lit- " tie children, and believe that salvation was and is " and is to come (a Disciple Idea) in and through the " atoning blood of ("hrisl (One of Rigdon's revival '' expressions.) For the naturalman is enmity against " God and h«s been since the fall of Adam (More "modern theology.) But if he yields to the enticingn " of the Holy Spirit (one of Rigdon's revival isms) '■ and putteth off the natural man and becometn a ' Saint through the atonement.)! Christ oui Lord, and " becometh as a child, submissive humble meek, "patient, full of love, willing to submit to the things *' which the Lord seeth fit to inflict on him even as a " child doth submit to his father." Seriously, now, as persons of sense, shall we believe that an Israelite, under the law of Moses, preached in that way, 150 years before the birth of Christ? Or that Rigdon interpolated these sentences from the New Testament, these phrases from modern the- ology, these revivalism." of his own, hito the MS he stole from Spaulding — when he was fixing it up to make "a big thing" out of it as a new revelation? In the sermon of a prophet, Abinadi, which is as much like one of Rigdon's ser- mons as the sermons of King Benjamin , Rigdon completely "gives himself away," as the slang expression has it. Page 174. "If Christ had not risen from the dead, or have broken the bonds of death (Shades of Murray, what grammar), that the grave should have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection. But there is a resurrec- tion from the dead, therefore the grave hath no victory, and tiie sting of death is swal- lowed up in Christ." Rigdon forgot that he was trying to put the resurrection of Christ into the mouth of an Israelite be- 122 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. fore it occurred, which demands the future tense, and used such language as the real speaker, Kigdon, should use, and spoke of it as a past event, saving, "had risen, "has broken." On page 277 we have doctrine taught that is as clearly the work of Rigdon as is his blackguard letter to the "Boston Journal," or his glorification of King Ahas- uerus' horse Immersion for the remission of sins is preached over 100 j'ears before John the Baptist, and in the name of Christ, more than 150 years before the day of Pen- tecost, just as Disciple preachers preach it; and to clinch the matter, that it is Rigdon, immersion in the name of Christ is for the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit, what Rigdon believed and brought from the Bap- tists, and the Disciples do not believe. Ob- serve the teaching agrees with the Disci- ples as far as Rigdon agreed with them, and disagrees with them, just where he dif- fered from them. Converts were added to the church, which was completely organized and in full operation more than 150 years before Jesus said, "I will build my church," proving that it did not then exist. Here again we have an instance in which Rigdon differed fiom the Disciples On pages 192, 193, 194 and 195 we have descriptiont of churches of Christ, Christian teaching — Christian ordinances Church discipline, all in accordance with Rigdon's ideas of what these things should be A wicked son of a preacher is converted, just as men "were converted under Rigdon's preaching, a regular miraculous Baptist "experience." This was followed by a regular series of Rigdonish revivals. under preachers preach- ing like Rigdon, the gospel in all of its ful- ness, according to Rigdon's notions. On page 233 we have a long extract from one of Rigdon's sermons : '• Ye must repent and be born again, for the spirit " faith (where except in John III in the exact words " of Jesus) if ye are not born again ye cannot enter the "kingdom of God : therefore c me and be bapiized " unto repentance, that ye may be washed from your "sins, that ya may have faith on the Son of (iod, " that talieih away the sins of the world, who is mighty " to save and tocleanse from all unrighteousness: Yea "I say unto you come and fear noi, l;iy to one .'^ide "every sin which doih so easily beset you which doth. '' bind you down to de^trnciion, yea come and go forth "and show unto your God that you are willing to " repent of your sins, and enter into a covenant with "Him, to keep His comma'dments, and manifest it " unto Him this day. by going dowi' into the waters of "baptism, and wliosoever doeth this, and keepeth the "commandments of God, fiom this time forth, the " same will remember that I have sai i unto him that " he shall have eternal life according to the Holy Spirit " which testifieth in me. Let me ask any person of common sense Avhich do you believe, that an Israelite, un- der the law of Moses, preached in that way, in the exact words of Christ and his apos- tles, more than 100 years before Christ? Or has Rigdon interpolated one of his exhor- tations into the manuscript he stole from Spaulding when he was making "a big thing," in the shape of a new revelation out of it? Old acquaintances of Rigdon in this audience can f4''>^ost hear hifalutin, spread eagle Sidney in oiio of bi« revival exhortations, as they hear that language. MR KELLEY'S TWELFTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen : — Before entering upon my main argument I will notice oiie or two ob- jections that have been made by my oppo- nent. First, with regard to the purported affida- vits that he read. — Take and read the state- ment shoAving the manner of interviewing the witnesses I introduced, — when the lan- guage was taken down at the time — the parties own words — and compareit with the manner of running around and getting up an affidavit when the other side is not there and you will soon discover who has the truth. Mr Braden : Was Mr. Thorn present when you interviewed those parties? Mr. Kelley : I have not presented any affidavits, sir. I havegiven their exact lan- guage taken at the time; written in their presence. That is the manner of getting this, and it is so stated here. I will read from the conclusion of the intervie- ; '' These facts and interviews are present d to the ' readers of the Herald impartially, just as they oe- " curred the good and bad side by side; and allowing " tor a possible mistake or error from a misHppreheu- " sion or mistake in taking notes, it can be relieii up- " on as the opinion and gossip had about the Smith "family and others among their old neighbors. It " will be remembered that all the parties interviewed " are unbelievers in. and some of them bitter ene- " mies to the faith of the Saints; and it is not unieason- " able to suppose that thi y all t'>ld the worst ihey " knew. So we sui mit it to the Herald reader.s without "comment, with the expectation offending eiich one " of the parties interviewed a copy when published." When this was published each of the parties was sent a copy oftheHerald with the interview, and not one from whose af- fidavit Mr. Braden has read has h.^^d the manliness to write to Mr. Kelley of Coldwa- ter, Michigan, and say tliat he was misrep- resented. But somebody can run around and get up an allidavit that does not men- THE BR ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. i2a tion a single material, contradiction, and a couple of them sign it. How many affida- vits did hie liave from tlie witnesses 1 read from last nig lit? From nobody but from Major Gilbert and Major Gilbert fails to point out a single thing m which he is mis- represented. Did you not notjce tiiat? He says that he was misrepresented, but he does not state wherem he was misrepre'-ent- ed. The fact is, Major Gilbert, if he made that affidavit, lied, and I know that he did. I am willing to face him In Palmyra, or any other place, and say that it is not true because I know his language was taken at the time. As far as the contradiction is concerned, I do not care anything about it. I wanted it to come before this audience. I knew what Gilbert had done when he found he was caught; and what Braden had to bring but I wanted to show this audience how easy it was to run around and get affidavits and statements from persons and prove things, when you write 'hem up yo'irself and have them signed The way it started, this Mr. Thorn, a Presbyterian preacLer was living there in the neighborhood, and he heard of Elder Kelley's preaching at Cadi lac, Michigan, and he went to these parties to get their evidence, and he sent it over to Cadilac, Muhigan, to publish it there iu order to defeat Elder Kelley's preaching. Elder Kelley, insteadof saying "O ! you're another," went directly to tiie parties them- selves, and there upon the ground took their statements, and took them down in writing and sent their statements back to them afterwards. Mr Thorn never did any such thing with Mr Kelley. nor with these witnesses, when they said they had made other statements, as Mr. Braden represents. I leave it then, for the honest and candid thinkers, and those who love truth rather than falsehood, to decide who has told the falsehood and who has told the truth, if there is any antagonism between tnese parties. There is, in fact, no worthy con- tradiction of W. H. Kelley's report of the interview, as yet. Major Gilbert does not state a single thing wherein he has been misrepresented. Was it in the statement that he had been trying for fifty years to collect evidence against the Book of Mormon.* Was it in that he said he had a way out of the difficulty now he thought ; that he had spoken to Saunders to testify that Rigdoii was there, and afterwards had written him, but Baunderd had not received it? Was it in that he is reported as disbelieving in the Bible? He is the only witness whose testi- mony I read before you, who has said he was misrepresented. The majority have stood, by their evidence as published in the interview. The others I could say some- thing about, but I will not at this time. Here I will refer to one or two other matters and then proceed with my argu- ment. First, with regard to the "woman preacher" referred to m Mr. Spauld'ng's letter, as found in Smucker's History. Does he not know that that is the original state- ment from which all the rest of these histories of Mormonism go to for their material, and yet the rest of them have struck out the word "woman." What right had they to do that? Mr Braden: "When was Smucker's book copyrighted?" Mr. Kelley : " I do not care when Smuck- er's book was copyrighted? Mr. Braden- "In 1878?'' Mr. Kelley; "l did not get it from Mr. Smucker. I got it from a bcok thaS was published long before Smurker. Mackey's History of the Mormons, p.iLlished m England. I will hand you the book any time you may wish to examine. It is a book published long before Smucker, and it has the words 'a woman preacher;' and it is the oldest work that I have seen that con- tained the letter. These others have taken it out of the letter because it killed them so easily. You quoted from works that had deliberately garbled the letter and have used such before this audience. I was, iu a former speech, speaking of these purported statements of John and Martha Spaulding, as set out by Howe, fchowing that they are quotations from something and notthe original. He does not give any dtte to these statements;— no time or place, or party by whom they were taken. They are put in quotations in the book, and tliey do not, in any sense, amount to statements. If they did, they are so contradictory to what Mrs. Spaulding her- self states, that they could not possibly be relied upon. This is the testimony he so triumphantly threw into my face the other evening— the best he has. How do you like to swallow it down? The publication by Howe of these purported statemen's, and the garbled extracts from our works in his "History of the Mormons, or Mormon- ism Unveiled," shows that the enemies of the Book of Mormon had nothing of truth lo sustain their wicked attacks and over- throw It, or they would have used it. All of the statements which he has pro- duced have now been examined, except that of Mr Campbell and Adamson Bent- ley, the last of these the one whom Rigdon referred to in the letter that I read to you last evening. I did expect to refer to Mr Campbell's this evening. I guess I shall, as I am in this connection— also Mr. Bent- ley's. Mr Campbell, you remember, mentioned in his statement that he was not positive with regard to this ; that is, that he thought that he would like to see what brother Bentley kad to say about it befor? he gave his testimony It"is not independent evi- dence by either of these parties Thia Adamson Bentley is the same party who was referred to by Sidney Rigdon ; who. Irom the outset (1881) undertook to destroy him; and Mr Campbell says, as you wili find by reading his letter, "that the con- versation alluded to in Bro. Bentley '8 let- ter in 1841. was in my presence as well as in his. My recollection of it led me, some two or three years ago, to interrogate Bro. Bentley concerning his recollection of it." ?.24 THE BRADEN AND KEi>LEY DEBATE. But T will produce the article and state- jnp'-*T of tlif ^ parties in full, so that all n^ toperly., dgethem: — litlennial Harbinger for 1844, page 36- Mr. Campbell heads these articles as fol- IcMs : — "mistakes touching the book of mor- mon." He then publishes an article entitled ^'Mormon^' — The means by which it stole the ' True Gospel,^' taken from the Evan- gelist, one of their own papers, then edited by Mr. Scott. The article is as follows : — "It is well krii'wn that the Mormons preach the true 'gospel, and plead for immediate obedience to it on ''the part of the hearers, as the advocate of original '"Christianity. This was not an original measure of "Mormonism for, indeed, baptism for the remission of "sins is a phrase not found in their book, A few of "their leaders took it from Rigdon at Euclid, on the ■'Western Reserve, as may be learned from Brother "Jones account of their first visit lo Kirtland, pub- "jished in a preceding volume of the Kvangelisi, Rig- 'don we were perfictly aware, had possessed him- "sf II of our analysis, and the pleafor obedience raised "thereupon, but n»t choosing to rely on my own re- "collertion of the means by and the times "at which "they were imparted to him, we wrote to Mr, Bentley, "who is his brother-in-law, for the necessary informa- "tion, Mr, Bentley's letter shows, snot only whence he "received his knowledge of the true gospel, but also "that, coward that he was, he had not the iii'iepen- "denee necessary to preach it in his own vicinity after "lie had received it. Thus the knowledge of ordering "and pleading the elements of the true gospel by that '■people, is seen to arise n* ar the same time, and from "the same source, as that of our own reformation, Mr, "Bentley's letter is as follows : — "Solon, .January 22. 1841. " Dear Brother Scott:— Your favor of the 7th" of Decem- ■'ber is received. I returned from Philadelphia, Pa., "on the 10th, and the answer lo your acceptable letter "hasbeen deferred. I was much gindficd to hear ffom "you and family, but would be much more to see you "onc<- mo e in the flesh, and talk over our toils and "anxieties in the cause of our blessed Redeemer. "You request that 1 should give you all the informa- "tion I am in possession of respecting Mormonism. I "know that Sidney Rigdon told me there was a book "C' ming out (the manuscript of which has been found "engraved on gold plates) as much as two years before "the Mormon bonk made its appearance in this coun- "try, or had been heard of by me. The same I com. "mnnicated to brother A. Campbell. The Mormon "book has nothing of the baptism for the remission of "sins in it; and, of course, at the time Rigdon got Solo- "mon Spaulding's manuscript he did not understand "the Scriptures on that subject " [Of course he did not. He was in the Campbellite Church then and they never understood the Scriptures as they ought to have done] "I eaiinot say he learned it from me, as "he had been about a week with yon in Nelson and "Windham, before he ctime to my hor.se. I, however, "returned with him to Mentor He stated tome that "he did not feel himself capable of introducing the sub- "jectin Mentoi, and would not return without me if "he had to stay two weeks with us to induce me to go, "This is about all that I can say. I have no doubt tiut "that the account given in Mormonism [Inmanked [this is Hoive's book "Mormonism Untreihd," which 'he refers to. They all go back to that for their inlor- mationj is about the truth, ft was eot jp to deceive "the people and obtain their property, and was a "wicked fontrivance with Sidney Rigdon and Joseph "Smith, Jr May God have mercy on the v icked men, "and may thev repent of thei' great wicked ess! May "the Lord bless you brother Scott and faiuily. "Yours most affectionately, "AdamsonBenti.ev. ' This is a genuine Carapbellite letter, as it has all of the ear-marks. He wants to ieil something, when it is evident without the least comment that he knows nothing at all. He is Sidney Eigdon's brother-in-law, and since Rigdon has left his cliurch wants to give him a dab, and he does not care how so that he is not caught. He had been intimate with Rigdon all along during the years 1823, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 "and 30: the two working together, preaching together ; and Bentley knew perfectly well that Rig- don could have had no more to do in get- ting up the Book of Mormon than he had ; and yet because Rigdon had united with the Saints he was mad and wanted to de- stro.y him. He indorses Howe's book as no doubt being "about the truth." This is the book which I showed you so perverted, misquoted, garbled, and wickedly falsified our works in order to writedown something against them. Bentley drinks it down. And the " May the Lord bless tjou, brother Scott." That was the spirit that marked the career of this man, at the time, to a dot. Never mind anybody else. No differ- ence what their claims. Houiu) tliem down because they do not follow us. Jiut the Lord bless us! me and my wife, my son John and his wife, brother Scott and his wife, us poor, and no more. I reserve comment upon this statement of Scott's and letter of Bentley till after presenting the revie\\ of it, and the evi- clence, as Mr. Bradeu has termed it, of Mr. Campbell. You will observe at once that this letter of Bentley's was too brazenly absurd for Campbell to swallow for a mo- ment. Mr. Campbell says: "Brethren Scott and Bentley are both mistaken a.i to "the fact of baptism for the remission of sins not bav- "ing been found in the Book of Mormon, and one of "them in the inference contained in the note append- "ed to Elder Bentley's letter ' (Here, then, are two mil- takes, at least , and by both on one of the points.] "The conversation alluded to in Brother Bentley'a "letter of 18-11, was in my presence as well as his." [This is a third, for Bentley says, "'I communicated it to brother A Campbell."! "and my recol ection of it led "me, some two or three years ago to interrogate broth- "er Beut'.ey, touching his recollection of it," [Here is a fou-th contradiction of brother Bentley, for he said he 'communicated to brother A, Campbell.] 'which "accorded with mine, except the year in which it "occurred, he placing it in the year 1827, and I in the "summer of 1826." [This is the fifth contradiction.] "Rigdon. at the time observing thdt in the plates dug "up in New York there was an account, not only of the ".Aborigines of thiscountry, butalso it was stated that "the Christian religion had been preached in this "countrv iust as we were preaching it on the Western "Reserve " Here is the sixth ; and a ve.iy essential difTerence. Mr. Campbell says that Rig- don was telling them about an account that was contained upon plates dug up in New York, but Mr. Bentley puts it iu his letter " the manuscript of which had been found engraved on gold plates" Here Bentley is convicted of deliberately lying in order, if possible, to make a show of connection between the " Spaulding Manuscript," which at this time, was in the possession of Howe, and the Book of Mormon : and so fffe wickedly puts the word " manuscript" into his letter to mislead. Mr, Campbell proceeds: — "Now. as the Book of Moi raon was being manufact- "ured at that time, for the copyright was taken out in ' .'une 1829, two years according to Elder Bentley, and 'three years according to me, after said conversa- ' tion (and certainly it was not less than two years), the THE BRA DEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 125 "inference of brother Scott touching the person upon "whom the theft was committed would be jilausible if "it was a fact that baptism for remission of sins is "no part of the Book, but something super-added since "from the practice in Ohio in the end of 1827 and begin- "ningot 1828; a year or more after Rigdon made the "aforesaid statement." Mr. Campbell proceeded then to make quotations from the Book of IVformon, to show that Messrs. Scott and Beiitley were wrong- and over conclusive, quoting from pages 240, 479, 581 and 582 of the book, and then says : — " Certainly this is testimony enough without further "readings. The note on the text of brother Bentley's "letter shows how easily men may reason wrong from "false farts, or from assumed premises. If the E'litor "of the Evangelist were not above the imputation of "envy, jealously, or vanity the whole aflFair might be "construed disadvantageously, but as it is it seems to "show the necessity of a si'rupulous examination of "the premigfS before we presume on such grave con- "clusions." Just so. There are a great many ear- marks visible to the naked eye about this alleged conversation with Mr. Rigdon, show- ing " the necessity of a scrupulous exami- nation of the premises before we presume on such grave conclusions." Mr Campbell, undoubtedly, made a large number of his followers wince when he struck these two conclusionists that little blow ; and had he on this occasion heeded the advice tend -red to others, another erroneous, yet "grave conclusion" would not have been arrived at. The only remarkable thing about this statement of Campbell's at all, is the fact that any man can be so blind as not to see that there is not a shadow of proof in it that in the least points to Sidney liigdon as a party having any connection with the origin of the Book of Mormon. Suppose that the memory of Mr. Campbell to be entirely correct in giving this conversation at least ten years after the time fixed for its occurrence (and he shows it is not, by himself stating that he first asked Mr. Bentley about it to see if he had it right), and what have we? Simply that Sidney Rigdon stated in his presence in the year 1826 or '27 that tliere was a claim made by some person in New York State, not even the name of the party then known to him it seems, that some plates of gold had been dug up in that State, giving aii account of the aborigines of this country, and stating that the Christian religion had l)een E reached in this country just as we (Camp- ell, Rigdon, Scott and Hentley) were preaching it on the Western Reserve. This same claim (with the exception of the words "just as we were doing upon the Western Reserve"), doubtless, to this time had been repeated by more than ten thou- sand people in the United States ; for the claim was in the public press before this, the announcement being made as early as 182S, and the plates were obtained in Sep- tember, 1827 ; and would it be a strange thing or proof of guilt for Sidney Rigdon to also talk about it with others? Indeed, when you turn the thought over, the strength of the evidence is the other way, for had Rigdon been connected with this in any wise he would not have spoken of It to Mr. Campbell and Mr, Bentley But, says one, why did he use the words "just as W9 were doing on the Western Reserve?" I answer, because he did not know anything about it, for had he, he could not have so spoken The record from the plates did not teach as they were teaching on the Western Reserve, but in nine-tenths of all its prin- ciples raiight the reverse. Mr. Rigtioa could not iiave made the statement had he been connected in any manner in getting up the Book of Mormon. All through, that bi.ok contains doctrinal principles entirely different to the teachings of Mr Campbell and these preachers of the Western Re- serve. When Joseph Smith first announced that the angel said to him that there was a record of the ancient inhabitants of this continent written upon gold plates and de- posited, to be brouarlit forth in the own due time of the Lord, immediately all the good old deacons and pious preachers of Man- chester and Palmyra, New York, started the story of a "Gold Bible." It was pub- lished over the country ; and since Campbell and Bentley can not 'Agree within a year of the time when they say Rigdon spoke of the notice, who will dare to say the conversa- tion was not in 1828, or even 1830, instead of 1826 or 1827. They can not agree within one year of the time themselves ; yet, they pre- tend to give such certain testimony, as they would have you believe, although your salvation may be shadowed in the grand hereafter by it, for having rejected the truth. Persons who will take such statements for evidence do so because they love that which appeals to their own selfishness and evil desires, and which is fallacious, rather than God's word, which says, "To the law and to the testimony ; if they speak not ac- cording to this word it is bet^ause there is no light in them." And again; "He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son " Well, but Mr. Braden says, "the devil may come abiding in the doctrine." When did you ever know of him coming and abiding in the doctrine of Christ? It is the Nevv Testament my opponent attacks upon this, and not me. Are we not to prac- tically rely upon John's statement, where- in he says- " If any come bringing not this doctrine, receive him not?" the con- verse of which is, if any come bringing this doctrine, no difference who ; he may begood, although called bad, him receive. It is founded upon the certain ground that the devil will not come preaching the truth, for it would destroy him ; — it would be contrary to his own existence. " A house divided against itself cannot stand." For this reason Satan "abode not in the truth from the beginning," says Jesus I am surprised that a professed minister of the (iospel should take the indefensible ground that you must denounce a thing whether it con- tains the doctrine of Christ or not. In this he gives the entire Christian religion away. 126 THE BR ADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE The standard is "Though we, or an angel from Heaven preach any other gospel," [anything other tlian the truth or doctrine of('hrist] "let him be accursed.". But my oppoiient would have you give them a little cursing if they do bring the Gospel. My friends, you need never be afraid that the Devil will come around abiding in the doctrine of Christ. He might teach one thing. He might teach for instance, baptism by water only ; but he will never teach baptism by water and of the Holy Spirit, to the believer, because God alone can give the Holy Spirit, and the Devil could not teach that, without soon being detected and exposed in the deception. Do not understand me as i-eferring to my op- ponent or the Disciples as Satan. I was only making the argument by way of an illustration. (Laugliter). I have all of his questions here : forty-two questions, 1 believe. He said I would nev- er look at or examine them ; but I have and find no basis to them whatever, except tha false statements, as I have shown, that he referred to at the first. I need not say to you that I do not have to take up my time in examining each one of them separately after having shown that the basis of every- one of them is false. Let him get upon a true basis and argue the facts essential to this case if he can. I think, perhaps, he might do better had he a different case. But, in the name of common sense what has he ac- complished by the forty questions present- ed ? Simply changed the form of the state- men t of what he claims his witnesses say and puts it interrogatively. Do I have to take up this same evidence which I have shown be- fore to be entirely unreliable and examined it because now he has revamped it and put ..in the shape of questions? You would certainly call me silly to so waste my time. I have, by showing the falsity of the state- ments upon which his questions are based, struck his foundation down, and what care I now for the twists he takes in the debris. It he has anything to offer in support of his foundation, or any new evidence, I shall gladly take the time to examine it, I have already examined all of his testimony, ex- cept, possibly, a few of the parties referred to by Patterson in his pamphlet. Should I find the statements of any others than whom I have examined I shall refer to them hereafter. Now I will proceed to the argument upon the main question, taking up first and an- swering objections made. My opponent, on the last evening of the discussion said that all the good there was in the Book of Mormon Smith and Rigdon stole from the Disciples, alias the Campbel- lites, but this is a thing to be proven, if true. I confess, viewing the matter from one standpoint, that it' seems as though there might have been some tampering with the Campbellite faith, some lime, if there was ever any special good in it, as it seems to be quite barren of any good thing iiow ; but whether it was stolen from them by the Latter-Day Saints remains to be shown. He says : "Tt is all balderdash," to ar- gue that "whosoever abideth in the doc- trine of Christ he hath both the Father and the Son." Yet this is the emphatic state- ment of the word of God. Remember it is not the language of myself, but he calls it balderdash. He says that bad men and the devil might come around abiding in the doctrine, but they would not have the Fath- er. Then the apostle must have missed it. It is not true that bad men or the devil ev- er did or ever will abide in the doctrine. Of the devil it is distinctly said "he abode not in the truth." Abiding in the doctrine is one rule given by John to test true teach- ers from false ones. The tru3 ones abide in the doctrine ; the false ones do not. Mr. Braden and his Disciple friends do not abide in the doctrine, as I will show more particularly in discu^«ing the next proposition; and they also argue that God cannot be with them uly in the word ; hence they liave neither ihe Father, Son nor Holy Ghost. He is fighting the inspired evangelist, not me. Again, he says when Mormonism is at- tacked by showing the bad character of those engaged in it that I retort by dragging the Bible down to the level of the Book of Mormon, attacking it. My opponent ivuows too well the tendency of the kind of argu- ment that is resorted to by him to defame and destroy the Book of Mormon and blast the reputation of its friends; but if the argument is good against the Book of Mor- mon and its adherents, as showing that God did not inspire or direct them, the same argument is good against any other class of men making similar claims. All of you can see that if the Book of Mormon is to be rejected because somebody slandered the character of those who brought it to light, that the New Testament must be under the same hypothesis; that if it be true that God would only select pure and ex 'ted characters, such as would at no time of life do a wrong thing, through whom to reveal his will, then pretty much all of the Bible is to be rejected, for Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Peter and Paul, those with whom God is said to have communed, were not men of such exalted and perfect charac- ters. There was none good, so far as that term is used, "no, not one." When my opponent accepts them as mediums through whom (^od revealed himself, what becomes of his position taken here, that if he can show that if some of the leaders who brought to light under divine guidance tne Book of Mormon did things some time in their lives that was not just right, he has proven the Book of Mormon false. Among the first things which Moses did was to kill an Egyptian and hide him in the sand and then flee his country. Abra- ham, the father of the faithful, had a con- cubine, "Sarah's niMid." Noah got drunk soon after he touch'd dry land, after the great flood, David hud wives and concu- bines too numerous to mention ; Solomon the same, combined with the sin of being an idolater. Abijah, after five hundred THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 127 thousand had been slain in battle before him, the Lord being with him, wax^■d mi^rhty and took 14 wives and begat 22 sons and 16 daughters. 2 Chron. 13 . 21, 22. Ho- sea went and took a woman of whoredoms and lived with lier, and then took tiis friend's wife; but still went on prophesy- ing, and my friend claims to believe tlie prophesy. Peter cursed and swore, denied his Lord, and yet wiio would discard his epistles? Saul assented to stoning Stephen to death, and afterwards he was an apostle and had many trials and temptations , and yet the list is not lull All ol this is in the Bible My '">pponen^ assumes +o believe in the inspiration of pretty much all hero men- tioned, just because their names occur in the Bible, not because they did no bad things during their lives , yet he endeavors to sink the Book of Mormon by connecting something to the lives of Joseph Smith aiul Sidney Rigdon that is not just right He can see that if such arguments will destroy the Book of Mormon's claims to being di- vinely inspired it destroys that of the Bible also, and while he fats in bringing an array of accusationsagainst Smith and Rig- don and others, which he ha^i failed to prove , — with him it is dragging the Bibls (which he claims lo believe in) down, to apply to it in an argument the same Kind of warfare, For the sak« of the argument. T migh*^ admit (that which is not true) that Smith. Rigdon et al were as bad as he repre- sents them to have been , they would then be entitled to a respectable standing among the very best of those whom he admits that God revealed himself through. He has only got beside himself. It does not drag- the Bible down to tell the truth about it. ft must stand on its merits just lik» the Book of Mormon. I am a believer in both It is consistency, truth and fairness that we want. He objects to theBook of Mormon because one of the writers says *' If there be faults in it they are the mistakes of men ," claim- ing that if it is inspired there should be no faults. But the Book of Mormon does not claim to be wholly inspired any more than the Bible claims to be wholly inspired. The writer says he writes according to his know! • edge in the characters ; — confessed that they had an imperfect language and that they could not write as well as they could speak When done his record, he asked that men might read the book with charity in their hea ts, and not condemn it on account of finding some fault; and then the writer gies on and says ; " If there are faults they are the mistakes of men ; but I know of nc faults." He then exhorts not to condemn the things that are of God. This is th& honestly declared statement of the writer As I examine these objections it becomes more and more apparent that brother Bra- den has not made any criticism on the Book of Mormon yet that will stand the test of examination ; neither will he. That you may see how much his assertions are worth, just note the fact that he said, on the last evening of the discussion, that the word "Jew" was not known to Bible writers until after the Jewish captivity. In II Kings, xvi. 6, the King of " Syria drove the Jews from Elath." This was about 742year9 before Christ, and 120 years before the Jew- ish captivity. The word Jew is found in Jeremiah xxxiv. 9, 590 years before C-'hrist, and long before the return of the Jews from their captivity The M'ord was in use 710 y 'ars before Christ, in the time of Hezekiah, King of Judah, II Chron., chap, xxxii. 18. It was applied to all Israelites 580 years be- fore Christ, Dan. viii. 12. Again, he asserts as an objection to the Book of Mormon that it speaks of st'^el and its uses, and that the Jews knew nothing of steel , that it was not known in old Bible times; only mentioned, he says, once, and that in the Book of Job That should have been enough to remove his objections . but he is keen to find fault, and " a drowning man Mall catch at straws" In 2 Saml 22 • 35, it is stated, " He teacheth my hands to war , so that a bow of steel is broken in my arms.' This was only 1018 years before the time of Christ The same thing occurs in Psalms of David, chap. 18, v 34, as well as in Job 20 24; and this is said to be the oldest book in the Bible My opponent does far better with his stories than he does m dealing with things that can be tested right here in this discus- sion If he wishes to succeed he had better go on telling his yarns, and not undertake to handle edged tools. Again, he says, the Israelites did not make and write on plates which would have been the case if Lehi could bring plates from Jerusalem. Very true , now let us see. In I Kings, 7 30 we are inlbrmed that they made " Plates of brass." These plates were used in building the temple, and the 36th verse says : "Graved [engrav- ed] cheriibims, lioias and palm trees" on them. In Exodus, 39:3 we read ; "They did beat the gold into thin plates." They wrote, or engraved, also on gold plates. "And thou shalt make a plate of pure gold and grave upon it like the gravings of a sig- net, Holiness to the Lord!" That which was the most highly prized, beautiful and sacred they wrote oil gold plates. Ex 28: 37, Ex. 39:30. They made a plate of pure gold, and wrote upon it a writing like the engraving of a signet. Holiness to the Lord " The Israelites not only engraved upon gold and brass plates, but also upon stones of various kinds, see Ex. 28 9. 11, 21 and 30- 6, 19 But working in brass and iron commenced with Tubal-cain. Gen. 4 22, and the art of engraving on hard substances was known 1700 years before the Cliristian era. See Gen. 38; 18, 25. So much for his objection to the Book of Mormon because they wrote on gold plates and brass plates. Again, he ridicules the idea of God giv- ing Lehi the " Liahona,'' or compass ; and says that "one spinnel pointed the way they should go ; the other the way they 128 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. should not g'o," of course, but the record eays nothing about the way they should not go. He thinks they could not read a writing on the spindle in a brass globe, but the writing was on the spindle and they could see the spindle. This is too marvelous a story for my opponent to believe; but he can swallow Jonah and the whale and then be ready for more like it. He can believe that God wrote the tables of the law and went before the Israelites and fed them on manna for 40 years ; when they got hungry for fresh meat God would send a shower of quails, and when they were thirsty the water would roll outof adry rock to quench their thirst. He can gaze with delight and the utmost rapture at the spring of water as it gushed from the jaw-bone of an ass in Samson's hand, and drink them all in and then think them but common things, and still be ready for more like it But when the Book of Mormon claims that God guided the Jaredites and the Nephites by miracle it is not to be believed ; it is all one of Joe Smith's fables gotten up to deceive Whether Smith stole this part of the Book of Mormon, (the big stories), from the Campbellites or not, remains to be proven along with the rest. Now there is not a.s astounding and miraculous things stated in the Book of Mormon as there is in the Bible; yet, my opponent objects to the Book of Mormon because it states that God by miracle aided the people who came to this continent, notwithstanding the huge miraculous accounts that are to be found in the book which he admits to be true. Nephi does not say, as asserted by my opponent, that he made plates in the wilder- ness where there was no ore ; but that after they had arrived at tlit- promised land they found " ore ol gold," and here he made his first plates. So much for his statement that they made plates out of nothing. He objects to the Book of Mormon because the word church is used in it before the Christian era. Church means an assembly of worshippers The Book of Mormon is a translation into English, No matter what an assembly of a like kind may have been called in old time it would be called a a church when translated into English. Besides Stephens says. Acts, 7:38 that there was H "Church in the wilderness," in the time of Moses. He objects to the Book of Mormon because it says the gospel was preached on this continent before the time of Christ It was preached to Abraham, Gal. 3 8, and to Moses and the Israelites, Heb. 4: 2. He objects to the Book of Mor- mon because the Nephi tes professed to have the Holy Ghost before Pentecost Day ; and said the Holy Ghost Avas not given until af- ter Jesus was glorified. Peter says "Proph- esy came not in old times by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter, 2:21. This Holy Ghost inspired all of the prophets and saints from Adam to Christ ; why not the Nephites? After Christ commenced his ministry on earth, his disciples were not to receive the Holy Ghost until after the ascension. He says ; "If I go not away the Comforter will not come." While he was in the world he was the es- pecial light of the people. That is the way it was, Mr. Braden. There is no clash herewith the Book of Mormon. The Holy Ghost and the gospel were enjoyed before thf Savior's ministry on earth, and they kept the law of Moses, also. (Time expired.) MR BRADEN'S TWELFTH SPEECH. Genti^emen Moderators, Ladies and Gen'it AtKN .— On page 234 we have a de- scription of many kinds of coin, and some of them were very large. Why have we never found any of these coins in America? In ruins in the old world millions of coins have been found. Why not on this con- tinent? On page 235 a Nephite preacher solves all the disputes of modern theoi* gy concerning the resurrection, and 100 years uelure Christ. Men may differ in their interpretation of of the general truths taught by Christ and his apostles, but there can be no dispute over the minute, dogmatical revelations of the Nephite prophet, who, strange to say, gives by inspiration the exact ideas of Rig- don 1800 years before Rigdon lived to preach thern. " Vow there is a death which is called a temporal " death ; and the death of Christ shall loose all bonds "of this temporal death, that all shall be raised from "this temporal death. The sp rit and the body shall " bf re united again in its perfect form, both limb and " joint shall be restored t'> its proper form, even as they " now are at this time, and shall be brongh to stand " l)efore the bar of God, knowing as we now know." There, that settles the vexed question in favor of a literal resurrection, (lod inspired the Nephite Vmalek, long before the birth of Christ, to explain the ressurrection and temporal death and spiritual death, just as Rigdon believed. On page 238 a soul-sleeper is silenced with THE BRA DEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 129 Rigdon's ideas on eschatology. On pag-e 289 we have the modern term "Dissenter" — a word never used until men dissented from the creed and practice of the church of England. On the page we have a de- Bcriptltm of Episcopalians, and the Lord's day is luentiDntd. This is followed hy pages of preacliing in which nearly every idea of modern theology, even the most abstruse, is discussed and settled in a manner that utterly eclipses the general teacliings of Clirist and his apostles; and what is more miraculous, these Nephites always agree exactly with Kigdon's theology in their revelations. On page 280 we have the Church of God described, and it is de- scribed as having perfect Christian teaching concerning topics the New Testament de- clares were mysteries until revealed by Christ and his apostles. On page 326 we read : " He prayed for Tblesslngs of Christ to rest on the •* brethren so long as there should be a band of Chris- " tians to possess the land, for thus were all true " believers of Christ, who belonged to the Church of "God called by those who did not belong to the "Church. And those who belonged to the Church " were f ithful, yea all iho.'-e who were true believers "of Christ, took upon them gladly the name of Christ "or Christians as they were called, because of their "belief in Christ." The New Testament declares that the disciples of Christ were first called "Chris- tians" at Antioch over one hundred years after the Book of Mormon declares they were called Christians universally in America. I wish now to call attention to one of those little things that speak volumes. There was a difference of opinion among the co-adjutors of Campbell concerning what should be the name of the followers of Christ. Campbell, Sheppard and others Insisted that they should be called "Discip- les of Christ." AValter Scott and others insisted that they should be called "Chris- tians," and that the Church should be called "the Church of God" or "Church of Christ." Rigdon agreed with Scott. Ob- serve that liis ideas are repeated several times in the above extract. By inserting into his stolen manuscript his ideas, he con- tradicted the New Testament concerning the time the name Christian was first given and made his "big thing" a tissue of ab- surdities. According to tlie Book of Mormon there were great numbers of Churches of God and multitudes of Christians hundreds of years before Christ came. They had a perfect knowledge of his Gospel and the most abstruse ideas of modern theology, all settled by revelation, long before Christ ; and the most singular fact is that the Lord agreed with Rigdon in all of these revela- tions that he gave these highly favored Nephites. How highly favored these old prophets were' in receiving, by inspiration from God, all of Rigdon's theology IbOO years before the advent of Sidney. We come now to another of those little things that speak volumes. Rigdon as a regular Baptist prercher, had a bitter prej- udice against all secret societies. In the i days of the ant:-Masonic excitement of the time extending from 1824-5 to 1834-5 Rig- don was a rabid anti-Mason. On page 382 he gives the Masons a dig and airs his anti- Masonic ideas. Gadianton and a band of robbers have a Masonic lodge and act just as anti-Masons said Masons acted. Again on pages 365-6 he airs his anti-Masonic ideas. A band of cutthroats have a secret society with oaths, grips, signs, pass words, and swear to protect each other in crime. On page 399 and on several pages following we have a repetition of Rigdon's anti-Masonie ideas. Seriously, isthisthe work ofaNephite before Christ, or is it the work of the anti- Masons, Spaulding, Rigdon, or Smith — one or all of them? Page 474 a prophet tells the Nephites that on the night our Savior is born it will be as light as day all night. The sun will set and rise, but the light will not be diminished in the least. The Bible flatly contradicts such stuff. On page 416 ^e are told again that the darkness at our Savior's crucifixion will last three days. The Bible says three hours. Page 422 we are told that it remained as light as mid-day (Sidney never does things by halves) all one night and a star was seen, the night our Savior was born. What sort of a star could be seen in mid-daylight we are not told. Perhaps all the Nephites had peep stones and looked into their hats and saw the star. ForsomeyearsGadianton's wicked Masons vex the righteous anti-Masonic Ne- phites terribly but at last the rigl^eous anti- Masons prevail and exterminate these vile Sons of Darkness the Masons and righteous- ness prevails all over the land as the result. Page 431 Mormon, who informs us that he is a fully developed Christian, says that he cannot write all that he wants to write be- cause of the imperfection of the language. The Almighty has inspired a man to engrave a revelation on brass plates and suddenly finds himself balked by the imperfection of the language that he has in his ignorance chosen. As the Mormon God is not infin- ite he might make such a blunder. Then follows a description of the three days of darkness, and ^idney just cavorts on King Ahasuerus's horse in depicting the horrors of that time, that ac- cording to the Bible never was. After this was heard the voice of our Savior, and it was heard over all North America. Sidney's miracles are always something worth while; none of your little miracles such as the Son of God wrought in Pales- tine, nothing but sky-splitting and universe- shaking miracles will do for Sidney. Then a small voice — not a loud voice — is heard that pierces their frames and causes their hearts to burn ; and our Savior, s])eaking in this small voice, says to the Nephites on this continent, "I am the Alpha and the Omega." Let the reader stop for a moment and think of the abs--:rdity of tiie Son of God saying to Nephites on this continent, who knew' nothing at all about the Greeks or their Ian" iiage, '' I am the Alpha and the Omeaa," the first and the last letter of the Greek alphabet. He might as well have ISO THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. used the first and last letters of the Chero- kee alphabet. After this our Savior, who had been res- urrected at Jerusalem, appears on this con- tinent and preaches one of Sidney Bigdon's discourses to them, and commands them to use Sidney Rigdon's baptismal formula, "Having authority given me of Jesns Christ I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," By the way, Sidney dropped the Disciple peculiar- ity of saying " Spirit " instead of "Ghost," and went back to his old Baptist formula. Who is such a simpleton as to believe that our Savior visited America after his ascen- sion into heaven, in violation of the New Testament that declares his next coming after his ascension will be at the end of his dispensation ; that his mission was to preach one of Sidney Rigdon's sermons to the aborigines of America, and to give as the law of heaven, by solemn revelation of the glorified Son of God, that they must use Rig- don's baptismal formula. On page 444 we have one of Rigdon's idiotic extravaganzas. Our Saviour commanded doubting Thomas to thrust his fingers into the nail prints in his hands and feet, and into the side that had been pierced. Such a simple natural aflTair as that would not do for the hifalutin spread- eagle glorifier of King Ahasuerus' horse. He tells us that the entire multitude went forth and each thrust his fingers into the nail pririls in his hands, into his feet, and into his pierced side. We learn from a fol- lowing page that there were at least 2,500 of them. It would be very rapid work for a person to go up and put a finger into a nail print in each hand, each foot, and into the pierced side, in fifteen seconds. Sup- pose they did the work as expeditiously as that, it took ten hours and twenty minutes to go through this farce. The Son of God came down from heaven, stood ten mortal hours while 2,500 persons filed past him, thrusting fingers into a nail print in each hand, each foot, and into his pierced side. Our humorous papers used to have cartoons caricaturip? Grant's hand-shaking when he shook hands with a few hundred for an hour or two; but this "beats Grant." If those who raised the cry "Any tiling to beat Grant" had called on Sidney he could have beat him all hollow and not half tried. Our Saviour, after this idiotic tomfoolery is finished, delivers a discourse made of badly arranged scraps of his discourses re- corded in the New Testament. We cannot say that his glorification has improved his revelations. Rigdon can tell bigger yarns than the truthful history of the New Tes- tament, but when it comes to making revela- tions that is another thing. It is to be ob- served that our Saviour follows King James' version. Even the obsolete English words, style, and mistranslations are fol- lowed exactly. He appoints twelve apos- tles and Nephi baptizes himself, and then the eleven, and the scenes of Pentecost are outdone. .Tesus did not come back from heaven on the day of Pentecost, but poured out the Holy Spirit. But then Sidney's Nephites were always far above their breth- ren back in Palestine. Our Saviour exam- ines Nephi's plates, so as to have everything fixed for Imposter Joe, and corrects one error. The plates did noD contain the pro- phecy that the multitudes would arise in America at our Saviour's resurrection. The Nephites admit that the prophet did say so, and declare that prophecy had been ful- filled. Observe, again, how these Nephites of Sidney outdo their brethren in Pales- tine. In' Palestine a few arise at the cruci- fixion ; in America great multitudes at the resurrection of Jesus. We have then a spe- cimen of Mormon extravagance of ignor- ance. Our Saviour in rebuking Peter, tells him that if he were to order that John should remain on earth till his second com- ing, it is no concern of his, and that he is to attend to his own work. John further de- clares that our Saviour did not say that he should remain. Here was something that just suited Mormon ignorance and folly. Rigdon makes our Saviour tell three Neph- ites that they shall never see death, and re- main till he comes ay ain. Sidney's Nephites are blessed again above all others, i'here is no doubt here. Our Saviour says three shall remain instead of one. He bestows a boon he did not bestow upon his beloved disciple John. Imposter Joe and Oliver Cowdery have a revelation, on parchraent- from John that he did not die, and did re, main on earth, in flat contradiction of God's word. Just such silly wonders as tliese are what Mormonism feeds on. The book closes with a prophecy of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, and denounces fearful woes on all who do not receive the tomfool- eries of Sidney Rigdon, Solomon Spauld- ing and Imposter Joe, The Book of Nephi, the son of Nephi, is an unimportant one. It tells us on page 481 that masonry revived, and that Satan was let loose and iniquity did fearfully abound. Sidney must have been exceedingly malig- nant against the Masons. Moroni takes up Mormon's work and he informs us that Masonry shall be prevalent when the Book of Mormon appears; and that churches shall be worldly and proud and that it will be a time of unmeasured apostacy. Above all men shall deny that miracles and revela- tions are possible. Then Sidney goes for the Disciples who would not accept the Baptist idea of a direct and miraculous influence of the Holy Spirit. We have Sidneys ideas for several pages and one of hia exhortations in his most approved camp meeting style. We find another of these incidental mat- ters that expose the fraud in this Book of Mormon. We have proved that ^paulding wrote several ma \u scripts. To his second Mormon maiu script he added the emigra- tion of the Zarahemlites, closing his manuscript with the book called the " Booki of Mormon." He very appropriately has^ Moroni declare that he finishes the record of his father ; and that he has only a few things to write, a few things that his father has commanded him to write on the few T5E BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 131 pairos left on the plates. He declares his father made the record and declares its intent. He tlien sa.vs he would write more if he had room on the plates but he cannot for the plates are full and he has no ore to make any more and is alone. He then adds the few pao:e8 he declared he would and the book appropriately closes. When Spaulding: went to Pittsburg, at Patterson's request he rewrote the romance, writing Mormon ManusiU'ipt No. Ill, and addinjf the.Jaredite portion. He overlooked this iang-uajre of Moroni, with which he had appropriately closed the Manuscript No. II. and as the Book of Mormon now stands, Moroni wrote 56 pages — the whole of the Jaredite portion, no nothing, for his, plates were full, and he could write no more. That one blander is enough to con- demn this fraud. In this Jaredite Portion, written on noth- ing, and with nothing as a basis for it, we have a wonderful series of stories. Mor- mon has buried all the plates except "these few plates." that he handed to Moroni, the Plates of Ether with the rest years before. Where did Moroni get the plates of Ether to use in writing the 66 pages he wrote on nothing? He wrote on nothing and had nothing to write. The Book of Ether says that the speech of the Jaredites was not confounded at Babel. The Bible declares that the speech of all mankind was con- founded. If time would permit we could multiply almost indefinitely such contra- dictions. We will now give an idiotic caricature of the history of Noah and the ark and defy anyone, outside, or inside of a lunatic as^'iuin to equal it. Noah took eight persons into the ark. Jared took with him twenty-two grown persons and their fami- lies. Noah took with him into the ark, at most two of all animals and fowls that could not subsist in or on the water: Jared took two of all animals and fowls, swarms of bees and wonder of wonders, two of all kinds of fishes and all kinds of seeds. Sidney never does things by halves. Jared was to take food and water for this large company of persons, for all his fowls, and fishes, and flowers for his bees. If the cubit used was the sacred cubit, as was doubtless the case, the ark was 60 feet, long, 100 feet wide, and 60 teet high. Jared built eight cigar shaped canoes, and each was small, set light on the water, was sharply pointed at each end, and as tight as a dish, for we are told " the top thereof '"was as tight as a dish, and the sides " thereof was as tight as a dish, and the " bottom tiierefore was as tight as a dish." Each of these barges was itie length of a tree and not more than 75 feet. Since the ends were sharply pointed, the ark would hold as much as 2000 such barges or 250 fleets of such barges. All kinds of animals could enter the ark ; th^re were many that could not enter one of these canoes. Noah was told to have a system of ■windows in the ark for tliat is the meaning of the Hebrew word. Jared made his as tight as a dish. He took into the^'e eight canoes, sharply pointed at each end, not longer tlian a tree, twenty- two grown persons with their families, two of all kinds of animals, two of all kinds of fowls, two of all kinds of fishes, swarms of bees, and food and water for all for 3ik days, and then shut down the door. No wonder he halloed to the Lord for light and air, shut up with such a crowd in a tight little canoe, as tight as the inside of a jug with the cork in. The Lord finds that he has made a mis- take in ordering Jared to make the canoes after the Divine pattern. He seems to have forgotten that animal life needs light and air. How does he remedy it? With infi- nite wisdom he tells Jared to knock a hole in the top and another in the bottom of eacli barge. Now, being an unbelieving Gen- tile, and not a spiritually enlightened and inspired Mormon, I can see that the hole in the top would let in the air and light, if it was big enough, and it would let in water and drown them all in a storm also, but for the life of me I cannot see what that hole in the bottom was for, unless it was to let in water and drown them. With ordinary mortals, holes in the botttmi of such heavily loaded canoes would send eveiy soul of them to "Davy Jones's Locker" quicker tliau you could say Jack Robinson, with youp mouth ready puckered, as the Yan- kee expressed it. But something like Mormon inspiration seizes me ; I see it all as clear as mud. An Irishman's boots had holes in the toes. Pat sagely cut a hole in each heel. When asked what that was done for, he replied. "Why, to let the wather out at the hael wlien it comes in at the toe, sure." As Jared's canoes were to go plunging and diving through the water, nmuh of the time under water, the hole at the bottom was to let the water run out, when it ran in at the top. Having provided ventilation on the most approved scientific principles, and hav- ing guarded, in the most scientific manner, against drawing by the water let in at the ventilating hole,the Lord then provides light for them. and his mistakes are all corrected. "And Jared did moulten out of a rock" (shades of Johnson, whatEnglish)! "sixteen small stones, and they were all clear like glass"-- -another scientific discovery — glass at the time of Babel. He brought them to the Lord, and the Lord touched them with his finger, and immediately they let out a flood of light, and Jared did not have to u.se kerosene, and he was inde- pendentoftheStandard Oil Company. Jared placed oneof these stones in each end of each canoe, and the Lord and Jared got out of all of these scrapes except one small mys- tery. How did the Lord and Jared get sev- eral times as much as Noah took into tlie ark into less than one two hundred and fiftieth part of the space, and how did they get into one of these canoes, anim:ils that must have been much taller than a canoe was deep; and then what about that big tank ot fish, or did the fish get along with- out water to live in, and were then taken 132 iHE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE into the canoes to save them from being drowned? But then such questions will qspoil the best revelations in the world, even the revelations of Sidney Rigdon. Two of the stones mentioned above were the stone interpreters of Jared's brother, and im poster Joe found them with the plates buried by Moroni, although Moroni never had them, and never buried them, and no Nepliite ever saw them, and they were never to come forth until the Gentiles were all converted. On page 509 Moroni prophecies that the one who finds these plates shall show them to three persons. Joe showed them to eleven. David Whitmer, says Moroni, showed them to his mother, and Emma Smith says she saw them for days on the table and handled them only covered with a thin cloth, and, strange daughter of Eve that she was, she never "peeked" under that cloth. With all our respect for the "Elect Lady" we can not swallow such a miracle as that. On the same page we have this balderdash "Jared's brothers did put forth these stones into the vessels which were prepared, one into each end thereof, and behold they did give light unto the vessels thereof," "Thereof" means of it or of them. The vessels thereof then means the vessels of the ends, for that must be what "thereof" refers to. Such balderdash as that is the "Fullness of the Gospel," given by inspiration — the fullest inspiration man has ever known, was pre- served by miracle, revealed by miracle, and given to the world, word by word, so precious is it, by direct miracle of Almighty God. Who dares to stand up and blaspheme the Almighty by such an assertion? At last the Jaredites set sail. Their canoes were in the depths of the sea, far under the water, and not a drop of water ran in through these two holes, one in the top and the other in the boltom of each canoe, and they had air with these holes under the water. Bah! Let us stop! If, as Imposter Joe tells us. God stives the world by folly, there is idiocy enough in that one scrap of Mormon "Fullness of the Gospel" to eternally save a whole universe of Mormons. On page 514 we are told that Masonry broke out among the Jaredites and of course Batan was let loose. We have a ccmibina- tion of Herodias and Tnllia, Herod and Tarquin. Jared, a murderous conspirator, promises the hand of his wicked daughter to Akish if he would bring him the head of the king, Jared's father. Akish starts Masonry among the Jaredites to accomplish bis infamous purpose, and then "they all did swear nnto Akisii, by the God of Heaven, and also by the heavens, and also by the earth ; and also by their own heads," ( What a fearful job of ciissiug they did do), "that who should vary from the assistance that Akish desired" (whatEnglish) "should lose his head, aud whoso should divulge what Akish made known unto them, the same should lose his life." Ordinary mortals would suppose that when a man loses his head, he lost his life; but then Mormon inspiration is a wonderful thing. The difTerence between losing his head and losing his life is as great as the Irish Justice of the Peace discovered when he declared, "It makes all the differ in the wurruld, in the eyes of the law, whether he said, 'Come out of the hoos McCarty,' or 'McCarty come out of the hoos.' " "And Akish did admin- ister unto them the oaths wliich were given to them of old, who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the begin- ning." Tliere you have it — Cain was the first Mason ! "And they were kept up by the power of the devil," ( The devil origin- ated the first Masonic liOdge) "to administer those oaths unto the people and keep them in darkness, to help such as sought power, to gain power and to murder and to plunder and to lie and to commit all manner of wickedness and whoredoms. Now it was the daughter of Jared who put it into his heart to search up these things of old, and Jared put it into the heart of Akish, where- fore Akish administered it unto his kindred and friends, leading them away by fair promises, to do whatever he desired, and it came to pass that they formed a secret combination, even as they of old, which combination is most abominable and wicked above all things in the sight of the Lord." There Masons put that in your pipes and smoke it. The Lord is not a Mason, "for the Lord worketh not in secu-et combin- ations." "Neither doth he will that man should shed blood, but in all things hath forbidden it from the beginning of men," The Lord is an anti-Mason, and don't you forget it. " And I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations." He is not a Morgan, then, "for it hath been made known unto me they are had among all people and they are had among the Laman- ites, and they have caused the destruction of this people of whom I am writing, and also the destruction of the Nephites." What an awful thing this Masonry has been, and now listen : " Whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations to get power and gain, until they spread over the land, behold they shall be destroyed, f<*r the Lord will not suffer the blood of his saintsshall be shed by them ; they shall al- ways cry unto him fiom the ground for ven- geance upon them, and yet he avenge them not." Now listen. Masons: "Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things shall be shown unto you, and that thereby ye may renent of your sins and sutler not that these murderous combi- nations shall get above you which are built up to get power and gain, and the work, even the work of destruction shall come upon you, even the sword of Justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you." Won't they catch it, though!! "To your over- throw and destruction if you shall suffer these things to be, wherefore God com- mandeth you when you shall see these things come among you that you shall awake to a seuse of vour awful condition " — THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 133 one of Rig^dou's revival expressions — "be- cause of this secret combination which shall be among you all. Woe be unto it, because of the blood of them that hath been slain, for they cry for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up, for it Cometh to pass that whoso bui'.deth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lauds, nations and countries." Tiie anti- Mason rant of 1825 to 1830. " And it bring- eth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil." There, Masons, you have it — the devil is the founder of Mas'^nrv, and Cain was the first Mason! "Who 'is the father of all lies." There, Masons, that cooks the Masonic goat to a cinder ! ! Page 517 King Heth turns Mason, and, of course, plots to murder some one. Page §22 Masonry breaks out in a new spot and Satan is let loose of course. In all th^ire were ovei .> score of stabs at Masonry, cov- ering several pages. Every charge made against Masonry in the years 1825 to 1830 is reiterated several times. Wlien we learu from Mrs. Spaulding tliat Spaulding was a rabid anti-^iason, and remember that Rig- don, a regular Baptist preaclier, was fanat- ically opposed to secret societies and was a ranting anti-Mason, and that Smith was an anti-Mason, all tliis rant and abuse is just what is to be expected. But who is such a sodden fool as to believe l^-it Israelites, in the wilds of America, HtiU years before the anti-Masonic excitement in the United States, uttered repeatedly all the anti-Ma- sonic abuse of Masonry ? ■ This one feature is enough to condemn the claim of the Book of Mormon and to expose it as a transparent fraud. MR. KELLEY'S THIRTEENTH SPEECH. GENTIiEMEN MODERATORS, LADIES AND GentIjEMEn : — The Spaulding story upon examination has been fully shown to be a story; — a wonderfully large one, too, for its time. That thing was thoroughly answered and put to shame by Sidney Rigdon as early as .January, 1836. His slaughter of that through a published article in the Messen- ger and Advocate, a paper printed here in Kirtland, was sufficient to put all honest men at the time upon their guard. Mr. Rigdon showed that there was not only no truth in the general statement connecting him with .Joseph Smith and the publication of the Book of Mormon, but further, that each and every one of the statements and allegations said to have been made by the parties (the very same ones Braden has brought up and cited as his witnesses in this discussion) were false. This was long prior to the death of Mr. Patterson, the Presbyterian preacher, in Pittsburg, whom Mr. l^igdon, in his letter of 1839, refers to as not lending himself "to the infamous plot to blacken his [Rigdon's] character." A man of no sympathies in common with the Latter Day 'Saints, and whom Rigdon's enemies had 'held out as the one to whcmi Spaulding delivered his manuscript for pub- lication in Pittsburg, and as knowing cer- tain things connecting Rigdon with the ro- mance manuscript. But these persons never get his (Patterson's) statement, altliough he lived twenty years after they had started the story, and eighteen j'ears after it had been publicly challenged and put to shame by the Saints. However, Wm. Small, of Camden, N. J., in the meantime, goes to this same Patterson in Pittsburg, and he makes affidavit to the fact that he never knew anything about such a manuscript as these parties had told about. But this don't in the least dash these story-tellers; they lie low for a time till Patterson dies ; and then, like them of old who said to the sol- diers, " Say that his disciples came and stole him away by night while we slept," they revive and start other theories in order to carry out their nefarious work. If it was so easy in the first century to get the guard to lie with reference to the resurrection of Jesus, after they had beheld the heavenly messenger and had fallen back as dead men, would it be remarkable that in the nineteenth century men would be able to get parties to spin falsehoods, to fill up the measure of crime as to this Spaulding tale? But these fair and full denials of this story were made when the professed "JNIau- uscript Found," was in the hands of Howe at Painesville, only nine miles away from Kirtland. and consequently, while there was access to the ,^r.s(', and only sufficient evidence they ever had for such a story, if ever such a story had existed in fact ; and with the challenge of the truth of the story in tiieir very faces, and a demand made for the proof, by one of the men assailed, too, with others, and in the very midst of the parties who claimed to know, Hulburt and Howe and these men, (said to be witnesses), 134 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. J fail to put forth a suigle statement that can in any view of the case be looked upon as evidence, burned the manuscript they had received of Spaulding-, s<> admitted hy them- selves and began in an underhanded and insidious manner to publish their stories through the ready newspapers for such things, and in 1840, after the Saints were far away from this part of the country, in the States of Missouri, Illinois and Iowa, Howe gets out his slanderous and disrepu- table work of " Mormonism Unveiled," or "History of the Mormons." This was four years after Sidney Rigdon through the Kirtland publication had shown the falsity of the story ; one year after his letter in the "Boston Journal," which played such havoc among the des- poilers of his good name ; one year after the full and clear examination and plain contradiction of the story by Parley P. Pratt, in the Neiv Era, a New York paper ; , and five years after the story had been pub- licly met and put to shame in various parts of the United States and Canada, by the elders of the Saints, and notwithstanding all of this, Howe and Robert Patterson, this last a little fellow now livingover here at Pittsburg (who would like to do some- thing to destroy the faith of the Saints, if he only could rake up something to do,) brazenly put out for the truth, the state- ment that their story was never denied till just lately. Men who will deliberately or ignorantly make such false claims as these, and ask you to believe them, cannot be re- lied upon in any feature of the case by hon- est men. Before a person publishes a thing as true, he should know it to be such, and he cannot justify himself afterwards upon the ground, or plea of ignorance. Another point do not forget. All the time, from 1834 to 1840. this same Howe had the Spaulding manuscript in his hands, and at the same time he had it in his hands, Mesdames Davidson and McKinstry, the widow and daughter of Solomon Spauld- ing, were claiming it was in fact, the genuine article that Spaulding wrote ; the "Manu- script Found." And Howe writes Mrs. Davidson a letter in the meantime, saying, "It did not read as we expected, and we did not use it ;" but never the once hints that it was the wrong manuscript, or not the "Manuscript Found," as claimed by these parties, who were the only persons under the sun wno could possibly tell whether it was the ''Manuscript Found^' or not. He never once in his letter to them asks if they did not have another manuscript some where of Spaulding's, or if they had any means of telling whether he had the right one ; or whether Hulburt had played off on him and given him the wrong one. No; Howe knew he ha 1 the Spaulding Manuscript in his possession, and that story in his control, with all advantage in his favor ; and as the coward that strikes down his innocent victim at the time he thinks no whisper of the deed can ever fall upon mortal ear, so, brooding in jealousy and in- cited through the lies and tales which had been i^oured into his ready mind, he puts forth his hand to consign to the past the first and only evidence of this Spaulding tale, while, with the weapons of false state- ments and stories hawked about by the vile and depraved, he essays to destroy an innocent and noble people. He knew at the time of his Avriting that he ought to have a different class of evidence to meet these things with and make good his assertions than that which he had, and he states in his book that he will furnish depositions for this purpose, and which, he says, "will sink these people." Oh! yes; sink them ; that was the object of Howe and Hulbert ; but he fails, however, to publish, or give in all of his writings or works, a single deposition of any person whatever, notwithstanding this boast. But what does he do? Answer v 1. He publishes spurious, garbled, per- verted and false things under the claim he was making quotations from the works of the Saints. 2. He publishes the questionable state- ments of a few persons, the quoted state- ments of two others ; all of which are positively contradicted by Mrs (Solomon Spaulding) Davidson, Solomon Spaulding's daughter, Mrs. McKinstry, Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt, and Patterson, the Presby- terian preacher at Pittsburg ; besides the fact that the.y so clearly and unmistakably bear upon the face the stamp of inconsist- ency and falsehood. They hold the idea throughout that these testifiers, who did not pretend that they had heard of or seen Spaulding's writing for more than twenty years, were so familiar with a manuscript, (which, to have been what they claim for it, must have contained from fifteen hundred to two thousand pages,) that they could, after twenty years' lapse of time, give names that were at the time strange and new to them; and never spoken bj' them for all of this time ; and other little things which it is plain the copiers of the pre- tended statements must have taken from the Book of Mormon, as this was four years after its publication, and done when they have the book before them, this last fact being clearly disclosed in the statements themselves. The absurdity, however, does not rest alone upon all of these things ; but their statements were emphatically, directly and llatl.v contradicted by the manuscript then in Howe's possession, and which claimed for itself to be the one Spaulding said was fi^nr.ci in a cave, and which was truly the Manuscript Found." These statements so directly contradict- ed, together with a few fraudulent affida- vits which Hulburt got up in New York, and which I have fully shown were fraud- ulent, is the entire stock in trade of Mr. Howe to form his basis of belief and cause him to so severely and viciously attack the faith of the Saints and make them appear odious, except the bare disbelief of himself in God, the Scriptures, and the fact that THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 135 there was any such thing in the universe of God, or history of man, as the Holy Spirit, in whicli the Saints believed and claimed to rejoice. Ah! Tlie secret is unfolded in his own words : — "I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than Joe Smitli saw an angel." And so he wrote as Voltaire, Hume and Thomas Paine from the stand- point of his unbelief, without the honesty of these others. I might intfoduee here as cumulative evidence on this question the additional statement of Mrs. McKiiistry, who had a better opportunity of knowing, and did know the manuscript of her father better, than either John or Martlia Sj-aiild- ing and who as late as the year 18S(i, pub- lished, (so stated by the compiler, Mrs. Dickensen), an affidavit in the Scribner Monthly, still claiming and reatlirming that thin Hulburt did get the "Manuscript Found." The statement of this Robert Patterson, of Pittsburgh, who is trying to find some terrible thing against the Saints, to Hulburt 4 years ago, in the presence of Mrs. Hulburt, "that his father, [Mr. Pat- terson, the preacher,] always claimed that he did not believe there was ever sucii a manuscript as the parties claimed the 'Man- ■DSCBiPT Found,' to be, about their printing office in Pittsburjih." And notwithstand- iag this, this same Robert F*atterson,in 1882, suppresses in his publication this claim of his (ather, and gives the purported statement as obtained fipm one, Rev. (?) Samuel Wil- liams who wrote up a list ofstories for pub- lication against the Saints, vvlien the first three lines of the statement clearly show that it is a fraud, and that Patterson never had anything to do with it wliatever. It is as follows: — "R. Patterson had in his em- ployment Silas Engles at the time, a fore- man printer," etc., then, signed at the bot- tom, "Robert Patterson." This is certain- ly enough on this. The statement of Mrs. Hulburt, made on Tuesday," February 5th, 1884, I now submit to you : — She said that, "Mr. Hulburt never obtained but one manuscript from Mrs. Davi.son. That one lie let E. D. Howe have, Wht-n Mrs. (Spaulding) Davison let him have it, he said he promised to return it; and when he let Howe have it Howe promised to restore it to Mrs. Spauldinp, but he never did. Hulburt -pent about six months time and a good deal of money looking np the Spaulding manuscript and other evidence, but he was disappoint- ed in not finding v\ hat he wanted. This was the rea- son he turned the whole thing over to Howe. Ke nev- er was satisfierl with what he found, and while on his death-bed he would have givfn everything he bad in the world could he have been certain there was ever a "M nuscript Pound," as claimed, similar to the Book ofMormon." • This is overwhelming proof, showing there was never any such manuscript as they claimed Spaulding wrote, and that they got the quire of paper upon which he did' write. It is the confirming proof, too, of Howe's guilt. Why did he not do as he agreed, send the manuscript which he got back to Mrs. Davidson? The reason is too plain to be concealed for a moment. He is so anxious to have it destroyed that he vio- lates his agreement to return " as soon as used." Why did he not return it when "it did not read as they expected," at the time he wrote to Mrs. Davidson? Shame on such trickery ! I miiiht alsointrodnce the emphatic state- ment of Mrs. Emma Smith, wife of Joseph Smith the Seer. She positively states : "That no acquaintance was formed between Sidney Rigdon and the Smith family till after the church was organized in the year 1830." "That neither" her husbai\(rnor herself "ever saw Sidney Higdon until long after the Book of Mormon was in print." This is the statement of one of the most honored and esteemed ladies of Illinois, and who, after the murder of her husband, con- tinued a resident of the State, raising her family, and departing this life but a short time ago in a ripe age, loved by all who knew her. Also the positive declaration of David Whitmer, made at Richmond, Mo., April, 188:2, in answer to a question asked him in the presence of a number of persona, by President Joseph Smith of Lamoni. la., to which he gave this answer : "That the Hook of Mormon was published long before Sidney Rigdon was known to our (the witness), family, or the Smiths ; that I know that the story told of the Spaulding romance in con- nection with the Book of Mormon is false." I will, in this connection, again call your attention to the affidavit of Mrs. Salisbury, to which Braden was so hasty to speak of last evening as being a lie, and therefore the witness could not be believed. Ijet us ex- amine it and see who lied. She says, " Tliat at the time of the publicatior^ of said book, my brother, Josepii Smith, Jr., lived in the family of my father in the town of Manchester, Ontario county, N. Y." That, you will not certainly say, is con- tradicted. Now look at the next: " That he had, ail of his life to this time, made his home with the family." Do you say this is contradicted? Where was his home to this time? Notice, she does not say he was at home all the time, but "made it his home vvitii the family." To the year 1827, he was a young man, and his horne was with the family, although he at times worked away from home. There are thousands of poof boys who have to do >liis, and my observation of humanity tells me that they are just about as apt to be honorable aiid truthful as those who stay at home and don't have any work to do ; or, if they do have, do not do it. In this year he gets married, (steals his wife, Braden says,) althousih he was in his 22d year, nnd the lady he marries was in her 2bd. Well, it rather strikes my mind that she wanted to be stolen. Besides, it is a proof that their Campbellite preacher, Rigdon. did not steal everything that came into Smith's possession. But Mr. Smith says in his history, that after the marriage he went to his father's and remained, living in the family a year and farmed with his father. Here is his home till 1828, certain, and with«)ut any contradic^tion of any witnesses. .And it le certain from all, that all the time during the year 1827 he was here in his father's 186 THE BRADEN AND KELLER DEBATE. family, and this is tlie time Tuclrove that Sidney Rigdon took the manuscript in order to start a church? Has he proved that Rigdon, in fact, ever knew anything of what the Book of Mor- was, till it was presented to him by P. P. Pratt, November, 1830? You know all of these questions must be answered in the negative. The only thing he has fairly proven with regard to "this Spaulding story to my mind, is the fact, that he had no evidence when he began. He refused T;%try to answer my arguments and struck out upon his alibi, where the burden of proof fell upon him, and his alibi has gone down and left him sitting with nothing under him But he is still plucky, and up and attacks the Book of Mormon for what he deems objectionable in it. This is a proper way to debate ; and if he can find anything bad in it, let him turn it out here. I shall not complain so he don't mis- quote, or mis-state the book. He has made U few Bible objections which I shall notice in this connection. Isaiah lfi:8, he says, "Refers to the disper- sion of the Moabites." But why does he say so? To whom does the prophet re- fer as leaving this la^d as being the "vine of Sibmah;"— "principal plants?" The peo- ple who were the desire of the Lord ; pleas- ant to him? Will he say what people of the land of Moab was referred to? There were many. Jeremiah 81, " Refers to the dispersion of Israel in the Assyrian empire," he saj's. But what right has'he to say so? The proph- ecy is emphatically airainst such an idea. Itsays, "Behold, I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the cnafits of the earth.^' Neither of these places refer particularly to Assyria. Isaiah 11:11, he takes up and quotes just part of the verse, and says : "Tliis shows it refers to the Israelites in the Ass^'rian empire." Had he quoted the verse it would have been sufficient to prove him wrong without a word from me, Noti<'0, while I read : "From Assyria, and from En.vi>t, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Haniath, and from the islands of the sea." (I'J, verse). "And he shall set up an ensign for the na- tions, and s-hall assemble the outcasts of Israel. an4 gather together the dispersed of Judah from tiie four corners of the earth." Was it indeed limited to Assyria? Is this the best he can do towards a refutation of my positions? He takes up what he considers the pet passage of Mormonism, Ezekiel 37, and thinks to make you believe that staff, rod and stick are used interchangeably in the Bible and mean power. I know we read of the rod of Aaron and scepter of Judah, but they are in no way used in the sense of a stick. We can well speak of the scepter of the king as meaning power, but not the stick of the king as meaning power. The words are not used interchangeably in the English, neither are the originals in the Hebrew so used in a single instance. But in his interpretation he overlooks entirely the writing upon the sticks which I f)artic- ularly called attention to. Did this mean the kingdoms too? Give us an exposition once or confess you cannot. But read it now substitutinsr kingdom for stick, and you have the ridiculous position of uniting the kingdoms in the 19th verse, and uniting them again in the 21st, without any idea of the writing upon the stick or kingdom. Now I sliall answer the objection made by him, thatnoneof Ephraimciuneto America. How does he know? Well, he says the Book of Mormon says they were of the tribe of Manasseh. Mr. Smith, bethinks, (or rather the equestrian Ahasuerus, Rig- don), made a great mistake here. If Mr. Smith had just sent over to Andover, or down to Hiram, or waited till the endow- ment of Betliany, before committing him- self, it would have been all right. But he thinks he is clearly caught here. Let us examine the position : Does the Book of Mormon say all who came to this continent were of the tribe of Manassah? No, it does not. But it says Lehi was, and that is enough for Braden. He can soon make the objec'tion. His objection is, then, that the book of Mormon did not trace Kphraim here bv lineage. But had it done so an objection would clearly have lain against it, as we shall see from the propiiecies. It is written iu Hosea v. 14: "For I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah ; I, even I, will tear and go away ; I will take away and none shall rescue him." 138 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. Here the thought is presented by the pro- phet thii; Ephraim, for some cause or the other, is to be broken up. torn to pieces, scattered. By turning to verse 8, of the same chapter we will readily discover the reason for this, which is clearly on account of their evils and abominations. In the prophecy of Jeremiah, vii. 15, the Lord says : " And I will cast you out of my sight as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim." It is clear from this instruction that Ephraim had, brought upon him a great and terrible judg- meiir by reason of his rebellion and trans- gressions. What was the penalty to be? Utter de- struction—annihilation? O, no. Turn with me for the answer to Rosea ix. 11, 12. The Lord there says: "As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception. Though they bring up their children, yet will I bereave them, that there shall not be a man left. Yea. woe also to them when I depart from them ! " Here the problem of Ephraim is made more plain. "Their glory," as a people is at some time and in some way to be taken away. They were to be taken as from early birth and separated one from another, and thus destroyed as a nation, as predicted by the prophet and scattered among the people. Ibid. 7:8. "Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned." Evidently not well baked then, so when taken up, it is readily broken to pieces; or, as in verse 11, pre- figured, he falls apart of himself. "Ephraim also is a silly dove without heart ; they call to Egypt ; they go to Assyria." His attach- ments are to be broken and he left to wander every wheie, and not seek a place with any one particular people. Mixed in Egypt and Assy ria his blood will afterwards not only be iound among the tribes, but among the Gentile nations also. Ephraim is thus set forth in the prophetic history of the Bible ; and yet, the objection is made by my opponent, and was long before made by John Hyde, and other short sighted theologians, that in the Book of Mormon the line or lineage of Ephraim is not traced to America, therefore, .it is a terrible blunder. Ah ! but the blunder is again upon the side of these self-constituted critics. Had the tribe been traced by lineage, there would have been a conflict with the prophecies. The Lord does not contradict himself in his own work, that is quite clear. Ephraim then, is mixed with the people everywhere ; and per consequence over here, as well as with the other nations. Turning to the Book of Mormon, I find that with Lehi who came to this country, there was the family of Ishmael, and Zoram ; and although it had been common in Jerusalem to keep the genealogy of all the people, it seems none was kept of these. Why, we are not informed; nevertheless, we are in- formed that Ephraim should not be able to keep his lineageor "glory," nor even desire to do so, but that he should be "mixed among the people." So it was that when Mulok came out from Jerusalem he brought "a company" with him, but the lineage of the company is not given. However, we are plainly informed in the book that the descendants of Joseph in Egypt were upon tliis land ; "of the seed of Joseph," and not simply through Manas- seh. And in Genesis, 49th chapter, it reads, "whose branches," not branch, but "branches," (daughters), "run over the wall" — "pass to the utmost bounds of the everlasting hills, above," (over, beyond), the blessing of my progenitors, of Abraham and Isaac. Both, also, as spoken of by Moses in Deuteronomy, go to the promised land and inherit together; he sets this out in the blessing, which we have shown could only refer to the land of America. In Gene- sis 48th, they are made "to grow into a multitude in themidstof the earth." In the Book of Mormon we find thorn traced here through the older brother, Manasseh, who had not lost the birth-right ; but Ephiaim as is clearly shown by the prophets would be the case, is yet, "mixed among the people ; " and hence, his lineage not traced. Then the book is still fonnd to accord with the Bible and truth, notwitstanding the ob- jections of some of the self-wise of the age. In the last days, Ephraim is to come out from among the people, and do his work and in his hand, in the inauguration of this work is the "stick of .Joseph," the "En- sign," which is to be put with the Bible, or "stick of Judah," and with the two, as with the power, or "horns of the unicorn," "he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth." Hence, in speaking of the gospel work of restoration in the last days, the prophet Jeremiah, says: "They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble. For, I am a father to Israel and Ephraim is my first born." Ephraim is to be first m the work in the last time ; he never has been before ! but his lineage being lost, when he is brought to light it will be as in the time of Nehemiah, through the instrumentality of a prophet standing up with the Urhn and Thummim. The Psalmist in the 80th num- ber, exclaims aright then, when he says : "Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, thou that leadest Joseph like a flock ; Thou that dwel- lest between the cherubim, shine forth. Be- fore Ephraim and Benjamin an« Manasseh stir up thy strength, and come and save us." This part of the work of Ephraim with others is so plain that it is hardly possible to go amiss if you take the Bible for your guide. And the prophecies are fulfilled in every condition, so far as the work has pro- gressed, in the coming forth of tlie Book of Mormon. Hereisw^here Mr. P.raden rested his great objection to the Book of Mormon, and his objection to the application of" the prophecy in the 87th of Ezekiel to that book. Now, I want to see him stand up to the THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 130 work and answer me upon this, if he can. There is an issue here, and ifhecanshow tiiat I am wro \g in my position of Ephraim being ''niixtil among- the people," and "scat- teretl.tipon all tlie mountains of Israel : upon the lace of the whole earth," but to be re- vealed in the last day by the light of rev- elation to inaugurate and "push to the ends of the earth" tlie work of salvation among the people, let him do so. (Time called.) MR. BRADEN'S THIRTEENTH SPEECH. GENTLEiMEN MODERATORS, LADTES AND Gentlemen : My opponent quotes from the Book of Mormon the declaration that men will say in regard to the Book of Mor- mon, " We have the Bible and that is sulH- cieut." There is no prophesy in that, for the Disciples had been saying that to Big- don, the author of tlie book, for years, when he was trjnug to prepare them to accept new revelations and his book. The word "Bible" was first api)lied to the scrip- tr.res in the fourth century by Chrysostom. We have here a Nephite in Anierica using it hundreds of years before — another mira- cle. As I have never read a word that Howe said, and have not made him a wit- ness, Kelley's attacks on Howe's analysis of the Book of Mormon is a nonsensical waste of time. As a lawyer will he tell me what effect his attacks on Howe's analysis of the Book of Mormon has on the testi- niony of the witness recorded in another part of the book ? I have sent for legal evi- dence that T. P. Baldwin was .Judge of one of the courts of Wayne county, N. Y., in 1833. When it comes I will settle that cavil of my opponent. I have explained that Spaulding concealed from his wife and daughter his purpose to publish his book, and that he told his creditors that he in- tended to publish it and pay his debts. Mrs. Eichbaum, clerk in the post office in Pittsburg, from 1812 to 181(5 inclusive, testi- fies thatBigdon was in Pittsburg in 1814-15, or during the time the Spaulding manu- script was taken to Patterson's office ; that he was learning the tanner's trade and was intimate with Lambdin, one of Patterson's printers, and was about the office so much that Engles, the foreman, complained of it. That settles that nuxtter. My opponent said last night that Mrs. Davidson said there were passages of scrip- ture in her husband's Manuscript Found. She does not. She says the passages of scripture and religious talk were added to the romance to get up the Mormon fraud. I have proved that Spaulding wrote sev- eral manuscripts, and my opponent's jabber on the assumption that he wrote only one is absurd. His attack on the testimony I presented is absurd and puerile. My oppo- nent seems to think that his course in inter- viewing parties, and then going ofl" and writing oil' what he says thfiy said, was far more honorable than Mv. Tliorne's course in going to the parties and having them go before a nKigistrtite and testify m their own words and say what they pleased. The witnesses swear thai he falsified their state- ments. He objects that Major Gilbert does not specify in what particulars he is mis- represented. It was not necessary, for, he says, it is all misrepresentation, deliberate falsehood. He objects that there is no date to the testimony of Conneaut witnesses. There is none to most of what he reads. There is neither date nor place to the testi- mony of the witnesses for the Book of Mor- mon ; and tiiey do not sign independent in- dividual statements as these witnesses do, but a joint statement w-ritten out for them by Imposter Joe. Cannot my opponent see that such pettifogging is putting into my hands a club that will knock out all the brains he has got. Campbell says Bentley is mistaken con- cerning one of the teachings of the Book of Mormon, therefore Bentley's testimony concerning what Rigdon told him is worth- less. Such talk is twaddle. Campbellasked Bentley whether he remembered a certain conversation and what he remmebered of it ; therefore Campbell's testimony is worthless. More bosh. I have said that a man may preach the teachings of Christ, or steal them and present them to the world as a revelation and be a hypocrite. He quotes " If any man abide in the teachings of Christ, etc.*" Yes, abide. What is it to abide in such teachings? To steal it and present it to the world as a revelation in a lying fraud, or live it out in life? For pity's sake stop that idiocy. He cannot make the Bible and the Book of Mormon parallel cases. But few of the writers of the Bible tell us they were inspired. But few tell us their books were written by divine command. None of the books were revised liy inspiration or by Jesus liimself. They were written on perishable material ; had'to be copied by uninspired men: they were not preserved by miracle, and they were translated by uninspired learning. 140 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. The Book of Mormon was written by men by divine commaud and most of them Bay they were inspired in engraving on the plates. They were preserved by miracle. Revealed to Smith by miracle. Translated by inspiration. Given word by word to Binith, by the Lord, in a miracle; and the witnesses declare that the voice of God declared to them that the translation was correct, and the Book of Mormon true. Tliere is no work of man here. It is all the work of the Lord. If there are mistakes they are the mistakes of the Lord. I said the materials used by the Israelites in writing their books were papyrus, parch- ment rolls — so the BibJe declares. His retort is absurd. Because tlie American people engrave on gold, or stone, on metal, wood, etc., the material on, which we write is metal, stone, etc. Bosh. Tlie use of the word " Jew,' is a blunder of the translator, as much as for a F'renchman to call all who spoke the English language " Yanlis," from the days of William the Conqueror, He has found " steel" in the Bible and he can find " farthing" also. Bibical scholars say that steel was un- known among the Israelites until shortly before Chi ist. If the Gospel was preached to Abraham, it was not all of the teachings of Christ and his apostles, in the exact words they used. The New Testament Bays the Holy Spirit was not given in the name of Christ until after he was glorified. The Book of Mormon says he was. We will notice an item omitted from the g roper place. The Book of Doctrines and ovenants says of the Book of Mormon. " CondetTination rests and will rest on all " who do not repent and remember the "New (Covenant, even the Book of Mor- " mou." Again. "Behold I say unto you " that all old covenants have been done " away in this thing" (the Bool? of Mor- mon) "and this" (the Book of Mormon) "is a new and everlasting conveuaut." Mormon revelation declares that the Book of Mormon is a new and everlasting covenant doing away Christ's dispensation and Christ's covenant. The Book of Doc- trines and Convenants declares that the Book of Mormon " Is the fulness of thf Gospel." The Bible— Christ's Gospel — was imperfect — did not contain the fulness of the Gospel. The Book of Mormon de- clares tiiat the Romish Church " took "away from the Gospel many parts which "are plain and precious, and also many "covenants of the Lord have they taken "away." It declares that " it" (the Book of Mormon) "makes known the plain and " precious things that have been taken "away." It places the Book of Mormon above the Bible, the New Testament and above the covenant of Christ. Such are the the blasphemous claims of this fraud. Kelley dues not present them to you. He " roars you genciy as a sucking dove." 'He is giving you miik such as becomes baues. 1 give you the strong meat of Mor- mon ism. The Book of Mormon tells us that if Ad- am had not transgressed and fallen he would have had no children. The Bible says God commanded him to be fruitful. According to the Book of Mormon God's first command to man was one that he could not obey unless he sinned. If he did not sin he must forever disobey the first com- mand God laid on him. It says if Adam had not sinned he would have known no joy for he knew no misery. 1 lien God put man in Eden with everything tliat could cause joy and gave toman no power toenjoj' it. Also unless persons suffer misery they can have no joy. The angels that are bless- ed suffer misery, for if they do not they have no joy. It further sa.vs : "Tlie.y did no good for thy knew no sin." Tlien the angels that have not sinned do no good ? An intelligence can do no good till he sins I Was Adam doing no good when in a state of purity he obeyed God's commands? If good comes through sinning tlien — the more sinning the more good. This absurd idea of the Book of Mormon is in flat contradic- tion of the teacliings of the Bible. There are many ideas in the Book of Mormon and in the Book of Doctrines and Covenants and in the interpolations of the inspired transla- tion that are plagiarized from fancies of the apocryphal Book ofEnoch. We will now resume our analysis of the Book of Mormon. We are told on page 517 that the Asiatic horse, ox and cow, the same blunder as in the case of the Neph- ites, the sheep, the ass and swine were common in America thousands of years ago. Science declares tliat these species of animals were introduced b,y Columbus and his successors. This Israelite writer (as it is claimed he is) speaks of swine as "good for the use of man." The sodden ig- norance of the fabricators of this fraud is beneath contempt. The,y represent the Is- raelites as living in the midst of the use of the Hebrew and using the hated Egyptian, instead of their sacred Hebrew for which they had such a fanatical love. They speak of the abhorred swine as good for man's use. They trample under foot every great feature of the law of Moses, and impudent- l.v tell us that they live under it and obe.v it On page 523, Ether, a Jaredite, whose an- cestors came to America 800 .vears before Abraham, prophecies in tlie exact language of the Hebrew letter, a thousand .years be- fore it was written, uses the language, the exact language of the Bil)le, of which liis people know no more than the man in the moon, and preaches the gospel to these Jaredites a thousand years before Christ. 527, Masonry breaks out again. 529, more deviltr,y by the Masons. 530, the wars caused by these sons of Belial, the Masons, cause the slaughter of two millions of men on one side to say nothing of women and children. When we remember that all the lives lost in our great civil war, directly and indirectl.y, was less than a million, and that less than half a million were killed or died of Avounds, we can form some estimate of what a war it must have been when, ten times as many were slain. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 141 Then the two contending parties arrayed themselves against each other, every last man, woman, and child, and 'laby, with helmets, swords and breast-plates. What a heroic sight to see children and babies armed with helmets, swords and breagt plates, and what a slaughter they made, no doubt! Then they pitched in every last man, woman and child and baby, and they "fit,*' and they "fit," and they "fit" and they "fit" and "fit," until nobody is left but Ether. He is miraculously f reserved to finish some plates for mpoaier Joe. Ether does not know whether he will be translated, which would be an easy job judging trom his ethereal name, or stay and die out as did Moroni, his copyist. Thus ends the history of these Jaredites who were not descendants of Adam or Noah, for the speech of their descendants was confounded at Babel and the speech of the Jaredites was not con- founded — they were not descendants of Noah. Finally, after copying on nothing, for his plates were full before he began, and he could make none, and from nothing, for Mormon had buried everything except the plates of Ether, which he never had ; Moroni whiles away his time in writing a liturgy for the followers of Imposter Joe. He then rehashes portions of the New Testament in a sermon about faith, hope and love, repeating Paul's language in many places. It looks as if Rigdon was trying to fix up his book so that he could set the New Testament as much in the background, as the New sets the Old. Then comes the miracle of miracles. Mormon out in the wilds of Aniei'i'-'a, "all his lone" as Paddy Avould say, on pages 539, 540, 541, preaches Sidney Rigdon's sermon against infant baj^tism and quotes scores of passages and phrases from the New Testament. What an insult to common sense to ask us to believe that an Israelite, in the wilds of America, over one thousand years after his people had any communication with the old continent or knew about its troubles over "infant baptism," just beginning, preached in America, 1400 years before Rig- don was born, Rigdon's rant against infant baptism. Mor ni, alias Rigdon, closes with one of Rigdon's rhapsodies of exhortation in which Sidney mounts King Ahasuerus' horse for the last lime in the Book of Mor- mon, and he then lets his Pegasus rest until he joins Imposter Joe in Manchester, New York, in December 1830. Such is a mere outline of the countless absurdities in tlie Book of Mormon, "The Fulness of the Gospel." We will now call attention to certain matters that require more space than we could give to tiiem in a running criticism. The ancient Israelites believed that the earth was stationary and that the stars moved. They did not know the (iitFeren(;e between the planets and fixed stars. Inspiration among the Israelites never revealed to them scientific facts. On page 286 of the Book of Mormon, Alma a Nephite nearly 2000 years before Copernicus saya "The earth and its motion and the planets which move in their regular form declare there isa God," a prose adaptation of Addi- son's hymn. Page 410 the language of the Hebrew poet in the Book of Jasher quoted in Joshua is thus commented and explain- ed. "If the Lord say to the earth thou " Shalt go back that it lengthen out theday, "we know that it is done, and thus accord, "ing to his word the earth goeth back and " it appeareth to men that the sun standeth " still, yea and behold this is so far it is the J' earth that moveth and not the sun." It is wonderful how much more than their brethren in Palestine Sidney's Nephitea and Jaredites always knew. Had the Israelite poet been one of Rigdon's poets he would not have represented Joshua as commanding the sun to stand. No he would have expressed himself in the most approved phraseology of modern science although his language would have been regarded as idiotic falsehood by his readers. Page 3 Lehi says he left Jerusalem because the Lord commanded him to do so, in a dream. Page 401 Nephi says he was driven out by people. Page 106 Nephi says he and his people were descendants of the Jews. The word " Jew" is a nickname as much as " Yank" and the word from which it is derived was not applied to any nation until a hundred years after Nephi left Jerusalem and the nickname was not used until mod- ern times. Page 231 Amulek declares that Nephi and all who went with Tjehi were Manassehites and not Jews at all. Page 375 we are told that the devil led Jared and his people. Page 502 we are told it was the Lord. Page To Jadob declares that the Lord told him America is an island. Common sense says it is a con- tinent. Page 416 an inspired prophet de- clares the darkness at the crucifixion shall be over the whole earth three days and a subsequent passage declares as a fact >f history that the darkness covered the whole earth three days. The Bible says it was over the laud in which the crucifixion took place and only three hours. John the Baptist declares tliat only our Savior could give the baptism of the Holy Spirit and that it was future in his day. T'^'^ apostle declares that the Holy Spirit would not be given in the name of Jesus until after his ascension. Our Savior so dechires. A Nephite prophet hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus says of his brethren "that they have been visited by the Holy Spirit, have conversed with anirels and been spoken to by the voice of the Lord: have had the spirit of prophecy and the spirit of revelation, and many spiritual gifts. T!ie gift of speaking with tongues, the gift of prophecy, the gift of the Holy filiost and thegiftof translation." A more flat contradiction of the word of God and the Son of diod could not be conceived. Page 19 and 20 we are told Jesus was horn at Nazareth. Pago 22? at Jerusalem. Tho Bible says it was at Bethlehem. We call yjur attention next to a tissue of flat con- 142 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. tradlctious. Page 507 "Jared's brother" {I wisli Rigdou had given that fellow a name while he was about it) " seals up his plates and interpreters and hides them up unto the Lord and they are not lo go forth until the Gentiles exercise faith and are clean before the Lord " That time has not come yet for the Book of Mormon was to go forth in an age of apostacy, unbelief, and crime, even the horrible crime of Masonry, Page 523 Ether, the last Jare- dite writes his gold plates. Page 158 Limbi finds them and breastplates and swords but not Jared's plates nor any interpreters. Mosiah interprets these plates of Ether with interpreters handed down among the Nephites for generations. Page 204 Mosiah 's interpreters were handed down to Mormon. Page 492 Mormon buries them wilh over twenty other relics, and hands only " the^e few plates" with no interpre- ters to Moroni, who buries 'these few plates." Smith finds not only " these few plates" which Moroni buried, and that was all that he buried, but he finds with them Laban's Rword that was not buried with them and was buried before and apart from them. Lehi's brass compass which was not buried with them and was buried before and apart from them and the inter- preters of Jared's brother that no Nephite or any one else ever saw or can have until the Gentiles all believe and are clean before the Lord. The Book of Mormon teaches that God led the Manassehites to America and bless- ed them far above Judah. The Bible de- clares II Kings XVII, 18-20, " The Lord rejected all the seed of Israel (Manasseh with the rest) and afflicted them and deliv- ered them to the spoilers until he cay t them out of his presence. Therefore the Lord was angry with Israel and removed them out of liis' sight. There was none left but the tribe of Judah only." You can believe the Bible or the Book of Mormon one or the other but not both. Mormons quote as their special reliance the prophecies in regard to Ephraim ap- plying them to the aborigines of America. According to the Book of Mormon there never was an Ephraimite in America. Page 231. The Nephites and Lamanites were Manassehites. The Zarahemlites were of the seed of Zedekiah-Judahites. There was not an Ephraimite on the continent. They could with far greater propriety quote the prophecies in regard to Judah for some were Judahites. To apply to Manassehites, the prophecies in regard to Ephraim, is as gross a contradiction as to apply to these Manassehites, the laws for the Lev'ites, as these Rigdonite revelations so frequently do. Page 271. Alma says " let us retain our swords that they be not stained with the blood of our brethren for perhaps if we stain our swords again they can no mo»e be washed bright through the blood of the Sou of our God." What blasphemy ! Swords washed bright through the blood of the Son of God. The blood of the Son of God a polishing powder. Who doubts that that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin? Page 437 we are told that Christ was crucified on the fourth day of the first month. He was not crucified until after the passover, which was the fourteenth day of the month, and was really crucified. on the 20th day of the month. The context declared that a just man kept this record and it was true. Sidney was mistaken that is all. Page 1. We are told that Lehi left Jerusalem in the reign of Zedekiah, in the first year of his reign. If we add the 70 years of captivity, which began with Zede- kiah to Daniels 483 years we have 558 years or 47 years less than 600. If we put the date of Christ's birth where it should be we have over 50 years. Sidney is mistaken again. The Book of Mormon fiatly contradicts the Bible in its stuff about the Melchisedec priesthood. I. The Bible clearly teaches that there never were but two priests of that order, Melchisedec himself and Christ. II. Melchisedek officiated before the Le- vitical priesthood. There was an introduc- tion of the Levitical priesthood and an in- troduction of the law of Moses. III. T'^ Levitical priesthood under the order of Aaron was abrogated ; Christ is priest, and he alone. The law is changed from the law of Moses to the law of Christ. I^''. Christ alone is priest after the order of Melchise- dec. V. He was not priest on earth but is priest in heaven. The Book of Mormon makes these priesthoods parallel, and talks of innumerable priests of the order of Mel- chisedec. Mormons appeal to the fact that Abel, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Jethro and Moses offered sacrifices. That does not prove that tliey were priests of any order. They offered sacrifices as patriarchs and propbets and not as priests. If there were any Melchisedec priests it was only those who offered sacrifices before the Levitical priesthood was established; and when the law was changed to the law of Moses the priesthood was changed to the Levitical priesthood. Samuel and all who sacrificed after the Levitical priesthood was estab- lished sacrificed as prophets. They are never called priests. The Book of Mormon tells us that the Nephites had priests of the Aaronic order, for they were consecrated according to the law of Moses, but every soul of them was a Manassehite, and not a Levite among them, although the law of Moses punished severely any one except a Levite who at- tempted to officiate as priest. The Bible declares that Christ did not ascend to hea- ven until forty days after his resurrection, and that his second coming is yet future — Heb. ix. 28. In the Book of Nephi we are told that Christ descended from heaven and visited the Nephites, and ascended into heaven again, and then descended and spent three days with the Nephites. Here we have a second and a third coming from heaven before the Hehrew letter was writ- ten, and in Jess than a year from his first ascension into heaven. The appearances of our Saviour to Paul and others in a vision THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 143 are not comings direct from heaven in the flesh as he appeared to the NephitPS — the manner in which the angels declared to the Apostles at his ascension he would come in his second coming. On page 527, MoBoni, a Nephite in Amer- ica, who knew notliing of any Hebrew or Christian scriptures after .Teren)iah. writes: "These things bring to pass the scripture which saith, ' Tliey wlio are first shall be last, and they who are last shall be first.' " "Where do the Scriptures say so? Matthew xix. 30, or Luke xiii. 30. Did Moroni, a Nephite in America, who knew nothing of the New Testament Scriptures, write that? Or did Rigdon, when he was revising the manuscript he stole from Spaulding to make a big thing out of it in the sliape of a pre- tended new revelation? Page 498, Moroni, alias Rigdon, writes : " Do we not read that God is the same yesterday, to-day and for- ever, and that in him is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." Yea, verily, Sidney, we, you and your readers do read Buch lanj:u:ige in Heb. xiii. 8, nnd in James i. 17, but no person in America 1,000 years before Columbus ever so read. Page 539: The Holy Ghost says to Moroni, " Listen to the words of Christ," and then we have over twenty quotations of the sentences and phrases from the New Testament. No, Sidney, the Holy Ghost never said that to Mormon. You vised to say just such things to your hearers in your sermon on inlant baptism, and you have interpolated your sermon into tlie manuscript you stole from Spaulding. Page 494, Jesus says to the three Nephites who were never to taste death : " When I come in my glory ye shall be changed from mortality to immortality." Positively de- clares that they were mortal and would re- main mortal until he came in his glory. In the very next paragraph Nephi says tliat whether they were mortal or immortal from their transfiguration he does not know, After recording the clear, positive declara- tion of Jesus that tliey were mortal and would be till he came ia his glory, Nephi C00I3' declares that he did not know whether Jesus lied or not I MR. KELLEY'S FOURTEENTH SPEECH] GentTjKMfn Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen : I will first notice one or two things in the statements that my opponent has just made. I suppose that if I should ask any person in this audience, now that they have just listened to his argument, to state a single objection that he has made against the Book of Mormon, just to arise and state one objection, you would not be able to do it. How many of you would? Why, he has read such a strin^' here that you cannot understand it, so tar as making an objection is concerned, and no other per- son, unless he would take weeks and weeks to go through it, or was well acquainted with the book, and such a person would ask for no reply on my part. And when you see, as I shall show you, that every one of those supposed objections that he has offered is clearly answered in the book, wliat will you think of the objector? The book itself answers every one of the objections that he has made, which I will show if I have time during this discussion, noticing each one particularly. Now, what is the proper manner of arguing a question? I will call attention to this again, so that you may not forget the diflerence between argument and the simple statement of something that does not amount to an argunient. If he can find a dozen objections to that book that will stand the test, that is enough to send the book down. Why don't he make hU objections fairly, and give opportunity of replying to them? But no, such a contest don't suit. The whole object seems to be to lug in so much that no white man who is sane, nor dark man either, on the continent can answer them all. Well now, he will find out that Sidney was on Ahasuerus'a horse all the time when he tries to defeat the question in that way. To-morrow night, however, I will answer the Gordian Knot. Among all these objections there was a "Gordian Knot," you know. That must be answered. That was a strong one ! Will he give up when that is severed? It will be cut in twain ; just remember that. The objection was made that the New Testament, in the history which it gives of the events in the time of the Savior, says that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, while the Book of Mormon, he states, says it was given. There he thinks is a Hat con- tradiction. \Vell, perhaps somebody in the audience who has never read the Book of Mormon, nor the New Testament but very little, mav think there is a contradiction here. The New Testament is speaking aliout a particular time when the Holy (ihost was not given to the disciples of Jesus, viz : betwet^n the ministry of the Savior jvnd his resurrection and ascension. The liook of Murmon is speaking of a time long prior to 144 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. the time when Jesus was in the flesh here. Will he take the g:round that the Holy Ghost was never given to the projihets on the Eastern continent? Mr. Braden: Not in the name of Christ. Mr. Kelley : In what name was it given if not in the name of Christ? Will you answer that? Let me cite you an example that will show that the Holy Ghost was given. Don't you remember that Saul was among the prophets at one time when this Holy Spirit was given to them? And that at another the seventy elders of Israel proph- esied when the Hoiy Spirit was upon them? The same Holy Ghost, too, that was notyet given, as the term is used in the New Tes- tament scriptures. And did I not quote last night where Peter says, "That holy men of old spake as they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost?" Then it was given before, was it not? If you meant not- through Christ when you said that the Book of Mormon contradicted the New Testament, why didn't you say not through Christ then? Mr. Braden : I did. Mr. Kelley: We will see. But what bet- ter does that make it? That is no objection. The Holy Ghost vvas given in the Old Testa- ment times too, and people possessed it and prophesied by reason of it long before Christ's time in the flesh ; and if it was not given through Christ I suppose it was given through men, just common men, away back there. But he ought to know that he who was Ciirist Jesus in the flesh was the same who was in the church in the wilderness. "And they did all drink of that spiritual rock, which rock was Christ," says the Apostle Paul, and this was when they were in the wilderness. Yet he wants to make out that because the Book of Mormon speaks of men being blest with the Holy Ghost be- fore the time of Pentecost, that there is a contradiction between the Book of Mormon and the New Testament. The rock they drank of was Christ, and the way men par- take of that rock is by the Holy Ghost. It is "a well of water, springing up unto eter- nal life." But enough on this point at pres- ent. I have plenty of material here this evening that is in shape. He objects again to the Book of Mormon, because it says that God cursed certain people with a skin of blackness, *(the In- dians.) Yet, doubtless, he accepts the idea that (lod did curse Canaan and from him were the descendents of Ham. That he al- so put a mark upon Cain. But then these accounts are in the Bible, and possibly my opponent has no difliculty in believing th^m. It is a fact, however, that the In- dians' skins are black, or dark, and there must have been a cause for it. The Book of Mormon says God put this upon them be- cause of their ini(|uity. Can Mr. Braden give a better reason? But now we strike our friend's invincible objection. The stronghold behind whiiih he bids defiance to the Book of Mormon. He says, among other animals which they found, on the promised land in the wilderness, was the ox. "Miraculous!" he exclaims. He had quite forgotton that it is stated in the Bi- ble, "Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together." Deut. 22: 10. And that ox is used to represent a class of animals known as the cattle kind, just as the ass is used to represent another kind known as the ass ; as swine represents the hog kind ; and thai neither the Bible nor any other writer thought it necessary to use only the male gender in all of their writing ; but used the common, the familar and modest words, "The ox and the ass." If you will turn to Webster's Dictionary, you will see that he defines the word "ox" as applying to all cattle kind, and especially when they are found in a wild state, or in the woods, as they were found when the second people came to this continent. Can't you under- stand it, Mr. Braden? Read and be in- structed and come out from j'our strong wall of defense! It will be better for your side perhaps, if you will put a little erudi- tion into your speeches, and copy with less credulity" from the misrepresentations, and falsehoods, published by Mr. E. D. Howe, et al. Every one of these objections of yours are but the reproduction of Howe. If they would stand the test, all well and good ; but when any one can see the fallacy of them by taking the objection as made by Howe, and comparing with the record in the Book of Mormon it seems childish to me for a man who, according to his own story, has scalped Inger?oll, and put a nosl of Philistines like Underwood, Jamieson, Rev. Mr. Hughey, and Moses Hull to flight, to be thus burdening his intell-^ct with such trifling matters. But he o'-jects to the Book of Mormon by reason of the predic- tion of the day of darkness upon the earth as follows : Book of Mormon, p. 22. "And it came to pass that I saw a mist of darkness on the face o' the land of promise ; and I saw lightnings, and I heard thunderings and eaitliqnrfces. an^l all manner of tumuUu.nis noises: and I suw tlie envAi and the roflvs that tliey rent : and I saw monntains tum- bling into pieces; "and I saw the plains of the earth that they were broken up ; and I saw many cities that they wei-e sunk." This was % vision of things to occur on the promised land, not on all the earth. The fulfilment of the prediction took place at the crucifixion of Christ as record '^ ou pages 437 and 438 of the Book of INIormon, However much this may be spurned uid laughed at by my opponent, the tradition- ary evidences given by the natives confirm the statement. "There was a terrible hur- ricane that carried away trees, mountains, houses, and the largest edifices." "All this time they were in darkness without seeing the light of the sun or moon." See North Americans of antiquity, by John T. Short, page 239. I will turn to Baldwin's Ancient America, page 176 and show you what is given in historical works in regard to this. He says : "In the first place Bmssenr de Bonrbonrg claims that there is in the old Central American Books a con- stant tradition of an immense cntastrnphe of tlie char- acter supposed : thin tradition alfirmK that a part of the continent extending into the Atlantic was destroyed in the manner supposed, and appears to indicate that the destruction was accomplished by a tuccessiou of THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 145 frightful convulsions. Three are constantly mention- ed and sometimei there is mentioh of oiie or two others," Who will he say went do'yn to Central America and got this out of the old books? Sidney Rigdon, or Solomon Spauldlng? Take which horu of the dilemma you choose now. But I will read en : "The land was shaken by frightful earthqnaKes, and the wiivt's of the sea combined with volcanic fires to overwhelm and engulf it. Each convulsion swept away portions of the land, until the whole disappear' d, leaving the line of thi- coast as it is now. Must of the Inhabitants, overtaken amid their regular employ- menis, were destroyed ; but some escaped in ships aiid some fled for safety to the summits of high mountains, or to portions of the land wiiich, for the lime, escap d immediate destruction. Quotations are made from the old books in which this tradition is recorded which ap- pear to verify his report of what is found in them. To criticise intelligently his interpi etation of their signifi- cance, one needs to" have a knowledge of those books and traditions, equal at least to his own." These things it is stated, same page, were handed down to the people, " and were pre- served in some of their festivals, especially one celebrated in the month of Izcalli which was instituted to commemorate this fright- ful destruction- of land and people, and in which princes and people humbled them- selves before the divinity and bes mght him to withhold a return of such terrible cala- mities." I might refer also to the fact that Geolo- gical speculation recognizes " catastroph- ism" as affecting the wonderful changes on the continent. Baldwin, page 181. The criticism and great parade over the sign that was given on this continent of the birth of Christ into the world, as found on page 422 of the Book of Mormon, is no credit to my opponent. The book simply states that when Christ was born there was no night or darkness on this continent; and this was one of the signs given to indicate the time of his coming. A star also appeared, but it does not say it shined in the day time. Why Mr. Braden should obj^t to super- natural things occurring on this continent at the birth of the Savior, when so many wonderful things occurred on the Eastern continent, as recorded in the Bible, is singularly strange. Or why that the same things should not appear here as there, A star appeared on the Eastern continent and went before the wi*>e men from the East and stood over the child Jesus, Did it shine in the day time or only in the night? Mr. Braden don't know. The wise men and searchers could not have come from very far East in one night. The whole diflficuity he has found is answered in the question, was God able to make it appear light in this country at the time when darkness would come on? If this account was in the Bible he would swallow it down and then ask for more like it; but as it is in the Book of Mormon it must be siDurned and ridiculed. Because the Savior's coming was clearly predicted by the prophets on this continent with many of the events that should trans- pire during his birth and ministry, Mr, Braden sets up, "It is plagiarism — stolen from the Bible or New Testament." Says the predictions were made " more full here than by the prophets on the Eastern con- tinent," And here it is well to observe that he does not know that. There were many things written by inspired men upon the Eastern continent which are not in the Bible. Some twenty books are mentioned in the Bible that are not known at the pres'^nt time. What tiiose books said about the birth of Christ, Mr. Braden don't know. Christ's second coming, which has not yet taken place, was pretty fully set forth as early as the days of Adam. Jude quotes from an inspired book which Mr. Braden never saw, as follows: "And Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these saying, Beliold the Lord cometh with ten thousand of h s Saints to execute jnd>>ment upon all the ungodly." As the X(-piutes had the Old Testament scripture up to the time of Jeremiah the prophet, they doubt- less were in possession of many of the inspired writings which are now lost to the world, including the one that Jude quotes from, which in all probability just as clearly and definitely set forth this first coming of Christ as the second. This is the reason that the Nephites quote from several pro- phets whose names are not found in the Bible. What of it? Christ affirmed that all of the prophets testified of him. If they testified, they said something about him, and many of them the same or like things. Moses, David, Isaiah, Daniel, Zachariahand others speak particularly of his birth and events attendant upon his first coming. They specify that he should be born of a virgin, — that none should desire him, " A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;" would be crucified, — killed between two thieves ; be spit upon, his garments parted, smitten on the cheek and a scepter put in his hand in derision ; and an array of other things too numerous to mention, and in which it is just as particularly set forth, and more so in detail, than in the prophe- cies as found in the Book of Mormon. This objection to the Book of Mormon like the others made is of no consequence; and no proof of plagiarism. But he says, "The Book of Mormon teaches the resurrection of the dead just like Rigdon believed it," How many ways are there to believe in the resurrection? Ezekiel says, "I will open your graves and cause you to come out of your graves," Is there any other way to believe in the resurrection ? Christ rose from the dead. If the Book of Mormon taught the resurrection of the dead, it would be taught just as found in the Bible, for there is but one way to be resurrected, i. e., to have the body restored to life again. Do the Campbellites believe it in a different way? You notice now when he answers this. The derisive manner in which he treats the Book of Mormon is the same as that used by all sceptics against the Bible — to hold it up in sport and derision ; and there is scarcely a chapter in the Bible but what has received their scathing satire and ridi- cule. Does my opponant think this a Christian way to examine a subject of any kind in order to reach the facts in the 14(> THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. matter? Has he forgotten that noted sceptics who believe as little in the Bible as he can in the J'ook of Mormon, make a busi- ness ofentertainini great audiences by treat- ing- the Bible precisely as he does the Book of Mormon. He must remember, that after all of his mirth and light treatment, truth remains just t.ie same That the audience may know just how much argument there is in such a method, I will read a passage from the liible after his style of reading the Book of Mormon, and see how it sounds. Isaiah 7 : 14-23 : — " Therefore the Lord him- self shall give you a sign ; behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel." Is not this miraculous enough to begin with? But I will continue : — "Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good . ' ' According to Mr. Braden's superficial view of commenting, that would be a sin- f:ular thing. Hereafter all you parents need o do in order to have good and wise chil- dren is to give them plenty of butter and honey to eat. Eighteenth verse : — "And it shall come to pass in that day that the Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assy- ria." What is to be done with these wonderful flies that live in the rivers of Egypt and the Assyrian bee. Read the next verse and you will see ; they are to fill all the holes of the rocks in the country, and to eat in the "thorn bushes." But I will read on : — "In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, the king of Assyria, the head and the hair of the feet [on the bot- tom of the feet my opponent would say], and it shall also consume his beard." Well, a great many razors do that these times. Now, if this was in the Book of Mormon would he not have a more miraculous or terrible thing to laugh at than any he has found in that book — shaving the "hair of the feet?" And again : "It shall come to pass in that day that a man shall nourish a young cow and two sheep ; and it shall come to pass, for the abundance of milk that they shall give, he shall eat butter ; for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land." If this was in the Book of Mormon, would it not be a fine piece for Mr. Braden's ridi- cule? Now, it seems to me, my friends, that be- fore you begin to swallow down such argu- ments as that, you had better just stop and <^andidly think awhile ; weigh and consider these things and statements in the connec- tion in which they are written in their full and true light, and not regard the ridicu- culous statement made as to them. This ridicule is not argument. It does not meet argument upon any plane, and it will not attack the Book of Mormon. Neither can It attack the- Bible in any successful sense with thinking men and women. But he makes sport of the Book of Mor- mon, because, says he, "It speaks against Masonry'." Yet, strange as it may appear, the word Mason does not appear in it. It speaks against secret societies, where peo- ple band together to rob, and steal, and murder, and plunder ; warns the people into whose hands the book should fall against all such, as they had been a fruit- ful cause of the destruction, of the govern- ment upon the continent and the peace of the people. Is this bad advice? Or is this Masonry? If so, the sooner it be put down the better. But that is not what Masons profess. Their's is a benevolent institu- tion; and Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon were both "Masons." The Book of Mor- mon says, page 382 that "Gadianton, who was exceeding expert in many words, and also in his craft to carry on the secret work of murder and robbery ; therefore he be- came the leader of the b^nd of Kishku- men." "They also sought place in the gov- ernment." Page 399. This band of rob: bers became so powerful that the law- abiding people were compelled to tak6 up arms and defend their wives and children and property against them. See Book of Mormon, pages 424, 425, Is this Masonry? These robbers had such strong holds in the mountains that the people could not dis- lodge them. Pages 426, 427 and 430. On page 428 of the Book of Mormon it reads : "And it came to pass that the ninety and third year did also pass away in peace, save it were for the Gadianton robbers, who dwelt upon the mountains — who did infest the land ; for so strong were their holds and their secret places that the people could not overthrow them." Again, pa^e 424, verse 10 • "The war be- tween the robbers and the people of Nephi did continue and became exceeding sore; nevertheless the people of Nephi did gain some advantage of the robbers, insomuch that they did drive them back out of their lands into the mountains, and into their secret places." Book of Mormon, page 427 : "And it came to pass in the latter end of the eighteenth year, those armies of robbers had i^repared for battle, and began to come down, and to sally forth from the hills and out of the mountains, and the wilderness, and their strongholds, and secret places, and began to take possession of the lands." This is what my friend calls Masonry. This account is confirmed by recent explo- rations. On the Lookout Mountain, lying between the Gennessee and Cass rivers, there is a strong fortification built upon the brow of the great ledge of stone. It in- cludes about two acres of ground. Within thirty feet of the top of this rock are five rooms made by dint of labor. The entrance to these rooms is very small. Mr. Fergu- son thinks them to have been constructed during some dreadful wars and those who constructed them acted on the defensive ; and believes that it was so formidable, ihaii THE BRADEN AND KEL.LEY DEBATE. 147 twenty men could have withstood the whole army of Xerxes ; as it was impossi- ble for more than one to pass at a thne, and by a slight push could be hurled one hundred and fifty feet below. Says, Mr, Short, in speaking of these: "This intro- duces us to another class of ruins, which, with a couple of exceptions, were not dis- covered prior to the summer of 1874. We refer to the cliff dwellings, the most remark- able habitations ever occupied by man." Pages 293 to 298. "The most surprising re- sults in all history of archaeological explo- ration in this country was obtained in Sept., 1874, by a party conuected with the United States' Geological and Geographical Sur- vey Corps." " One of the first clifl[' houses discovered by explorers is a most interest- ing structure, the position of which is over 600 feet from the bottom of the canon in a niche of the wall furnishes a significant commentary on the straits to which this sorely- pressed people were driven by their enemies." "Five hundred feet of the ascent to be made to this aerial dwelling was comparitively easy, but a hundred feet of almost perpendicular wall confronted the party, up which thay never could have climbed, but for the fact that they found a series of cuts in the face of the rock leading up to the ledge upon which the house was built. This ledge was ten feet wide by twenty feet in length, with a vertical space between it and the over-hanging rock of fifteen feet. The rocks of the cliff served as the rear wall of the house. The door opening on the esplanade was but twenty by thiity inches in size." "Some little taste was exhibited by the occupants of this human swallow nest." " An examina- tion of the immediate vicinity revealed the ruins of a half dozen similar dwellings in ledges of the clifis, some of them occupy- ing positions the inaccessibility of which, must ever be a wonder, when considered as places of residence for human beings." Down the valley aways, < a remarkable "watch tower" was discovered. "The outer wall of which was 43 feet in diameter, the inner twenty-five. The outer wall is still standing twelve feet high." Mr. Jackson's next discovery was "on the face of the vertical roi-k, ^vhi<■h here ran up from the bottom of the cafiou; and at a height of from fifty to one hundred feet, were a number of nest-like habitations.'' " The cliff" house in this case was reached by its occupants from the top of the cafion. The walls were pronounced as firm as the rock upon which they were built. The stones were very regular in size. The dwelling measured fifteen feet in length, five feet in width, and six feet in height. Three miles further down the cafion, the party discovered at heights from GOO to 800 feet above their heads, some curious, unique little dwellings, sandwiched among the crevices of the horizontal strata of the rock of which the blutf was composed. Access to the summit of the bluffa thousand feet high was obtained by a circuitous path through a side canon, and the houses them- selves could only be reached at the utmost peril— of being precipitated to the bottom of the dizzy abyss— by crawling alon^ a ledge twenty inches wide and only high enough for a man in a creeping position. This led to the wider shelf on which the houses rested. The perfection of the finish was especially noticeable in one of these houses, which was but fifteen feet long and seven feet high, with a wide wall run- ning back in a semi-circular sweep." Here I will state that in the summer of 1876, when I was in Washington City, I visited the National Museum and noticed that they had just begun to place casts, representations of these cliff dwellers' cities, among the relics and curiosities of that institution. But when in 1882 I visited the same institution there were large num- bers of these representations that seemed to particularly interest and attract the public. You will find there miniature representa- tions of these cliff cities that have been lately discovered, prepared for the purpose of interesting and entertaining the world, for there is nothing that has ever been found that is like them. And yet they are set out, described, located and traced in the Book of Mormon, in the history of what he terms Masonry, but which in fact is the history of the coinbin ations of robbers, and not Masonry. How did Sidney Rigdon get these facts? Here is anotner thing of which to make a note when he answers. (Time called.) 148 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. MR. BRADEN'S FOURTEENTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen : — We will now ask your atten- tion to a conglomeration of contradictions and absurdities, as incapable of being un- tied as the Gordian knot ; and no Mormon can cut it either, not even with the wonder- ful sword of Laban. Page 507 : The plates of Jared's brother are to be sealed and buried, and are not to go forth until the Gentiles repent of their iniquity, have faith and are clean before the Lord. According to the Book of Mormon that time has not come. Page 523: Ether hides up his plates of gold, and they are afterwards found by Limbi. Not Jared's brother's plates, but Ether's plates, who never had or saw the plates of Jared's brother. Page lo8 : Ser- vants of Limbi find twenty-four gold plates, said to be Ether's plates, not the plates of Jared's brother. Page 1-56 : King Benjamin lived only three years after Mosiah began to reign in his stead. Three years after Mo- siah ascended the throne, or just after his father's death, he sent men out who first learned of Limbi and his people. Limbi told them of the gold plates of Ether, found by his people. Page 507: Jared's brother was to write and seal up what he had seen, and bury it, and his two stone interpreters, and they were not to come forth until after the death of Christ, and until the Gentiles were converted, and this time has not come yet. Then occurs this sentence : " For this cause did King Benjamin keep the plates of Jared's brother, that they should not come to the world till after the* death of Christ." IPage 200 : King Mosiah translates the plates found by Limbi's people, with the inter- preters handed down from generation to generation from the beginning, that the people might know concerning the people that had been destroyed. Now, then, let us p^mt out a portion of the contradictions. 1. The plates of Jared's brother were hid up, and were not to go forth until the Gentiles were converted, and yet King Benjamin had them. 2. Here it is represented that the servants of Limbi found the plates of Jared's brother, and they came into King Benjamin's hands. In another place it is the gold plates of Ether that they find. 3. King Benjamin had the plates found by Limbi's people, yet he died before his people knew anything about Limbi's people, or the plates they had found. 4. King Benjamin had these plates found by Limbi's people, yet Limbi gave them to King Benjamin's people after the king's death. 6. If the plates in King Benjamin's possession were the plates of Jared's brother, they could not be trans- lated without the two stone interpreters he buried with them — at least the Lord said BO. Those interpreters were never found, yet Mosiah translated the plates without these interpreters, with a pair his ancestors had handed down for generations. 6. If they were the plates of Jared's brother they were not to go forth until after the death of Christ and the conversion of the Gentiles, yet Mosiah gave Wieir contents to his people before the death of Christ, and the Gentiles are not converted yet. 7, Jared's broiher buried his interpreters with his plates. If King Benjamin had his plates where were those interpreters that were so all-import- ant to an understanding of the plates. 8. Mosiah interpreted these plates with stone interpreters handed down for generations, from the beginni-ng. From the beginning must mean since Lehi left Jerusalem. We hear of Laban's sword, Laban's breast- plate, Lehi's compass, but nothing of these all-important instruments, interpreters until now. 9. Mosiah's grandfather trans- lated the stone of Coriantimur without any interpreter ; but his grandson must use in- terpreters that his grandfather did not have, or did have and did not use, and yet could not translate without using them. If they were the plates of Jared's brother we have in the Hook of Mormon, at least all their important features, in the Jaredite portion, yet the Lord said they should not go farther until the Gentiles were converted, and that has not been done yet. Well, there we will stop, though we are by no means done with the contradictions. The Jaredites left Asia right after the confusion of tongues. Between that time and their destruction they had twenty six kings, some of whom reigned but a short time. They were destroyed about 'JM B. C, for Coriantimur died among the Zara- hemlites about that time. From Moses to Christ was 1600 years by true Chronology. Subtract 250 and we have 1350. P>om Moses to Abraham 645 years by true chron- ology. From Abraham to Babel was 250 years, or the time from the departure of the Jaredites from Babel till their destruction was 2250, which divided by 26 gives 86 years, as the average length of the reign of each Jaredite king. If we accept the other statement that they were destroyed 600 pears before Christ, the average reign was 73 years. Sidney did not stop and figure that story out, when he wrote it. Jared's brother ( I wish Sidney had given that fellow a name while he was about it ), seals up his record and buries it, and with it his stone interpreters, without which no one can read the record, and the Lord says it shall not go forth until after the death of Christ and the conversion of the Gentiles, an event yet future. Over 2000 years after- wards, long before Christ, Ether finishes this r.ecord. How could he so long before Christ get the portion Jared wrote, when the Lord said he could not? How did he write on the plates if they were sejled? How did he interpret it so as to know THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 149 when to begin his record, so as to begin when the record stopped in the history? If Ether got those plates was not the Lord mistaken? If he read them was not the Lord mistaken? If he left them so that Limbi got them, was not the Lord mistaken ? IfMosiah translated them without Jared's brother's interpreter, was not the Lord mistaken ? If Moslah gave the whole thing away to his people, was not the Lord mis- taken? If Ether's plates are a continuation of the plates of Jared's brother, how did Moroni interpret the portion of Jared's brother's? How did he get Jared's broth- er's interpreters without which, according to the Lord, it was impossible to understand the plates? He did not have them, he had Mosiah's interpreters. Then he liad Mosiah's taanslation, or rather his father did, and buried it, and Moroni had neither plates nor translation, come to think about it. If he had what Mormon buried, and he must have had them in order to get Ether's plates, he had Mosiah'if full translation. What need then of Moroni's translation, when Mosiah had done it? What need of his abridgement, when he could have buried for Imposter Joe the whole fleet load of plates, the whole library? What need of Moroni's translation for imposter Joe since he had Jared's brother's interpreters, and could read the original? How did Imposter Joe get those interpreters since j\Toroni never had them? Moroni never had them, nobody ever had them, and nobody can have them, until the Gentiles are converted. How could Moroni and Mormon translate those plates of Jared's brother, without the interpreters sealed up with them and with- out which the Lord said nobody could understand them, and Imposter Joe had to have Jared's brother's interpreters that the Lord said nobody should have, to interpret an abridgement of a translation made by those who did not have what the Lord said they must have. How — but there we will stop again. This jumble of lies is the "Ful- ness of the Gospel." The Book of Mormon tells of three fellows who never died, and never will die. That is a pretty big story, but it beats that in another place. It tells us of a fellow who lived before he was born, or before he lived at all. Page 481 Amaron hid up the records in the year 320. Page 482. Mormon was then ten years old. Page 483. When he was fifteen or in 325 the Nephites who were never to see death, were taken av»ay because of the sins of the people. They were taken out of the land entirely. Page 485. Moroni wri tes : "There are none that know the true God, save it be "the three disciples of Jesus, who did tarry in the "land, until the wickednes of the people was so great " thnt the Lord would not sntfer thorn to remain with " the people, and whether these be on the face of the " lnnd, no man knoweth. But behold my father and I " have seen them, and they have ministered unto ns.' Contradictions: I. Mormon says that these three were taken out of the Land when he was fifteen. Moroni says nobody knows whether they are in the Land or not, although he tells us that the Lord took them out of the Land. Mormon says they were taken out of the Land when he was fifteen. If they ministered to Mormon it was before he was fifteen. Moroni says they ministered unto him and his father. They ministered to him years before he was born, or he had a very precocious father. With ordinary people that would be extraordinory, but it doubtless was a common thing with Sidney's Jfephiles. The story of the extermination of the Ne- phites is idioffally absurd. We are told, page 384, that the Nephites covered the land from the sea East to the sea West, and from the sea South to the sea North, or from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and from the Gulf of Mexico to tii© Northern Ocean, or all of British Anifr- iea and the United States, and probab'y most of Mexico. They were a highiy-civii- ized, wealthy people, with ships, temoles, houses, cities, cultivated farms, and fixed residences. In the year 380 the Nephites were signally defeated by the Lamanites. Page 491. Moroni, their leader, proposes that both sides gather every man, woman and child, on each side for a final struirgie, in the Plain of Cumorah, in the presentSla'^e of New York. The object of the writer is to get the people tos^ether to have them ex- terminated, and in the right spot for Im- poster Joe to find the plates. Who believes that an intelligent leader, of an intelligent civilized people, ever dreamed of such a fool's project, or even proposed it to a sen- sible people? The Mormons who fiock to- gether at the call of lui poster Joe, or Pria- pus Young, migiit do it, but i)eople of com- mon sense would not. Who believes that an intelligent, wealthy, highly civilized people, covering Briiish America, Uni- ted States and Mexico would abandon cities, homes, farnis, property, and flock to- gether, millions of tliem, in obedience to such an idiotic command? Who believes that such millions of people could accom- plish such an undertaking? Think of the North and South leaving homes and prop- erty, and flocking, men, women and chil- dren, to the central part of New York for a "Kilkenny cat fight ;" and this was done before telegraphs to send out the command from the State of New York to Alaska. Cal- ifornia, and Florida. And the people Hock- ed by millions, men, women and children, to central New York, withou;. railroads to carry them, marching, men, women and children, every soul of them to central New York, from Alaska, from California, from Florida, to be exterminated, and all that Imposter Joe might get those plates. In less than four years these millions of idiots who had come at this idiot's idiotic decree, gathered, men, woinen and children in cen- tral New York. And the fool liamanites they gathered also. And then the v "fit." and they "fit." and they "fit," and "fit." and "fit," until only one Nephite was left, Moroni, and he escaped for no earthly rea- son, except tliat the Lord wanted him to finish up and bury these plates for Imt)()S- ter Joe. Seriously, ladies and gentlemen, 150 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. do you believe that such idiocy as that is the "fulness of the gospel?" The slaughter of the Jaredites is even worse than this. In their case there was a ■war until ten times as many soldiers as were killed in our great civil war were slain, and fifteen or twenty millions of non-combat- ents ; and then there is an idiotic gathering of millions of idiots— men, women and chil- dren— for an idiotic "Kilkenny cat fight " There is the same leaving of home, cities, property, and all behind. The same flock- ing together of men, women and children. Observe tbe idiocy of both this account and the Nephite slaughter. Warriors leave their wives, children and non-combatants at home. But a portion of the men ae are ever taken to the field; some are left to take care of the property. It is only migratory nations or people on an emigration like the Israel- ites in the wilderness that take their women and children with them. This people were a highly civilized, wealthy people, and the very people who would send out only a portion of th«ir men. Another idiocy. We are told men, women and children marched armed with shields, head plates and breast plates and other weapons of war. Women armed with weapons of war, children armed with weapons of war! Idiocy ineffable! And then they went forth to battle, men, women and children, millions of them — babies and all, with head-plates, breast- plates, shield and swords, spears, bows, arrows, darts, and doubtless with catapul- tae and battering rams. And they "fit," and thev "fit" and "fit," and "fit" and "fit," till Coriantimur, and Shiz, andEthei' (who was bottle holder) alone were left. "Tlien Coriantimur smote ofl[" the head of Shiz, and it came to pass that after he had smote off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up his hands and fell after that he had struggled for breath he died." Now most men die and quit breath- ing when their heads are off, all except Sydney's Jaredites. That explains the oath of the'Masons among the Jaredites. "If a man would not do what he had sworn to do, he was to lose his head. If he told the secrets he was to lose his life." As Syd- ney's Jaredites did not lose their lives when they lost their heads, the difference in the two penalties is all clear now. Ether then then finished his work in making out a re- port for Imposter Joe. This fight was worse than even the Kilkenny cat fight. In that classic contest the tip of each cat's tail was left, but in this, the cats, tails and all, on both sides, down to the last hair, were used up, except one hair. Ether, that was not in the fight at all. Tlse Jaredites were taken up to central New York to be exterminated. Then the Nephites were taken up there to be exterminated; and all that Ether and Moroni might leave the plates where it would be handy for Imposter Joe to find them. The Book of Mormon piously mor- alizes — "We see the Lord accomplishes great things with small means." Yes, in these two instances he accomplished the smallest possible thing with infinitely and miraculously great means. Having told us of men who lived befor« they were born, or 'lived at all, and men who lived after they were dead, Sidney tells of two great nations' who occupied the same country, farms and cities at the same time and never knew of each other's existence. On page 136 we are told that. Coriantimur died among the subjects of King Zarahemla about 250 B. C. The Jared- ites covered the continent of North Amer- ica until that time with cities, farms, houses, and at the least calculation tViere must have been 60,000,000 of them. 600 B. C, or 58o years Ibefore the Jaredites were destro3^ed, the Nephites and Zarahemlites came over and they spread over and occupied the same land for 350 years before the Jaredites used each other up, so we have two great na- tions of different race and language occu- pying the same farms and cities at the same time, and not knowing anything about each other. There now, who doubts that the Book of Mormon is of Divine origin? These Jaredites marched up to New York and slew each other, and the Nephites who were occupying the same land and farms knew nothing of it. I was going to suggest that Symmes's theory must be true, and that one party occupied the upper side of the farms while the other occupied the lower side in Symmes's hole, but the State of New York, where the Jaredites perished, is on the upper side. Perhaps they occupied tlie land as the Irish and the fail -^ occupy Ireland at the same time. Will Kelley tell us which were men and which were fairies, or " good people," as the Irish call them. We are told that Jaredite cattle went into the land of Zarahemla : that Jaredites went after them : that Jaredites hunted in Zarahemla and built cities there and y<=^ the Zarahemlites and Jaredites knew noth- ing of each other, although the Zaraheml- ites were over 300 years before Coriantimur came among theru. One of these people must have been fairies certainly. Page 516 Jaredite prophets tell the peoftje that unless they repent the Lord will destroy them and bring in a people to take their place. As Coriantimur died among the Zaraheml- ites about 300 years after the Nephites and Zarahemlites came to America they had already been in the land hundreds of years when these prophets were prophecying, but doubtless it was as fairies — invisible people, and the Jaredites and their inspired prophets knew nothing of it. The Book of Mormon tell us that the Jaredites had glass when they left the Tower of Babel for how could Jared's brother tell that the " stones he did moul- ten out of a rock" were like glass if he had never seen glass? They must have had glass for Granny Smith says, Jared's brother's interpreters were diamonds set in plates of^lass, which were set in silver bows. They had steel also before Abraham's day, for " Shule did moulten steel out of ore and make swords for his people." Page 512. We have also such anachronisms as "Church" 600 B. C. when the word was not used till after his time. We have THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 151 Christians by millions hundreds of years before Christ: when the followers of Christ were first called Christians at Antioch after his ascension. We have "Churches of Christ" by thousands when that term was not thousrht of until after liis death. We have " Martyrs for Christ" before he was preached to men. We have Masonry described and denounced thousands of years before it was thou.arht of. Episco- palian liturgy, pulpits and "Lord's day" and " Dissenters" before the day of Christ, when they are peculiar to England and the Christian Dispensation, We have the Eng- lish legal idea of the " bar of God" fre- quently. There are debates on Soul-sleep- ing, Universalism, Deism, Unitarianism, anf kingfisher's holes, that it left the hol-'S sticking out into the air fifty feet. The hoio that Moroni waved in the air, and on which he had wrote the writing that I'e people might see what he had wroteon the hole must have been like the old feliow s kingfisher's holes. The adaptations and imitations of modern literature and the Bible expose the fraud -i- lent character of the Book of Morman. I" the first book we have the revival power of animal magnetism imitated GOOyears before Christ. Pages 23 to 28 John's Apocalypse imitated and the Church of Rome describ- ed, as only history can describe it. Page 24. The American Revolution described. Pages 176, ISO, 181, 243, 245, 272 and 373 are imvtations of Fox's Book of Martyrs. Pages 196-7 a weak imitation of Paul's conver- sion. Page 202 teaches the modern radical democratic idea of vox populi vox Dei. Pages 226, 246. Peter's deliverance is imi- tated. Ananias lying to tneLord imitated. Page 223. All spiritual gifts enjoyed. Pago 246. Peter healing the father of Aeneas imi- tated. Page 252. Watering of Jethro's flocks by Moses imitated Pages 256 and 266. The fall down power of modern revivals is imitated. Page 289. Episcopalians preach from high pulpits, and have liturgies and on the Lord's Day, something never dream- ed of till after Christ. 322. An inspired prophet scalps his enemy just like any other " big injun" who takes " heap much scalp." Page 3'jl. The delivery of the Hebrews from the fiery furnace imitated. Pages 406-407. Elijah's miracle of drought and rain imitated. Page 480. Daniel cast into the lion's den imitated. Page 438. Candles invented. Page 436. The raising from the dead by Jesus and others imitated. Page 456. The miracle of the loaves and fishes imitated by making tlie institution of the Supper just like it. Pages 22« and 231. Peter and Cornelius imi- tated. Scenes at the crucifixion of Christ, THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 133 darkness, rending' rocks, raising of the dead, imitated, only Sydney far out-does the New Testament writers. Thomas put- ting^ his hngers in nai! prints and side imi- tated, only Sydney has over 2500 spend ten or twelve hours in such a performance. An attempt to imitate our >^avi(vur's lan- guage to Peter ibout John '9 tarrying here absurdly ihanged into liis saying and doing what th<» New restameiit, (John himself being the ivnter)says he, did not say or io. Page .:)I4. Ditigbter of Heroaias imitaied. Page -t^O. Daniel's iiiierprtiing the hand writing on the wall imitated. Soiomon imi- tateabel liave the complete gos- pel preached among them belore the days of Abraham. No Israelite prophet was ev- er favored with such levelatiuiis, not even Jsaiah as Jared's brother. [ challenge my opnoiicnt l<~' name an im- portant Chistiaii idea, or im^iortant idea of modern fheology that Rigdon does not put intothe mouth ■)f hi-> Nephites. His gross illiteracy appears m fhi ^act ihat ne Jid not see that he was exposing his own hand and work and voic as clearly a* he ever did in any sermon h- preached. 1( is the most transparent c:under:u^- /raud ev- er attempted By actual careful ccun^ the pia^iarismj mon fixed in 1830. "Fort Ancient, which would have heiis garrison of 60,000 men with their familif.s and provisions, was of a line of fortifica- tions which extend across the State, and served to check the incursions of the sav- ages of the North in their descent upon the mound- builders' country." Don't talk of families, gentlemen, or Mr. Braden will have you arnjing the babies ! "The second class of military works is exceedingly numerous on all the water courses — exiiJting not only on the Ohio and Mississippi, but on all their tributaries, especially on the Muskingum, Scioto, Miami, Wabash, Illinois, Kentucky, and rainor streams — are mounds which served uis out- looks.'' Squire and Davis remark on this subjeef., that, "There seems to have existed a system of defenses extending from the source of the Alleghany and Susquehanna in NewYork, diagonally across the country, through central and northern Ohio, to the Wabash. Within this range the works which are regarded as defensive are largest and most numerous. The signal system, we have reason to believe, was employed through- put theentireextentof this rangeof works." Shall I claim your time further to show wnat was stated in the book years before to have been since corroborated? But he calls them " fools" for fighting so. Well, that don't help the matter. The Book of Mormon don't endorse their work as having been right. The question is, did they so live, and fight, and destroy each other ? The book says they did, and that there was not only one nation, but two, who came to a similar end in this very country ; and after the people have tried to laugh the idea down for fifty years, explorers and scientists have come in and say they are facts. Then do they not corroborate the history as given in the book, aud place it beyond any doubt that the book must stand? Will he not answer to the arguments instead of standing like a schoolboy and talking about Kilkenny cats ? FIRST HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS. I will now briefly refer you to the time in which Ancient America began to be known through the reports of archaeologists to the world. Of their journey to Guatemala in 1839 and 1840, Stephens says, page 124: THE BRA DEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 157 "We did not know that the country was so eompletely secluded ; the people are less accustomed to the sight of strangers than the Arabs around Mount Sinai, and they are much more suspicious. Col. Galind'o was the only stranger who had been there before us and he could hardly be called a stranger, for he was a Colonel in the Cen- tral American service, and visited the ruing under a com mission from the (lovernment." These are the remarks of Mr Stephens, who with Mr. Catherwood, was under the auspicies of the United States Government, and they required this backing to get the aid of the Central American Government as far as it could give, to protect them in their explorations as late as 1839 and 1840, in exploring and describing the very country and its cities, described in the Book of Mormon in 1828 and 1829. He says that no stranger except Col. Galindo had been there before. And yet my opponent wants to make you believe that Sidney Rig- don, Solomon Spaulding, or Joseph Smith knew all about these ruins and cities and peoples so as to place it in the Book of Mor- mon ; that book placing the landing of one portion of the people that came to this country in Yucatan, the very country that is spoken of by this eminent traveler. Referring to the explorations of Captain Del Rio, he says : "The report of Captain Del Dio, with the commen- tary of Dr. Paul Felix, of New Guatemala, deducing an Egyptian origin for the people, through either the ■upinenesB or the jealousy of the Spanish Government, was locked'up in the archives of Guatemala until the time of the revolution, when by the operation* of liberal principals the manuscript came into the hands Of an English gentleman, long a resident of thai country, and an English translation was published at London in 1822. This was the first notice in Europe of the discovery of these ruins; and instead of electrify- ing the public mind, either from want of interest in the subject., distrust, or some other catise, so little notice was takan of it, that in 18.34, the L'terary Gazette, a paper of great circulation in Loudon, announced it as a new discovery made by Col. Galiudo." Now for a research for the publication of Captain Dupaix. His expeditions were made in 1805, 1806, and 1807, the last of which was to Palenque. The manuscript of Dupaix, and the designs of his drafts- man were locked in the Cabinet of Natural History in Mexico till 1828, when M. Baradere took them from the museum, "where," says Stephens, "But lor this accident they might still have remained, and the knowledge of the existence of this city again been lost." "Afterwards the work was first published in Franc© in 1834 and 183,5." About this time Lord Kingsborough pub- lishes his works, which, says Stephens, "so far as Palenque is but a reprint of Dupaix, and then his works iiai Paris were four hun- dred dollars per copy." Stephens, etc., 297, 298. Then he says, with reference to his own work, the materials for which were gathered in 1840 and 1841, "My object has been, not to produce an illustrated work, but to present the drawings in such an in- expensive form as to place them within reach of the great maas of our readers." Page 310, vol. 2. Speaking of these buried cities in another plac«i he says, "that even Humboldt had never heard of, much less seen." Do I still, my friends, have to convince some in this audience, or even Mr. Braden himself, that there was no general knowl- edge known to the world to be gathered to form the basis to make the history con- tained in the Rook of Mormon in 1828 or 1829, much less 1810 and 1811, when it is claimed by Brad en that Solomon Spaulding wrote ? The work therefor:' is not the work of man alone, and has a higher authority, which proves its divinity. Continuing the question of individual identity of the remnants of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who formerly lived in a civilized state upon this continent, and Israeli tish tribes of the old world, 1 intro- duce the analogical evidence of identity of the family, as set forth by Mr. Delafiold, page 65. He finds that there is a resem blance : In language, anatomy, mythology, uses of writing, knowledge of astronomy, and hab- its of burial of their dead. The effrontery exhibited in standing bo- fore an audience and asserting without the least shadow of proof that there are no such proofs of similarity, is only equaled by the audacity of the statement that there are no proofs of the remains of the horse on the continent, or if there were horses, as he argued at Wilber, they were not like our horses. Does the Book of Mormon say that they were like our horses? Prof. Winchell, in his "Sketches of Creation," page 210, says : "it is a curious fact that so many generi, now exlinet /rom tAc continent, butlivingin other quarters of the globe, were once abundant on the plains of North America. Various species of the horse have dwelt here for a^.'cs, and the que.ition ieasonal)ly arises whether the wild horses of the Pampas may not have been indiginous. Here too the camel found a suitable home." This is the way our scientific men, per- sons who are posted upon these things talk. In 1877, there were discovered in the fos- sil beds of Lake County, Oregon : "Fossil bones of the elephat, camel, horse, elk and reindeer. The horse being much more abundant than either of the others. Also bones of other animals larger than the elephant." There are now in the museums of this country, of Yale College and the Smitiison- ian Institute, skeletons of two kinds of animals which formerly lived upon this continent, either of which is larger than the elephant. Do I have to call your attention to the fact of the discoveries of Prof. Marsh, who in the "Chicago Times Expedition" to the west three years ago, found in the peat beds of Wyoming, the bones of the mas- todon ? The Book of Mormon, in the year 1830, was published, and on page 577 it mentions with the horse the fact of the existence upon the continent of "elephants, cureloms, and cumoms ;" and placing them in their order as to size, and giving the nature of the animals also, as to disposition, struct- 158 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. are, «fec., by saying they were "useful unto man." Are these bold statements of a work claimLng- for itself ektire credibility, anything- like the musings of Gulliver's travels, which we have been referred to? But the objection is further made that it is like Gulliver'fe travels as there was no beginning point, no directions, no stopping places by which to test it. The trouble is the assertion is not true. From the outset it begins with giving the names of the parties setting out upon the journey described. The very spot known to the world from which they migrated. The very time and names known to the world at the time and found in history and the Bible, to-wit, Lehi, La- ban, l^einuel, Ishmael, &c. Giving a full genealogy of the prominent parties of one tribe, lur.ningall risks of bi-ing caught by reason of historical or other contradictions, or by reason of disclosures of history or discoveries in science: — Takes these fami- lies from Jerusalem, giving direction of trav- el, distance, naming number of days of trav- el in each direction, definitely, distinctly, and clearly — see pages 2, 4, 33, 35, 3fi, 41, 43 of the book — giving a description of the country, the rivers crossed, deserts passed and mountains reached, until it lands them upon the sea shore. And yet it is persist- ently stated before you that the account is on a par with Gulliver's travels — a work of fiction that pretends to give no time, place, country, or people or fact. Has he repre- sented it fairly or truthfully f Is there not time, place, people, destination, race, char- acteristics, habits, customs and the exact present status of descendants all given? (Time called.) MR. BRADEN'S FIFTEENTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and GentIjEMEN :— Kelley told you last night how Rigdou exploded the Spaulding story in the Messenger and Advocate. Would it not have been better to have repeated the explosion, than to have given his unsup- ported assertion that Rigdon performed such marvels. He repeats the story already ex- posed as a fabrication of his own at least twice that Hur.but got the INIanuscrlpt Found from Mrs. Davidson, and Mrs. Mc- Kinstry. They only gave him an order to search a trunk for it. He repeats his falsi- fication of the language of Hurlbut ; that he says he got the Manuscript Found. Hurl- but says he did not get it, but a part of an en- tirely different manuscript. He repeats that Howe says they got the Manuscript Found, and it was not what they expected it to be. Howe says no such thing. He says the manuscript Hurlbut brought to us was not what he expected. It was not what they expected, because it was not the Manuscript Found. The assertion that either Howe or Hurlbut said they obtained the Manuscript Found, and it was not what they expected, is a deliberate fabrication of Kelley. Hurlbut did get the Manuscript Found, H« wrote Mrs. Davidson that he did. But he did not give it to Howe, He sold it to the Mormons. Mr. Patterson does say that he knew but little of the man- uscripts taken to the printing office. Fu- gles, the foreman, attended to them. But Patterson's ignorance, however, does not set to one side the clear testimony of other witnesses. My opponent undertakes to ridicule the evidence I introduced as heresay — "Rev. Bonsall Winter's stepson ; Mrs. Irwin, his daugliter, and Rev. Kirk said that Winter told them." Letus retort. "Kelley says that Joseph III. says that Emma Smith saj'S. Kelley says thatHowe said. That Gilbert said. Kelley says that the Quincy Whig says, that Nichols says, that Ely says, that Mrs. Davidson said." Does he not know- that he commits murder on his own testi- mony when he resorts to such pettifogging? My opponent has not offered a scintilla of evidence that an Ebpraimite ever entered- America. He tries to get out of that ridi< ulous blunder about oxen. I know tliM cow is used as a generic name for the genus bos ; so is ox. But where both are used to- gether, neither is generic; but both are tlit- names of a class of the genus. "Cowb'" means the females of the genus, when used with ox and "oxen" means an unnatural class of the genus when mentioned with cows. Suppose instead of saj'ing "sheep" the Book of Mormon had said "ewes" and "wethers." Would they be generic names? Come, sir, you can't get out of that idiotic blunder in any such way. As the Book of Mormon says in one place that darkness shall cover the earth three days after the crucifixion, and the Bible declares that it was only three hours and over the land about Jerusalem, he cannot pettifog away the contradiction. If it was as light as mid-day all night how could a star be seen in mid-day light? My opponent has not explained it iiow the Nephites foretold the exact language Christ would use to such an extent, that whole pages are so foretold. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 159 Nor how they come to speak of the language as the7i in the Scriptures, hundreds of years before Christ and the apostles uttered it. He aslts me if I know wliat was in the 40 books known and unknown, quoted or re- ferred to by the Kible. I don't. But until he proves that the language was in those books, he cannot prove that his Nephites quoted from them. Again if it was, it would only cliange the absurdity from the Book of Mormon to another book. Finally, we find the language in the New Testament and we know that neither Nephite or anyone else could quote it until it was uttered, any more than they could quote Shakespeare or Pope. Did these unknown prophets quote from Shakespeare and Pope thousands of years before they lived, so that Sydney's Nephites could quote such language from them ? I read from the Book of Mormon denunciationsof secret societies, their oatlis, grips, signs, pass-words, all the denuncia- tions uttered by anti-masons when the Book of Mormon first appeared. This shows that it was written in that excitement. Science says thnt the Asiatic species of our domestic animals were not in America un- til introduced by Europeans. Tlie Book of Mormon says they were — a flat contra- diction. Another fraud in this affair, Oliver Cow- dery began his work of writing down the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Doctrines and Coveuants de- clares, April 17th, 1825. The trauslalion was fitiished, Mrs. Smith says, early in June. The copy-right was taken out June 10th. Just to think of a man writing as dictated to him slowly word by word the manuscript of a book as large as the Old Testament, or about 2000 pages of foolscap in less than sixty days, thirty-three pages per )iis (if the Greek of the New Testament, wherever it appears in King James' ver- sion; notwithstanding the Nephites could know notiiing about that: and to cap the climax of absurdity, they have imitated the English idioms of King James' transla- tors, that did not live until 1200 years after the last Nephite wa§ dead. They have made the idioms of the English lan- guage of 1611 the idioms of the Nephites in America who lived hundreds of years before there was any English, and lliOO years before such idioms were used. We can illustrate the absurdity of this blun- der by a case like this. " A man who knows nothing about the Old Testament, except what he learns by hearing an Irish- man read the original Hebrew, and trans- late it into Enyrlish, the Irishman reading the Hebrew to himself and giving the Eng- lish of it to his auditor, as he reads, comes before us with a book that he claims an angel gave to him in Hebrew manuscript, and that he was inspired to translate it into English. When we come to examine it, we find that he has imitated, not only the Hebrew idioms of the Old Testament, that were brought out in the Irishman's translation, but has actually imitated the Irishman's Hlbernicisms, his brogue, sup- posing in liis ignorance that Paddyisms were Simon Pure Hebraisms. Would any body but a Mormon be such a fool as not to declare, in one moment, that his ridicu- lous putting of Paddyismsinto the mouth of Hebrew, exposed his story as a lie and a fraud, and his b )ok as a ridiculous blund- ering fraud? Would it not be as clear as dav? ,. ,, . , In precisely the same stolidly ignorant manner, the fabricators of the Book of Mor- mon have put into the mouths of Israelites in America, not only the Hebraisms that are in five King James' version of the Old Testament, but the Hellenisms of the Greek of the New Testament, that appear in King James' translation; and what is idiotically absurd the Anglicisms, the 160 THE BRADEIs AMD KELLEY DEBATE. brogue of King James' translators. Think of Israelites in America, thousands of years ago, using the brogue of King James' translators, thousands ot years before such brogue was spoken by the English them- selves. Not only so, but they have imi- tated the incorrect readings of the manu- scripts used by those translators, as any one can see who compares the plagiarisms from the Bible, in the Book of Mormon, with King James' version and the late Canter- bury version. The Lord in giving the translation, word by word, to Joe Smith, slavishly followed the incorrect readings of the manuscripts, from which King Jame's translators made their translation, just as they appear in that translation. Not only so but he actually copied their mistranslations also, as one can see by com- paring the plagiarisms in the Book of Mor- mon with King James' version and the Canterbury version. Let me give two noted instances. The Lord in doling out word by word, I Cor. xiii. 4, copied the blunder of King James' translators and inserted the word "easily" and translated the Greek " Charity is not easily provoked;" when every scholar knows, whether the Mormon God does or not, that "easily" is is not in a single Greek manuscript known to exist. In like manner in doling out Isaiah, xviii, 10, he copied the blunder of King James' translators and gave it to Joe, " The Lord God and His Spirit hath sent me" when every scholar knows, whether the Mormon God does or not, that it should be "The Lord God hath sent me and His Spirit," i. e., " He hath sent me and hath sent His Spirit." This is sufficient. We might give many more. The fabricators of the Book of Mormon have copied the obsolete words, the obso- lete grammar, the violations of grammar, and the punctuation of King James' ver- sion, showing that they were as ignorant as the man in our illustration. They have copied the blunders of King James' trans- lators as Simon Pure Hebraisms, just as he copied the blunders of the Irishman. They are like the Chinaman that a lady employed to make some plates to fill out a set of chinaware. She had but one plate to give him as a pattern and it was cracked and nicked. To her amazement and amusement "when John brought to her the two dozen plates she had ordered, every one was cracked and nicked just as the plate she gave him. He copied everything, suppos- ing it to be a part of the pattern. Just so the fabricators of the Book of Mormon have copied every crack and nick in King James' version. Another thing that proves that the pecu- liarities of the Book of Mormon are awk- ward attempts to imitatu 1=,, i iiiey are such ablundering caricature ol King James' version. They are as much of a caricature and as awkward as the attempt of a New England Yankee to imitate the brogue of an Irishman. The paddyisms are exagger- ated until the attempt is a caricature. The "Beholds," "Wherefores," " Therefores," "Thereofs," and "Now it came to pass," in the Book of Mormon, are ridiculously fre- quent and most awkwardly used. By actual countneary 1.700 sentences have "Behold'' at the beginning of them or near the begin- ning. Nearly 1,400 have " And it came to pass." Nearly 700 have " therefore." Nearly 500 have "wherefore;" and "lo," "yea," and "thereof" are most awkwardly fre- , quent. The awkward use of the brogue of ; King James' translations betrays them just ' as the hackdriver's blunder betrayed him. A great Quaker convention was assembling in Philadelphia. Quakers patronized tlieir own people. To get customers one limb of the world put on drab and a broad brim. He looked all right, but when he asked an old Quaker, "Where is thee's baggage?'* the Quaker retorted, "Away with thee for a cheat." The same is true of the jargon of the Book of Doctrines and Covenants. It is no more like the brogue of King James' version than the talk of the stage Irishman is like the brogue of the genuine Paddy right from the " ould sod." Mormons ab- surdly seem to think that the brogue, the lingo of King James' translations, is the genuine dialect of heaven, and that angels and the Lord cannot or do not talk in any other. The Lord and angels spoke to Egyp- tians in Egyptian, to Philistines in their dialect, to Chaldeans in their tongue, to the Hebrews in Hebrew, and when the Israelites ceased speaking Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, or whatever was the speech of the people they were addressing ; but they affected no an tique brogue, or rather caricature of it It the Lord ha(l translated the Books o. Mor- mon for Joe Smith he should have put it in decent English of the nineteenth century, and not in the obsolete brogue, grammati- cal blunders and atrocities of King James* version, or rather in a most absurd, disgust- ing caricature of them in an ignoramus s effort to imitate them. Hardshell Baptists think that preaching is not preaching unless in the nasal sing-song whine called "the holy tone," and that the most idiotic bal- derdash is equal to the preaching of angels, if in that twang. So Mormons seem to think that revelation is not revelation unless it is in the brogue of King James' transla- tors, and that the most idiotic twaddle is equal to the seraphic strains of Isaiah, if in that lingo. In their attempts to imitate it they come about as near to it as the Yankee schoolboy does the genuine Hardshell sing- song when he attempts to declaim "A Harp of a Thousand Strings." Mormons attempt to parry these objec- tions, bv appealing to faults in the Bible. We reply 1. The blunders of King James' translators, their brogue, is no part of the original, as Mormons are so ignorant as to suppose. 2. The messengers of God in the Bible never used an old obsolete brogue, or rather a most awkward, absurd caricature of it. Nor did the Holy Spirit make the persons inspired perpetrate such idiocy 3. The uneducated Amos did not use the polished Hebrew of Isaiah or Jeremiah. Nor did Peter use the classic Greek of THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 161 Thucydides. But neither Amos nor Peter violated all laws of tjranimar and speech, in their writings. Their language is terse and blunt, but not such an atrocity as the balderdash of the Book of Mormon and Mormon revelations. Will our opponent give us such a list from the original as we have given from the Book of Mormon ? It may be asked if Spaulding, an educated man, and a person like Rigdon were authors of the Book of Mormon, how could it be full of such errors? How could they put such errors in it? Would not they know enough to avoid them, and would not they do so? We reply: 1. Spaulding has been very 'much overrated. His education could not have been what it is claimed it was or he never would have been so grossly ignorant as to suppose that the brogue of King James' translators was the oldest dialect he could find, as his wife tells he did. His ridiculous imitations of the brogue of King James' translators, his awkward imitation that caricatured it, until his neighbors ridiculed it and nicknamed him "Old- came-to-pass," and his stolidly retaining such an ignorant blunder to the last, shows that he lias been very much overrated. He was doubtless a dullvisionary prosy pedant who undertook a work for which he was utterly incompetent. 2. Rigdon was very illiterate as his letter to the Boston Journal proves, by its misspelled words, violations of grammar, and utter ignorance of punctu- ation, as tlie publishers describe it. His education was obtained in a log school house. He was never a reader except of the visionary and extravagant. He was a rant- ing, spread-eagle, highfaluten declaimer, who mistook bombast for eloquence, fustian for rhetoric, extravagance for sublimity. We have then the blunders that such a man as Spaulding would make in writing on such a theme. His prosy dull repetitions and awkward imitations of the Bible, that made his stuff what Mark Twain calls it "chloro- form in type." Then the ignorant blunders of suck*an illiterate person as Rigdon and his rant, fustian, spread-eagle and bombast. The blunders that an ignoramus like Smith would make in reading such a manuscript to another, and the blunders that an illiterate blacksmith like Cowdery would make in copying, then the blunders a printer would make in setting up such unusual stuff, espe- cially when he dare not strike out what seemed wrong to him, as he might mar the inspiration by striking out its cant and its brogue. If it' had been decent Eniilish, the printer could have corrected it. But it m as like Josh Billings spelling. Thewitin Josh is the bad spelling. So the inspiration in the Book of Mormon was its butchering of the people's English, The atrocities of speech were the divinity that was in it. Still one is compelled to admit that with all of these causes of error, each cause of error, wrought a stupendous miracle, to have gotten up such a monstrosity as the Book of Mor- mon. We have proved by historic evi- dence that Rigdon remodeled Spaulding's manuscript, interpolating the religious por- tions so as to fit it to be used as a pretended revelation. We have proV-d by the Rigdon- isms in the Book of Morjuon that it is his work. His belief in immersion, believer's baptism, baptism for the remission of sins, free grace, opposition to infant baptism, opposition to the doctrine of total heredi- tary depravity that borders on Pelagian- ism. These were tlie ideas of the Disciples then. His opposition to secret societies, denunciation of Sectarianism. When he agreed with the Disciples we have Disci- ples teaching, but when he dittered, their teaching is bitterly opposed. He contends for community of goods. He retained the Baptist idea of direct and miraculous power of the Holy Spirit. This led him to con- tend for baptism of the Holy Spirit, bap- tism to receive miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. Imparting spiritual gifts by lay- ing on of hands. Restoration of mira- cles, revelations and spiritual powers of the Apostolic church. We have also the fall down power of Rigdon's revivals, and that he was subject to himself. When he agreed with the Disciples the Book of Mormon agrees with them. When he dif- fers from them it differs bitterly. Take for instance his bitter denunciation of those who say, "We have the Bible, we need no new revelation." He is especially bitter over this, and his book is full of instances of the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit, such as he contended for. We have his pet expressions, his revivalisms, his baptismal formula, his rant against infant baptism. The child is not more clearly the off-pring of his parent than the religious portion of the Book of Mormon is the work of Sidney Rigdon. Rigdon committed an absurd blunder in using the words "baptize" and "immerstj" as he did. On page444 he represents (Jlirist as making baptism and immersion two en- tirely different things. He commands men to baptize, and tells them to immerse in doing it. Our Savior used but one word, and that meant to immerse and that alone. He committed another absurd blunder when he represented immersion as univer- sal among the Nephites, hundreds of years before Christ. Immersion was utterly un- known as a religious rite, except the bath- ings of the law of Moses, until John the Baptist. He made the blunder still more absurd when he represented the Nephites as immersing in the name of Christ. That was never done until it was done by the apostles of Christ. He magnified his blun- der still farther when he represented them as immersing for the remission of sins. That was never done until it was done by John the Baptist. He capped the climax of this tissue of absurdities when he rep- resented them as immersing for the mirac- ulous gift of the Holy Spirit, and he fiatly contradicted the word of Uod. He coolly tells us that these Nephites had all spiritual gifts and every miraculous power of the Holy Spirit, to an extent utterly unknown, even to the apostles. John vii. 38, Jesus said "He that believetb 162 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. on me, as the scriptures have said, out of him shall flow rivers of water. But this he spake of the Spirit which they that be- lieved on him should receive. For the Holy Spirit was not yet given because Jesus was not giorifled." John xv. 7, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth, it is best for you that I go away. For if I go not away the com- Ibrter will not come unto you, but if I go away, I will send him unto you." Eph. iv. When Jesus ascended, then he gave spirit- ual gifts unto men. Had Rigdon been there he would have told Jesus, " Nevertheless *'you are telling a falsehood. The Holy " Spirit, in your name, has been enjoyed by "my Nephites over 600 years, and to an *' extent that no human being ever did or ** ever will enjoy, outside of my Nephites." This stuff of Rigdon contradicts the teach- ings of the Bible, that the revelations that constitute the sacred scriptures were given in Palestine and in connection with the Israelites in Palestine. Rigdon has a higher and far better dispensation, over in Amer- ica, and different from the one in Palestine, for the priesthood is in Manasseh, not in Levi, and the scepter is in Manasseh, not in Judah, thus abrogating the Mosaic dis- pensation entirely. The Nephites had the gospel so fully and completely that there was nothing left for Jesus to reveal ; nothing for him to do but to fill the programme that Nephi«e prophets had marked out for him, as minutely, word for word, act for act, as Shakspeare has "written out the part of the one who plays the part of Hamlet. The law of Moses was to prepare the way for the teachings of ('hrist, just as the Ter- ritorial Government prepares the way for the State Government. Rigdon has a more perfect State Government than even the apostles instituted in full blast hundreds of years before the Territorial is abolished, or the Constitutional Convention held, or the State organized. He has the people living under the State Government and claiming all the time to be living under the Territorial Government, every feature of which they are trampling under foot. One is inclined to ask Sydney " why did not God give prophets and reve- lations and the Gospel to the Israelites in Africa, India, or China?" There were great multitudes of them, with great schools, in all of these places. Why was not the Gospel .revealed, and the baptism in the name of Jesus, and the Holy Spir t and all spiritual gifts, in Christ's name, enjoyed among such prophets, as Ezekiel, Daniel, Malachi in Palestine as well as among your Nephites in America? Why did not Jesus go to Spain, India, or China, after his resurrection, as well as to your Nephites? This lying fabrication of Rig- don contradicts Christ's commission to his apostles. The Gospel was to go forth to the world through his apostles, and through them alone. They were to go to all nations, give the Gospel to every creature. It contradicts the claim of the apostles, " To us is commit- ted the ministry of reconciliation. We were chosen to do this work." It con- tradicts Isaiah and Micah ; '-The law of Christ was to go forth from Zion, his word from Jerusalem." "The gospel was to be preached among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." It teaches that Manasseh took the priesthood from Levi, before ttje Messiah, the Melchesidec priest, and the scepter from Judah, before Shiloh came. The rebellion of the Ten Tribes was a sin. The conduct of Rigdon's Nephites was rebellion, apostasy, and yet God blessed them, even above faithful Judahites and Levites, Rigdon, in the case of his Jaredites, flatly contradicts Gen. xi. 9. At the Tower ef Babel the Lord confounded the language of all the earth. Sidney declares that his Jaredites were too smart for the Lord and ran away from him, and the Lord did not do what he thought he did or said he did. Sidney pretends that his Jaredites, who came to America 250 years before A t-raham, had a higher and more perfect knowledge of the Gospel than any Israelite, known to the Bible, had before the advent of Christ, and in some particulars better than any have ever had, except his Nephites. Why did not Christ make his adventamong these Jaredites 2,000 years before he came? They were better prepared than he found the Israelites in Palestine when i e did come. Why did he not make his advent among the Nephites, hundreds of years before he came? They were better prepared for him, and indeed he and iiis apostles did not leave the Israelites and Gentiles on the old conti- nent in as highly favored a condition as these Nephites were hundreds of years be- fore he came. Why did not God make Jared's brother the father of the faithful instead of Abraham ? If the Book of Mormon be a revelation Jared's brother so far excelled Abraham hundreds of years before Abraham lived that he is the real father of the faithful, and Abraham only a pretender. He was favored above all Israelite prophets except Sidney's fictitious Nephites. The apostles were not so highly favored and all to no purpose for he was to seal it up. The time that the Lord said they were to go forth is not yet come. After all the work of Christ and his apostles the world is not yet ready for the revelations that God gave to Jared's brother long before Abraham's day. If the Nephites had our Bible, or as much of it as was in existence before they left Jerusalem, why was not it buried instead of Moroni's plates? Why do not we have an abridg- ment of it on the plates as well as what is given on them? If it is because they had the Bible, then why did the book of Mor- mon steal so much from the Bible? We have neither the historical part of the Bible nor an abridgment of it in the Book of Mor- mt>ii, but the religious portions of the Book of Mormon are stolen from the Bible and mixed with Rigdon's notions. If we need the Book of Mormon in addition to our Bible, it must be because it contains addl- THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 163 tional truth. What single new idea, what single better expression of a biblical idea have we in the Book of Mormon ? We are told on pages 5fl5-oUU tliat Jared's brother (1 wonder if that fellow really had no name, if he was always anonymous?) said that Christ was literal flesh and blood, that Jesus showed himself to hiiu as he did to the Nephites, after his resurrection, with his body of tlesii, bones nnd blood. This flatly contradicts the positive declarations of the Bible, that he first tabernacled in flesh, became incarnate, in tlie person of Mary. That he took on him the seed of Abraham. Tliat his human nature was of the seed of Abraham, was a lineal descend- ant of Abraham. That his body was pre- pared for him when he came to do God's will, or in the person of Mary, Here we are told that he showed that body to this anonymous fellow of Sidney Rigdon's cre- ation, hundreds of years before Abraliam or any of his seed existed, and thousands of years before hebecame incarnate, according to the Bible. We are further told that man's body is an exact image or copy of God's body. Then God has a literal boiiy of literal flesh, blood and bones, notwith- standing Jesus says " God is a Spirit," and " spirit has not tie ^h and bones." Of course, then, God has organs of eating, digesting, evacuation, procreation, aiid uses tliem, or he eats, digests, evacuates and procreates like man, and Priapus Young's A(l:un-God theory is true according to the Book of Mormou. MR. KELLEY'S SIXTEENTH SPEECHI GENTIililMEN MODEBATORS, LADTES AND Gentlemen ; — I will first call your atten- tion to one or two things that have been mentioned, as objections, and then go on ■with my argument. 1. That it is not probable that any per- sons could have been led to this continent as claimed at the time of the confusion of languages without the same being known to the people of the old world. Gen. 11: 8 states: "So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the'name of it called Babel ; be- cause the Lord did there confound the lan- guage of all the earth ; and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth." It seems to me that they did know it on the old world. Josephus says, that they were scattered abroad upon all the earth, and that some <»t them "went over the sea." The Book of Mormon tells about a colony that came out from there composed of a few families, and Mr. Braden thinks it could never have hap- pened. In fact, however, it is improi)able to the Bible-believer that God should not have taken steps to the colonization of all the earth, since he had created man for the purpose of dwelling thereon. It is said, here that the language of all the earth was confounded, and Mr. iJraden objects again, for the reason that the Book of Mormon states that there was a family who were permitted to retain their speech so that they could understand each other. The history of it in the Book of Mormon is as follows : That at the time of the confounding of the language of all the earth, the brother of Jared went and asked that the Lord would remember him in his merry, and that He would permit that these brothers and tiieir families might understfind each other ; and he prayed, and the Lord granted his prayer as to himself and Jared and a few others. Now, is it in fact unreasonable, or dofs it contradict the Biblte in any particular? The language was confounded so that tlie people could not work togeiher to build the tower there— and thai they should go abroad and inhabit the wh(^le earth. That was the object of it. And a few were per- mitted, and we don't know but what d'>z- ens of families, or hundreds even, wert |ior- mittedin the same way to understiuid one another of which we have no record. But he objects because the family, first of Jart-d and then of Jared's brother, or the broth- er of Jared and then Jared himself, were permitted to first converse about this and understand each other. Mr. Br den niiikes his mistake in supposing that Ihe work of cotifounding the language was all of a sud- den, a tiling similar to a stroke of light- ning. There is no sen-^e in supposiuir tiiat in this God did not. work like himself, and use some proper means to perform this work and warn too, the people. Again, he says that the Jared if es ran away from the Lord so he could not con- fouiid their language. But where did he get it? When a man says a thing he ou>i:iit to have some foundation for it. The Book of Mormon states that the Lord led them awav. He did not get it out of that Book. Where did he get it? Where did you get the statement that Jared ran away so the Lord could not do it? The liuok of Mormon does not say either that the Lord couUl not do it but on the contrary that the Lord 164 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. could doit, but that he had compassion and pity on these parties because tliey cried un- to him. Do you understand tliat God is not 6uch a being tliat he wili answer when peo- ple cry unto him? But, he objects a^ain that Jesus did not come to this continent, because if he did wliy did he not go to Spain and other places also. How does he know but what he did? It may be thathedid. He appeared, says Paul, to live hundred brethren at one time after his resurrection, and doubtless to many that we did not have any account of on the Eastern Continent. And how does he know but what he went to Spain and China and the islands of the sea ? If it is an argument in his favor to interrogate upon something he knows nothing about, it is an argument in mine. That is the logic of it. -. Then he gives to us a reminiscence of Sidney Rigdou's bitter denunciation, as he says, of those who clung to the Bible while he was a Campbellite preacher. What has that or anything else Rigdon did while a Campbellite to do with the question under discussion? Do you believe that while he was a Campbellite, preaching here in North- ern Ohio, and converting so many upon the "Western Reserve, my Campbellite friends, tliat he was denouncing those who claimed to believe in the Bible? Was that his man- ner? Mr. Braden says it was. Yet you kept him for your preacher and he was the ablest p''eacher you had. He made more converts than any other two preachers on the Western Reserve. This is shown in your own history. And still Braden asserts this man was denouncing everything that was good at the same time that he was mak- ing these converts. Is that the way to make converts to the Campbellite faith? If not, where is the sense in sucli statements, my friends? 3. Again, he objects to the Book of Mormon because somebody prophecied he should re- ceive the Holy Spirit in the name of Christ, or through Christ. I would like for him to tell this audience two things. 1. In what way did the people of old^n time receive the Holy Spirit? How did Elijah and Malachi, or any of the proph- ets? I asked him the question upon a for- mer evening. Let him answer that ques- tion. 2. Turn to the Rook of Mormon and show where they claimed to have received the Holy Spirit through Christ, or in a different manner over here than is represented in the Bible. There is not an instance in the Book of Mormon where it teaches the receiv- ing of the Holy Spirit in a different sense to the Bible. This is all Braden's imagina- tion. Do not misrepresent the book to uhe audience. Note his answers to these, will you please? 4, Another thing. He says that my testi- mony of the three witnes.ses to the Book of Mormon is precisely like his, because I refer- red to the fact that Mr. Howe's purported statements from John Spaulding and Martha Spauldiug had no time, place, or date, nor were they original testimony ; that is, that they were quoted from something else and not genuine. Now if you will turn to the back part of Mr. Howe's book, you will find, in- stead of giving the statement itself, he gives a quotation from a statement. That is not like the testimony I offered. When I turn to the testimony of the three witnesses, my criticism, he says, "is the club that knocks me in the head." But the testimony of the three witnesses which I read is their state- ment, not a quotation from the statement of the witnesses. There is no pretention to a quotation here, but the witnesses send it forth themselves as their testimony. "Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people." This is our testimony. Can you find anything like that in Howe's quo- tation from the purported statements of John Spaulding and Martha Spaulding? The cases are not parallel in any sense. There is not nor never has been a question or reason to suppose that the statement in the Book of- Mormon was not that of the three witnesses. All three of the witnesses have voluntarily since confirmed this fact ; I have read you some of these later state- ments of them. While the others (these quotations found in Howe's book), are ques-' tioned, and they show doubt upon the face of them. Those of the three witnesses he thinks were written up by Joseph Smith. Will some of you take the trouble and ex- amine them, and then tell me if a man who could write those statements up could be justly called an "ignoramus," if you please, that he has been calling Joseph Smith. Mr. Braden has used that language of Joseph Smith from the first. Again, he tells ua that Joseph the third says that Emma says, and all of this. Ah ! yes ; but all there is to it, Joseph Smith wrote his mother's tes- timony down as she gave it. Now his evi- dence, so far as being direct and explicit, don't compare with this at all. So, also, of David Whitmer's evidence; it is upon record, and we quote from his evidence as given by himself, published by himself over his own signature. Braden's state- ments are objected to because they are not given by theparties directly. But, he says, Mr. Bo'nsall says, that somebody else told him so; and they thought Dr. Winters put it in writing, and they did not have the original statement. Mrs. Dunlap Rig- don's niece, who was a member of Braden's church, is said to have said, &c. That is what I object to sir ; and if you can pro- duce the original statements of these par- ties or a reliable publication of them, do so, and then the argument upon that point will cease. But I deny that you have any evi- dence from Dr. Winters, Abel Chase, John Spaulding, &c. Bring on your evidence and I will examine it, if you have any. Patter- son and Howe won't do to put up evidence for me. 5. Next I notice that he has raised the old objection that tlie Book of Mormon contains in it the idioms whicii peculiarly belong to the translation of the Bible. That is a valid objection, if true to any extent, and now Will he dare examine it candidly with me. THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 165 I say it is not true and ask liim to cite instances which he is willing to rest his ar- gument upon. If I do not answer objections of that nature before the conclusion of tbe discussion, there will be one point against me. It is a valid objection if the idioms or words peculiar to the translation of the Bible have been copied in the Book of Mor- mon from the Bible in a reckless, blundering way, as he says, and it is an objection that I will meet on to-morrow evening, and I want you all here to liear it, too. At this time I will proceed with my main argument. The Book of Mormon states that the last civilization which came to this continent landed here about -590 years before the time of Christ, and existed in a civilized state here till the close of the fourth century; giving specific statements of dates, places and conditions which are quite sufficient by reason of their completeness, to either con- demn or corroborate the narrative in the subsequent developmentof the relics, ruins, etc., of that ancient people, through the independent line of evidence brought for- ward by archfeologists. This was in 1827 to 1830; the developments have been made since. • Do they contradict or confirm this state- ment boldly and fearlessly made? I refer you to the latest accounts given of the dis- coveries in this direction. S. B. Evans, of Ottumwa, Iowa, published through the Chicago Times, 1881, his explorations, con- clusions, etc., from travels on the continent and examinations of works, and from these concludes that there have been at least two civilizations that have lived and dwindled away on the continent prior to the Aztecs or Toltecs, of Mexico; the last of which must have ceased to exist at least from a thousand to fifteen hundred years ago, and occupied the time of at least one thousand years of civilization here. Take his time and conclusions and compare with the positive declaration of the Book of Mor- mon made over fifty years before without the aid of these examinations and the published accounts of researches and dis- coveries now attainable, and you must begin to fftel that its work was not that of the guesser. The civilization must have ceased to exist according to the best scien- tific theories the fourth or fifth century of the Christian era. The Book of Mormon says 400 years after Christ. A thousand years back from the fourth or fifth century, again gives about the time that Lehi left Jerusalem according to the record. If Mr. Smith was guessing, did he not guess well? Do you still believe he was guessing? Oh ! but Braden says he did not write in a perfect language," and before he will receive anything as of divine origin it nmst be in a perfect 'language. He asks me to state whether Peter or Paul, or any of the prophets \frote in an imperfect language. My answer to this is, that, there is not a scrap of gospel manuscript under the sun within two hundred years of Peter or Paul. Mr. Braden nor no other man can tell whether they wrote in pure Greek, or pure Hebrew, or in the Syrian, or the Syrio-Chaldaic or what they wrote in. He does not even know what particular lan- guage they did write in, imperfect as it must have been ; and it is in dispute at the present time as to the particular language Jesus himself used when he was here. And yet, I am asked to furnish something in the exact original writing of I'eter, Paul, or John, so as to prove to Braden that what they wrote was not perfect grammer. Let us examine this silly nonsense a mo- ment. It is the old objection of Howe, and Hyde, and as might have been ex- pected "without any foundation. What language known toman is perfect? Will he tell this audience what language known to man now, or that has ever been known or in use since the time of Enoch that was perfect? Can any of .you tliink of one? Mr. Braden can you? Don't you know there has never been such since Pabel's time at least. So that if you require a perfect language, God could never have spoken to the world. We will take the English language, as that is the one more nearly connected with the question under consideration. Three hundred years ago what would have been considered good English is not now — the language is continually changing. The great Shakespeare, the master, says "I had rather," while our school ma'ams turn up their noses at it now, and correct the little one to say " I would rather," I coulAgive you many such instances from such writers as Spencer, Cowper, etc., could I take the time here, showing great changes day by day and year by year of the English lan- guage. Pope telfs us that the language changes as do the fashions. This of itself ought to be a sufficient answer to the objec- tion that it is not in good English. The American Bible Society, I understand, claims 23,000 inaccuracies so far as minor points of language, use and construction are concerned, found in King James' transla- tion of the Bible, and yet at the time of the translation it was put 'into English by the masters of literature — the best scholars of the realm. Only last night we were saluted with the remark, " Suppose Joe Smith had as good a right to make a word as Web- ster." Certainly he had. According to the history of the English language, Mr. Smith or a'ny one in this audience has just as "-ood a right to make a word as Webster or any other man ; and I can cite hundreds of instances of words that have been manu- factured, not by the scholarly of the age, but by men that were in indifferent cir- cumstances in life. Don't you remember that a few years ago, only in 1S40, I believe it was, in a sfveat political convention held at the time that Henry Clay was a candi- date for the Presidency, a gentleman in the convention from Tennessee — a common farmer too— who got tired of the noise and rattle in the convention, said that he be- lieved that they ought not to tolerate the " outsiders " in there any longer ; and from that very time the word "outsider" was 166 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. coined into the Eng-lish languasce, and we now use it, and it is admitted to be a proper word — coined by a man that was among those not scholarly, as he thinks Avas the position of Joseph Smith. I could tell you of a hundred such cases, and taken right from the works upon the English language. If he is acquainted with the literature of the English language he knows the state- ment to be entirely correct. But the objection is further urged that the Rook of Mormon was translated by in- spiration and should have been in a perfect language. Think a moment! For God to look ahead and use language in advance of the times would make it incomprehensible to the persons to whom it was given, and too, imperfect when compared with their language as a standard, no difference how much better in fact it might have been. This is the logic he offers. God must talk in perfect language when he speaks, al- though he speaks through men. Perfection so far as our language is concerned is deter- mined by the usage of the times. The usage changes, hence perfection changes. Therefore, if God speaks, he must so speak, that it will be good English to-day, according to the language, and good Eng- lish next year, according to the standard, although the standard has changed. The lallacy of the position must be apparent to all. We must conclude that the language is but the medium through which the thought is conveyed, and the Lord uses the medium we have. The question is not one of perfect language or imperfect language. No claim is made to giving a perfect language to the world. The only sensible criticism to be made as to the language used in the book is from the standpoint of whether it is in such language as all people may understand it, who are conversant with the language in which it is given ; for the message claims to be sent to all. Has he made the objec- tion that it is in such language that all may not understand it? Every one ; whether high or low, rich or poor, the educated or the uneducated? Oh, no. His objection is, that it is not in the vocabulary of we giants in the world of language and litera- ture. If he will turn to I Cor. 1:26, he find that "Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called. But God hath chosen the fool- ish things of this world to confound the wise, and the weak things to confound the things which are mighty ; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not to bring to naught things that are." God's ways are not Braden's ways. That is clear'. Braden's view is, just to think of the grand, good, and noble characters of the last three hundred years ; of Calvin, I.uther, Wesley, Camp- bell, etc. And then, think of the Lord choosing as an instrument the likes of Joseph Smith. No; the Lord says, "not many noble," after the ways of the world ; but Braden's idea is, let us have what we call noble. The untutored Galileans and poor fisher- men of Judea stand a poor show with the great " Scalper of Robert Ingersol." But I will continue farther to notice the criti- cism. Is this an objection in fact, or is it only an imaginary one? Will not the im- perfections of an original language in a strictly literal and true translation appear in the translation. If you take the writ- ings of Xenophon, or of any of the great Greek scholars, or the speeches of Cicero in the Latin, and put them in the English language, will they not read differently from the speeches and writings of the un- learned made in the same time and in the same language in which those scholars lived and wrote ! They will read differently, although they have been correctly trans- lated into the English language. And so it would be, too, if the original writers of the Book of Mormon did not have a perfect language, or did not speak or write cor- rectly ; the imperfection would crop out when it was put into the English language ; nor would it be in the fine literature that it might have appeared in, had they been scholarly men, which they say themselves they were not, as I have before shown you from the book wherein one of them state» they were not mighty or efficient ;in writing even as in speaking. In their writings then we might expect to find many imperfections. If so, it would crop out, and the unskillful work and style be reflected in the translation into English, as it would if made from the Hebrew, the Greek, or the Latin. It is not difficult even for a novice to detect these interjected anachronisms in language in many authors. Let us examine the strength of the argu- ment from the other standpoint: Suppose the Book of Mormon was in tact in the smooth and finished speech of a graduate of Dartmouth college, as is claimed for Mr. Solomon Spaulding, and then you should find the expression therein, that the origi- nal language in which tne book was written, was a very imperfect one, as is the admis- sion in the Book of Mormon ; would not my opponent say at once that it was an irrecon- cilable inconsistency? And woujd he not have a more reasonable basis upon which to make the claim that the book was the work of the cultured clergyman of New England? There can be no doubt of it. Every position Mr. Braden takes against this book on account of its unenticing style, language, address, and compilation, exposes more fully the utter unreasonable- ness and absurdity of his Spaulding tale, " old come to pass," and all. But I will examine the work of some New Testament writers: — Mark was as much inspired as Matthew, but his language of recording the gospel is quite different. Luke's st^'le and language is not that of John, and it is easy to see that the untaught Peter is such a character from his inspired Epistles ; while Paul's characteristics of culture shine out in his. But Braden thinks that, if the Lord should use Joseph Smith and inspire his mind to use the means he THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 167 had prepared to translate a language, he must not use the vocabulary of Joseph Smith. The Lord, in translating the book through Joseph Smith, would certainly use the lan- guage of Joseph Smith so far as that vocab- ulary would reflect truthfully the original. If it was deficient, then of course it must have been supplied, but not otherwise. "What vocabulary would he use? Of some learned gentleman who was president of Harvard or Dartmouth? Why, how would Joseph Smith understand it after he had translated, according to that? And then Satan would find some argument for his Spauiding story. Was not the message to Mr. Smith as well as to the others of the human family, and could he understand it if not, in great part, in his vocabulary? Was it not also most proper that he first of all understand this message? All must answer these questions the same. Then why object to the work upon this ground? It is but reasonable to expect that we should find in the translation the language in great part in use and understood by the translator at the time of the translation. I might refer also to the fact that there are hundreds of works written in the Enghsh language that were correct according to the best usage at the time in which they were writ- ten, but which are poor English to-day; and not only this, but the very vocabulary of those works is altogether unlike the vo- cabulary of other works that were in good English, written at the same time. Need I cite you to the common work that is known all over Christendom, published in England a few years ago, known as Bunyan's Pil- grim's Progress ; thought to be a model yet, in many things, of good English, for the reason that the words that are used in it are so simple that everybody can under- stand it; but because of this does it follow that other works written at the same time, but in a widely different vocabulary, were not in proper form and style also? Mr. Braden's reasoning is like this : Joseph Smith was an unlearned boy, with a limited vocabulary of words, as the vocabulary of all unlearned persons is of few words when compared with the scholarly. The Book of Mormon is in the language of such an un- learned and illiterate boy; Sidney Iligdoh and Solomon Spauiding were educated, able and well-intormed men, and ministers — one a Presbyterian and graduate of Dart- mouth College, the other belonging to the church of which " I, Clark Bradeu, am a member,"— orator of the great Mahoning Association, a city pastor, etc., their vocab- ulary of the English language was of the best at the time, rich, and especially Spaul- ding's, who was classical and scholarly. Therefore the learned and scholarly Spaui- ding wrote the Book of Mormon, in common phrase language, and the eloquent and gifted Sidney (Bro. Braden's pastor) stole it and gave it to Joseph Smith, an un- learned, illiterate, low, mean, drinking, shiftless, lazy, thieving, rascally boy, who lived hundreds of miles away, in the forests of the State of New York, at the time when they had no news, lines, railroads, or easy conveyancing as now, and when from the very surroundings of the case it was impos- sible that Rigdon could, from his station in life, ever have noticed that there was such a boy living in the world so far as having anything to do with him was concerned. How do you like it? Sidney Rigdon, so far as the use of language is concerned, was one of the most eloquent men that this na- tion has ever produced. I can read you passages from his speeches, his sermons, and from his presentation of the case of this people before Congress and the world, that equal anything that I have ever seen in the writings or addresses of Calhoun, Webster or Clay. And yet persons will try to make out, in order to if possible connect him with the authorship of the Book of Mormon, that he was such a poor, illiterate "igjioramus" of a fellow that he did not know anything. His language was all of this clap-trap "nonsense," of unusual "verbosity," and abounding in "vulgarisms," and such as that. Well, now, it is not true. All of you who have heard Sidney Rigdon, and thei e are many in this audience, know it is not true. You know that he was a man who could talk, and talk eloquently ; talk in one-half hour more than Braden, or I either, can talk in two days, so far as tiie use of fine and eloquent language is concerned. That is the kind of man he was and what he could do. And yet INlr. Braden wiU have it that these two ministers, Sidney Rigdon and Solomon Spauiding, made the Book of Mormon. It seems to me that his argu- ments will not tally at all when you begin to examine and weigh them. Paul says. "And I came not with excellency of speech," and yet he was inspired of the Lord, and so mav be the case of Joseph Smith. My friends, can you not all now see that such objections are really frivolous, and that the work must be tested upon its mer- its ; of what it is; of its teachings, its doctrines, its principles, and not upon the false objections that have been rais- ed. "He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and he Son." Not if their message is in good language "with excellency of speech," pure Greek, Hebrew or English; but is it so as to be understood, and when un- derstood is it according to the doctrine of Christ. Can you see the point? I think my audience can. But all the good there is in the Book of Mormon is borrowed from the Bible lie says. Does that make it bad because it is borrow- ed from the Bible? Why don't he point out the bad to this audience and show where that came from ? That is what you are waiting for him to do. Does he sup- pose you will go home and begin to kick the Book of Mormon if he leaves it like the Bible? Would it not be entitled to the re- spect and belief of Christians if it did come out of the Bible? Jesus said "every good and perfect thing came from God-" But again, the claim is made that the er- 168 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. rors of King James' translation were copied in the Book of Mormon when it was trans- lated. Now this I deny. It is an assertion that cannot be made good. If they are let him read. When God takes away the "sin" of Israel he is to "remember their iniquities no more." He is to make witli them a cove- nant, and the law is to be written in their hearts, not on tables of stone. "Moreover, I will make a covenant of peace with them ; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them, and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them forever more." Ezek. 37:26. In view of accomplishing this event, it is written : " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that it shall no more be said the Lord liveth that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; lout the Lord liveth that brought up llie children of Israel from the land of the nortii ; and from all the lands whither he had driven them; and I will bring them again unto the lands that I gave unto their fathers. Behold I will send for many fishers and they shall fish them, and a'terwards will I send for many hunters and they shall hunt them from everv moun- tain and from every hill, and outof the holes of the rocks." Ezek. 16 : 14-16. And in order to accomplish their restora- tion, as thus pointed out, tlie Lord says : "I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them. And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles and their offspring among the people." Isaiah 61:8,9. Here Israel is to be revealed among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the peo- ple. Their lineage is to be discovered. And how? Evidently as in old time, wheu doubts, or no certainty was had concern- ing the lineage of certain of the tribes, who sought to be registered among those who were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found; "they were not to eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim." Ezra 2:63. Neh.7:65. As the "Urim and Thum- mim" was the means by whicli ancient Israel and their lineage was revealed, it will doubtless be the means that God will employ to make their "seed known among the Gentiles, and their ofTspring among the people." God will work like liimself ; "He will reveal his secrets to his servants the prophets." Anios 3:7. (Time called.) MR. BRADEN'S SIXTEENTH SPEECH. Gentlemen Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen: We will now call your at- tention to a radical difference between the Book of Mormon and the Bi ble. In the Bi ble the miraculous power of God was sparingly exerted, and revelations were sparingly given. God never did for man what he could do for himself, for such help would have been injurious, just as doing every- thing for a child ruins him. With his ten- dency to exaggeration, extravagance and falsehood, Rigdon, in his fiction, the Book of Mormon, has miraculous power exerted on all occasions, even the most trivial and in the most extraordinary manner. He is constantly loading his miraculous cannon to shoot some flea of difliculty. Miraculous power was as common among the Nephites as the use of speech. Their miracles are so much more wonderful than those of the Bible. At the birth of Christ the Bible tell us that a star appeared. Rigdon tells us that it was as light as mid-day all night. At the crucifixion the Bible tells us that darkness covered the land around Jerusa- lem for three hours and there was an earth- quake in Asia Minor, Rigdon tells us a horrible darkness covered the whole earth three days and three nights or until Christ arose — all the time he was in the tomb. The Bible tells us that some saints arose during the earthquake at the crucifixion. Sydney tells us njultitudes arose three days after, at the resurrection. Rigdon lets King Ahasaerus' horse run away with liim every time he gets to fabricating miracles, Rigdon regarded miracles as the all in all of revelation, as such an extravagant vision- ary fabricator of lies would naturally do. Tlie Bible teaches us that they are merely a means to an intiiiitely higher end, and worthless except as they accomplisli that purpose, and will cease when it is accomp- lished. It teaches tiiat the Corintiiian Church that excelled all others in its won- ders, was the most imperfect Church in tua days of the Apostles. 'I'hat is true to day. Tlte lowest displays of religion are among the negroes of the South, Spiritists, Mor- mons, and in meeting and revivals where 170 THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. there are the most claims made to super- natural power. Spiritism is a low system. Negro religion is a disgusting caricature. So is Mormonism with the gibberish called speaking with tongues, its pretended reve- lations, its rubbing with sweet oil. It is a childisli superstition. It substitutes won- ders for divine truth. The supernatural of the Bible differs from Mormonism in every particular. The his- tory of the Bible occurred in the midst of the worlds history aud was a wonderful part of it. There is no getting off into Utopia, — Nowhere, as in the case in the Book of Mor- mon. No studious avoiding the crucial test of connection with the world's history. No hiding plates in the ground. No clumsy contrivance of plates and bungling machinery of stone interpreters. No hid- ing behind blankets. No handing plates down out of heaven, that are of no conceiv- able use. For their contents are not read from them but are given word by word in the crown of an old hat, aud seen by peeping through a stolen peepstone. No hiding of plates or manuscript when copied or trans- lated. No concealment. No contradictory absurdities. None of the surroundings that imposture always throws around itself. There were no surroundings of pre- vious imposture vagabondisjn aud crime. Compare Mormonism with all other frauds and it has every objectioual feature of all them, exaggerated. The prophecies of the Bible are majestic outlines surrounded by the clouds of unrevealed ni^^steries out of which they appear. They arouse expecta- tion, they cheer with promises, or warn with threats, but they give onlj^ grand out- lines. Tlie prophecies in the Book of Mor- mon are as minute and exact, and as full and set forth the event as completely as the first machine exhibits every detail, of all other machines made just like it. In noth- ing is this more apparent than in the proph- ecies concerning Christ. If all prophecies in the Old Testament that are claimed to be prophecies of Christ, were real Messianic prophecies, they would not foretell as much concerning him as a meagre table of contents tells of what is in a book. When we reduce the list to its proper proportions, about twenty Messianic prophecies, they do not foretell more of his career than a title page does of a book. The prophecies in ;he Book of Mormon begm with Clirist's mother's name, and they foretell every inci- dent of his career witli tlie minuteness of history. They even foretell his exact lan- guage, a thing the Bible does not do in a single instance, and close with his ascen- sion. We have as exact history as we have in the New Testament, liigdon was deter- mined that his propliecies should excell the Bible, and he copied the New Testament to such an extent that the fraud is as impu- dent as it would be to introduce a child to his father, or a man to his wife. The Avriters and speakers of the Bible give their message to the world with the dignified confidence of conscious truth aud inspiration. They do not stoop to hedging against doubt and unbelief. They declare their message and leave it with the reader or hearer without argument or excuse. The writer of the Book of Mormon begins hedg- on the first page, and his last page closes with hedging against objections and unbe- lief, anticipating them and trying to pre- vent them, and to answer them. We are told with painful iteration and reiteration, on nearly every page, how the Lord com- manded chem to make plates, to record on them this and that. What care the Lord took to have the plates preserved. How they were revised and corrected by the Lord. How they were hid up unto the Lord. How interpreters were provided and preserved. That ''if there be fault, it be the mistake of men," We are besought not to condemn the record on account of imperfections. That they would have done better if they had had more time, or if they had written in another language. That a more perfect account is yet to be brought to light. The arguments of those who contended, as the Disciples did with Rigdon, that we have a perfect revelation in the Bible, are elabor- ately stated and answered with all the bit- terness that Rigdon felt against the Disci- ples because they rejected his fanatical hob- bies. All the objections that it is thought will be urged against Imposter Joe are an- ticipated and discussed. A language that no one ever heard of is fabricated as the language in which the plates were written. They are miraculously preserved and the records are engraved on jDlates in the most imperishable manner. In all this we see the conscious fear and guilt of the impostor hedging against detection in his fraud. It is as different from the Bible as falsehood is from truth. We propose now to show that the Book of Mormon is destitute of every particle of evidence necessary to sustain an uninspired book. What must be proved to sustain the Book of Mormon? I. That the family of Jared emigrated to this continent from the Tower of Babel, escaping the confusion of tongues. II. That Jared's brother and Ether did, by Divine command and inspira- tion, engrave on plates the history of these people. III. That Limbi and King Benja- min obtained these plates and handed them down, so that Moroni at>ridged them. IV. That Lehi and his family emigrated to this country from Jerusalem in the first year of the reign of Zedekiah. V. That Lehi, Nephi and other prophets by Divine command and inspiration kept a history and engraved it on plates. VI. That members of the fam- ily of Zedekiah migrated from Jerusalem to the land near the Isthmus of Darien. VII. That they were discovered by the Nephites during the reign of their King Zarahemla. VIII. That Zarahemlites and Nephites were united^ IX. That their his- tory was kept by a succession of prophets by Divine command and inspiration. X. That Mormon, by Divine command and in- spiration, abridged these records. XL That Moroni finished the abridgment and buried it. XII. That in the form of an angel Moroni THE BRADEN AND KELLEY DEBATE. 171 appeared to Joe Smith and crave him the plates he had buried. XIII. That Joe Smith by inspiration translated the j^lates. XIV. That we have that translation and an abridgement of the history of Nephites, Zarahemlites and Jaredites in the Book of Mormon. Such is the claim. What attempt is made to sustain it? How do we sustain the claims of any ancient book? Xenophon's Anabasis for instance? I. We show that it is the uni- versal belief of the world, learned and crit- ical as well as unlearned, that Xenophon wrote the Anabasis, and that we have in it what he wrote, and that he wrote the truth. II. We show that such has been the uni- versal belief of each generation until we reach the generation in which it is claimed that Xenophon lived and wrote. HI. We then shoAV that the people of that genera- tion, in their literature, mention Xenophon, his book, and that they accepted it as true. IV. We show that other writers of that age record the same events, mention the same persons and events. V. We show the places, customs, surroundings that it men- tions are true ; that it interlocks truthfully in geography, customs, literature, etc., with the surroundings and with the age that it describes. Such is the course we pursue to sustain the claims of an vininspired book. How much of this proof has the Book of Mormon? I. It is not universally received by this generation, learned and critical and unlearned, as what it purports to be. II. We can trace it no further back than Joe Smith, in 1830. III. Before he gave it to the world, not a soul had heard or knew one particle of the Book of Mormon, or its contents, or a single incident in its pre- tended history. IV. IS ot another genera- tion or book knows a particle about it or its pretended history. V. From the Tower of Babel to 1830 not a human being knew of the Book, or knew a single particle of its pretended history. VI. Mormons cannot appeal to a single book, fact, custom or place back of Joe Smith. VII. Its pre- tended history interlocks with no other, does not even touch it. Its places, customs, persons and events are utterly unknown to all geography, history or literature. VIII. We have neitlier coins, inscriptions, ruins, or any relics that can be traced to its per- sons or pretended history. IX. It stands upon the assertion of Joe Smith as entirely, and it is unsupported by anything else, as the Mosaic account of the creation stands upon the inspiration of Moses. Even more so, for science has shown that the Mosaic account is a correct outline of the course of evolution in creation. But there are no rel- ics, no remains, no fossils to sustain the Book of Mormon. If it claimed to be writ- ten without inspiration, like Champollion's translations of Egyptian papyrus, it has no evidence to sustain it such as he produced. He showed the papyrus. By comparing his translation with Greek records of the same events, he proved that he had translated correctly. Pie proved by an appeal to other history, to literature, to customs and sur- roundings, that his translation and it» statements were sustained. No one but the few witnesses ever claimed to have seen Imposter Joe's plates. No one ever knew whether he translated correctly or not. No one ever knew an idea that would sustain his translation or its state- ments. All the proof we have is certain assertions. I. Imposter Joe asserts that an angel gave him certain plates. II. That he translated them by the gift and power of God. III. That what is in the Hook of Mormon is that translation. IV. The three witnesses declare that by a miracle they were showed certain plates. V. That the voice of God declared to them that Joe's translation in the Book of Mormon is true, VI. The eight witnesses declare that they handled certain plates. All they say be- yond that is an assertion of what they did not know. The appearance of Moroni to Imposter Joe was a miracle. So was his giving Imposter Joe tiie plates. Of this we have not one scrap of evidence but that of Imposter Joe. The translation of the plates was a miracle. That the Book of Mormon contained the translation thus miraculously made we have the testimony of four per- sons— Imposter Joe, Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdrey and David Whitmer. We rnay as well dispose of imposter Joe first. The questions we have to settle are : I. Is the point to be established suscepti- ble of proof? We will concede that as far as Imposter Joe is concerned he is compe- tent. II. Are the witnesses of sufflcientin- telligence to be competent? We will con- cede that Joe is. III. Is he worthy of be- lief ? Is he of good character for truth and veracity? We will impeach Imposter Joe under this test. IV. Was he disinterested in the issue? We will impeach Imposter Joe under this test. V. Was there collus- ion ? We will impeach Imposter Joe un- der this head. VI. Has his testimony the consistence, harmony and appearance of truth? We will impeach Imposter Joe under this test. Is Imposter Joe worthy of belief? For vears before he told the story about the revelation and its inspiration h« had spent his time in witching for water, pretending to find lost property, buried treasures and mines of precious metals. This is the uni- versal testimony of his neighbors. It is ad- mitted bv his mother in her history (Pages 96, 97) an