JS, History, 1838–1856, vol. E-1, created 20 Aug. 1855–5 Apr. 1856; handwriting of Robert L. Campbell, , and Jonathan Grimshaw; 392 pages, plus 11 pages of addenda; CHL. This is the fifth volume of a six-volume manuscript history of the church. This fifth volume covers the period from 1 July 1843 to 30 Apr. 1844; the remaining five volumes, labeled A-1, B-1, C-1, D-1, and F-1, continue through 8 Aug. 1844.
Historical Introduction
History, 1838–1856, volume E-1, constitutes the fifth of six volumes documenting the life of Joseph Smith and the early years of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The series is also known as the Manuscript History of the Church and was originally published serially from 1842 to 1846 and 1851 to 1858 as the “History of Joseph Smith” in the Times and Seasons and Deseret News. This volume contains JS’s history from 1 July 1843 to 30 April 1844, and it was compiled in Utah Territory in the mid-1850s.
The material recorded in volume E-1 was initially compiled under the direction of church historian , who was JS’s cousin. Smith collaborated with in collecting material for the history and creating a set of draft notes that Smith dictated to Bullock and other clerks.
Robert L. Campbell, a recently returned missionary and member of the Historian’s Office staff, transcribed ’s notes into the volume along with the text of designated documents (such as letters and meeting minutes). The Church Historian’s Office journal entry for 2 May 1855 pinpoints the beginning of his work: “R. L. C. on Book D forenoon, afternoon began book E.” Campbell’s work on the volume apparently concluded on 5 April 1856; entries in the Historian’s Office journal indicate that he then moved on to other assignments while another clerk, Jonathan Grimshaw, began work on volume F-1, the last manuscript in the series. (Historian’s Office, Journal, 2 May 1855; 5 and 9 Apr. 1856.)
Volume E-1 contains 391 pages of primary text and 11 pages of addenda. The initial entry on page 1637 is a continuation of the 1 July 1843 entry that closed volume D-1. The final entry in volume E-1 is for 30 April 1844.
The 391 pages of volume E-1 document a crucial period of JS’s life and the history of the church. Important events recorded here include
• An account of JS’s 2 July 1843 meeting with several Pottawatamie chiefs.
• JS’s 4 July 1843 address regarding his recent arrest, the Legion, and Mormon voting practices.
• JS’s 12 July 1843 dictation of a revelation regarding eternal marriage, including the plurality of wives, in the presence of and .
• The 13 August 1843 disfellowshipment of and revocation of his priesthood license.
• Dispatch of the first missionaries to the Pacific Islands on 20 September 1843, led by .
• JS’s 1 October 1843 announcement of ’s appointment to a mission to Russia.
• Minutes of a 6–9 October 1843 general conference inserted under the date of 9 October at which pled his case in regard to his 13 August 1843 disfellowshipment and was permitted to continue as counselor in the First Presidency.
• Text of JS’s appeal to the Green Mountain Boys of , inserted under the date of 29 November 1843.
• A 20 January 1844 entry that includes a poem by commemorating the presentation of two copies of the Book of Mormon to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert by .
• JS’s nomination on 29 January 1844 as an independent candidate for the presidency of the .
<August 30> in her constitutional capacity, or could claim under the broad folds of the Constitution of the .
When I first read the charter, I supposed it was circumscribed by the Statutes of the State; but upon a second reading, I saw the beauty of that ‘Magna Charta’. I saw that the Legislature of had ceded to the city council of the city of , the power to legislate for the common weal of , For a part of the 11th Section of that Act, reads as follows:—
“The city Council shall have power and authority to make, ordain, establish and execute all such ordinances, not repugnant to the constitution of the , or of this State, as they may deem necessary for the peace, benefit, good order, regulation, convenience, and cleanliness of said city.’
Now, if words mean any thing, here certainly are vested rights, as sacred as substantial, and, according to the terms of the Charter, (perpetual succession) as durable as those of the , or , for the ‘benefit and convenience’ of the citizens of , and her posterity, ad infinitum. It is a wise, liberal and substantial foundation for those who may be so fortunate as to share the salutary effects of its ordinances, and to partake of its growing blessings. If has power to enact laws for the benefit and convenience of her inhabitants, so has for her citizens. If the Constitution of the protects in her vested rights, has the same claim, and the same power to control it. And, if the city council of should pass an unconstitutional act or ordinance, literally repugnant to the constitution of the or of this , all that could be done would be to declare it void by some court having competent jurisdiction, and there the matter ends, without any recourse upon the charter any more than there is recourse upon the constitution of the for unconstitutional acts that so frequently disgrace the statutes of the several states.
When I heard that the legislature, last winter, was laboring to repeal or modify the said charter, it put me in mind of a father and a son who owned a horse which they were too lazy to prove, and bring out his good qualities; but a gentleman observing him, purchased, and in a few days passed by with the noble animal in full mounted harness attached to an elegant carriage, attracted the attention of all that saw him. The son immediately sought the father to sue and get the horse back, but the old man drily replied— ‘It takes two to make a bargain’. So if the legislature should repeal or alter the charter of , without the consent of the citizens, they have only to put a quietus on the act, through the Supreme Court of the ; as many other cases have been according to her Reports.
Reserved rights and vested rights are very different, and had the legislature reserved any important point in the charter, and the city Council used it, without the consent mutually of both parties, they would have held amenable to the supreme court for the usurpation of that power. But when the ‘benefit and convenience’ of demands ordinances no broader than the Constitution of the and that of justifies, no matter whether there is any law on the subject or not, the city Council has only to shew their wisdom by their ordinances, and their power of their virtues, and how beautifully the world will behold imperium in imperio. [p. 1711]