The Papers
Browse the PapersDocumentsJournalsAdministrative RecordsRevelations and TranslationsHistoriesLegal RecordsFinancial RecordsOther Contemporary Papers
Reference
PeoplePlacesEventsGlossaryLegal GlossaryFinancial GlossaryCalendar of DocumentsWorks CitedFeatured TopicsLesson PlansRelated Publications
Media
VideosPhotographsIllustrationsChartsMapsPodcasts
News
Current NewsArchiveNewsletterSubscribeJSP Conferences
About
About the ProjectJoseph Smith and His PapersFAQAwardsEndorsementsReviewsEditorial MethodNote on TranscriptionsNote on Images of People and PlacesReferencing the ProjectCiting This WebsiteProject TeamContact Us
Published Volumes
  1. Home > 
  2. The Papers > 

Minutes, 28 December 1834

Source Note

Minutes, , Geauga Co., OH, 28 Dec. 1834. Featured version copied [not before 25 Feb. 1836] in Minute Book 1, pp. 81–82; handwriting of ; CHL. For more complete source information, see the source note for Minute Book 1.

Historical Introduction

On 28 December 1834, the , Ohio, convened in the church’s to consider a case that involved and George Hartley of , Randolph County, Indiana. The difficulty between Walker and Hartley was long–standing, having first arisen in 1831. Walker, who had purchased land in by March 1819, was a resident of Winchester in 1831 when missionaries and arrived in the town. In July and August 1831, Hancock and Coltrin established “a larg[e] branch” of the church in Winchester, perhaps baptizing Walker and Hartley at that time.
In late November 1831, , , , and some others traveling to arrived in Winchester and held several conferences with the local church members. Around this time, and Hartley had a disagreement over an unspecified financial transaction that they then brought before a conference held on 6–7 December. Cowdery and the other conference attendees requested that Walker and Hartley resolve their disagreement privately. When they failed to do so, Marsh and Whitmer, acting as mediators, instructed Walker to pay Hartley “his just Due.” According to the minutes of that meeting, after “much cavilling on the part of Walker to stand or hold fast to his agreement,” Walker agreed to pay the amount. He “truly humbled himself & they came together as brothers and disciples & all matters were settled & buried.”
It is not clear what revived the and Hartley case in December 1834, but it may have been related to Walker’s standing in the church. Though not mentioned in the 1831 minutes, Walker may have had a church-issued taken from him at that time or sometime before the December 1834 meeting. Next to Walker’s name in the minutes of a 29 November 1831 meeting is a parenthetical note: “license taken.” It is unclear when it was written in the minutes.
It is also possible that brought the case up again as a result of a visit from a few months prior to the 28 December 1834 council meeting. In fall 1834, Hancock, who had traveled to with the , and , a church member who had been baptized in , Missouri, in July 1833, traveled from , Missouri, toward . In early October, the two men stopped in “at the House of Oliver Walker” and held a series of meetings. Hancock, who had likely not communicated with Walker since the branch of the church was organized in Winchester in summer 1831, may have encouraged Walker to visit Kirtland and meet with the high council to determine his standing in the church or resolve any lingering matters. Whatever the reason, when Walker met with the high council, they affirmed his good standing.
Near the close of this high council meeting, JS and spoke “relative to the order of offices and titles in the church.” Their comments may have been related to the rebuke that they and other members of the received on 5 December 1834. According to ’s record of that meeting, “the voice of the Spirit” told the leaders of the church to reform their “manners, habits and customs, and salutations” and to give “unto every man the respect due the office, calling, and priesthood.”
is listed as a clerk of the council, but since he was one of the speakers involved in the case, it is more likely that kept most of the minutes of this meeting. Cowdery may have added to those minutes, which later copied into Minute Book 1.

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    Minute Book 2, 6–7 Dec. 1831.

  2. [2]

    Tucker, History of Randolph County, Indiana, 390. Hancock and Coltrin traveled together and proselytized in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois in summer 1831. (Hancock, Autobiography, 95–110; see also Revelation, 6 June 1831 [D&C 52:29].)

    Tucker, E. History of Randolph County, Indiana, with Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of some of its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Chicago: A. L. Kingman, 1882.

    Hancock, Levi Ward. Autobiography, 1803–1836. New Mormon Studies CD-ROM: A Comprehensive Resource Library, 2009. CHL.

  3. [3]

    Hancock, Autobiography, 101.

    Hancock, Levi Ward. Autobiography, 1803–1836. New Mormon Studies CD-ROM: A Comprehensive Resource Library, 2009. CHL.

  4. [4]

    Cowdery was appointed moderator at the 6–7 December 1831 conference.

  5. [5]

    Minute Book 2, 29 Nov.–1 Dec. and 6–7 Dec. 1831.

  6. [6]

    Minute Book 2, 29 Nov.–1 Dec. 1831. The parenthetical notation was likely not part of the original minutes but was later added by John Whitmer when he was compiling these minutes into a book. The notation could also have been made by Ebenezer Robinson, who copied Whitmer’s records into Minute Book 2. (See Source Note for Minute Book 2.)

  7. [7]

    Nathan West, Report, ca. Jan. 1835, Missionary Reports, 1831–1900, CHL.

    Missionary Reports, 1831–1900. CHL. MS 6104.

  8. [8]

    Account of Meetings, Revelation, and Blessing, 5–6 Dec. 1834.

Asterisk (*) denotes a "featured" version, which includes an introduction and annotation.
*Minutes, 28 December 1834
Minute Book 1

Page 81

Minutes of a of the assembled at the in Ohio Sabbath evening December 28th 1834. presiding, who opened by prayer
The council was organized as follows:
President
Presidnt
for
for
President
The case of Elder of Indiana, was presented to the council, by . was called to make such remarks before the council as he thought proper— who related a difficulty which formerly existed between himself and George Hartley once a member of the church in .
Four counsellors were appointed to speak on the case (viz.):
The circumstances of ’s former difficulty were stated by himself, Elder Hancock, , (who presided over the at one time when said difficulty was settled[)] President and . The counsellors then made their remarks, and also Presidents & J. Smith Junr. after which gave decision. That is, and has been, a member of this church, and that he is and has been an in the same. And that so far as has been presented to this council, nothing has been done by him, whereby he ought to be expelled from this church.
A vote was called which was unanimous with said decision. [p. 81]
View entire transcript

|

Cite this page

Source Note

Document Transcript

Page 81

Document Information

Related Case Documents
Editorial Title
Minutes, 28 December 1834
ID #
7859
Total Pages
2
Print Volume Location
JSP, D4:208–211
Handwriting on This Page
  • Warren A. Cowdery

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    Though JS was present at this high council meeting, he did not preside. According to the rules governing the high council, JS should have presided; only if he were absent was another member of the presidency to officiate. It is possible that Sidney Rigdon presided because JS was not present at the beginning of the meeting. (See Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102:9–11].)

  2. [2]

    John Smith and Luke Johnson were absent for unknown reasons. The rules governing the high council explain the protocol for finding substitutes for absent members: they were to be high priests considered “worthy and capable to act in the place of absent counsellors.” William E. McLellin substituted for Luke Johnson while Sylvester Smith filled in for John Smith. Sylvester Smith was a standing member of the high council until September 1834, when he was released as a result of accusations he raised against JS, which were ruled to be without merit. (Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102:7]; Minutes, 24 Sept. 1834.)

  3. [3]

    Hartley was not present at this council, but he had been present at the 1831 meetings.

  4. [4]

    That four counselors were appointed to speak suggests this was a difficult case. (See Revised Minutes, 18–19 Feb. 1834 [D&C 102:13–14].)

  5. [5]

    Probably Levi Hancock.

  6. [6]

    Walker and Cowdery were the only two people who attended both council meetings in which this case was discussed.

  7. [7]

    Hyrum Smith and William E. McLellin also visited church members in Randolph County in fall 1831. Both men may have been familiar with Walker from this visit. Sydney Rigdon’s connections with the Walker case or the members in Randolph County are not known. (McLellin, Journal, 4 Oct. 1831.)

    McLellin, William E. Journal, 18 July–20 Nov. 1831. William E. McLellin, Papers, 1831–1836, 1877–1878. CHL. MS 13538, box 1, fd. 1. Also available as Jan Shipps and John W. Welch, eds., The Journals of William E. McLellin, 1831–1836 (Provo, UT: BYU Studies; Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1994).

© 2024 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of UseUpdated 2021-04-13Privacy NoticeUpdated 2021-04-06