Footnotes
William Clayton served as a recorder and scribe for JS in Nauvoo from 1842 to 1844. (Clayton, Diary, 10 Feb. 1842; Clayton, History of the Nauvoo Temple, 18, 30–31; JS, Journal, 29–30 June 1842.)
Clayton, William. Diary, Vol. 1, 1840–1842. BYU.
Clayton, William. History of the Nauvoo Temple, ca. 1845. CHL. MS 3365.
Footnotes
Perkins prepared another undated statement that appears to be an earlier rendering of several of the mercantile debts included in this October 1838 statement. In the other undated statement, Perkins included notes indicating he had written to New York merchants, asking for instructions on their unpaid promissory notes, and was awaiting their reply. In the October 1838 statement featured here, Perkins identified who was in possession of the notes and who should be paid. (Perkins & Osborn, “Demands in Hands of Perkins & Osborn,” between 1 Sept. 1837 and 28 Oct. 1838, JS Office Papers, CHL.)
Transcript of Proceedings, 24 Oct. 1837, Rounds v. JS (Geauga Co. C.P. 1837), Final Record Book U, pp. 362–364; Transcript of Proceedings, 24 Oct. 1837, Rounds v. Rigdon (Geauga Co. C.P. 1837), Final Record Book U, pp. 359–362, microfilm 20,279, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL.
The mercantile firm Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery was a partnership that Sidney Rigdon, JS, and Oliver Cowdery began by June 1836. The mercantile firm Cahoon, Carter & Co., which included Reynolds Cahoon, Jared Carter, and Hyrum Smith, was selling goods by June 1835. The mercantile efforts of Cahoon, Carter, and Smith appear to be related to their endeavor to construct and finance the House of the Lord in Kirtland. (See John A. Newbould, Invoice, Buffalo, NY, for Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery, 17 June 1836; Mead, Stafford & Co., Invoice, New York City, for Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery, 8 Oct. 1836, JS Office Papers, CHL; Advertisement, Northern Times, 2 Oct. 1835, [4]; and Minutes, 6 June 1833.)
Northern Times. Kirtland, OH. 1835–[1836?].
Transcript of Proceedings, 5 June 1837, Kelley v. Rigdon et al. (Geauga Co. C.P. 1837), Final Record Book U, pp. 97–99; Transcript of Proceedings, 5 June 1837, Kelley v. Cahoon et al. (Geauga Co. C.P. 1837), Final Record Book U, pp. 100–101, microfilm 20,279, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL. Promissory notes were transferrable financial instruments. An individual or company could receive a promissory note and then endorse it and transfer it to another individual or company for payment.
U.S. and Canada Record Collection. FHL.
As calculated in this statement, JS personally owed Perkins & Osborn $159.50 for the firm’s services. He was credited $23.01 for money lent and goods purchased, and he was then required to pay Cahoon’s note for $51.34. With these additions plus a year of interest, JS’s costs amounted to around $191.00. JS also likely paid the retainer fee of $5.00 for a lawsuit Timothy Martindale initiated.
The debts JS and Rigdon owed jointly in connection with the mercantile firm Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery were for the judgment and damages in the Kelley lawsuit, totaling $2,083.47, and for a promissory note given to John Ayer for $442.12, which totaled $506.49 after twenty-five months of simple interest at 7 percent.
Amounts were not recorded for the promissory notes given to John A. Newbould, due eighteen months and twenty-four months after September 1837.
See Historical Introduction to Letter of Introduction from John Howden, 27 Oct. 1838.
| Joseph Smith Jr | ||||
| To Perkins & Osborn Dr | ||||
| 1838 [1837] | ||||
| March T[erm] | To Retainer & Term fee Rounds Qui tam vs. you | $5 00 | ||
| June T | " hearing on demurrer & Term fee | 5 00 | ||
| " going to in May for you & consulting in sundry Cases | 10 00 | |||
| Expenses same time .19¢ horse & wagon paid $2 | 2 19 | |||
| " fees on Complaint before [Edward] Flint | 15 00 | |||
| June T | " fees on same in Court of Com. Pleas | 35 00 | ||
| 28 | " Consultation at | 3 00 | ||
| July 27 | " defending you successfuly in three suits before Flint, Kingsbury & | 10 00 | ||
| " Retainer Barker use of Bump vs you | 5 00 | |||
| 28 | " time & trouble with Holbrook about watch | 1 00 | ||
| Augt | " Consultation & advice with Knights respecting Whitneys deed | 2 00 | ||
| 16 | " 3 pair of shoes returned by | 3 31 | ||
| Sept 15 | " fees State vs Ritch on your complaint before | 6 00 | ||
| Horse & wagon & expenses | 2 00 | |||
| Oct. T | " trial Rounds Qui Tam against you | 25 00 | ||
| " drawing bill of Exceptions for writ of Error | 10 00 | |||
| 139 50 | ||||
| Decr | " fees several suits against you at — | 5 00 | ||
| " fee " in Underwood Bald & Spencer against you and others now pending } | 15 00 | |||
| $159 50 | ||||
| 1837 | Contra Cr | |||
| May | By cash to at | $5.00 | ||
| Jun 28 | " bill of shoes of | 8.14 | ||
| " spade | 1.50 | |||
| July 27 | " Cash to $1.00 d[itt]o to $1. | 2.00 | ||
| Augt 16 | " 2 pr of shoes to | $1.81} | for shoes Returned } | 3.31 |
| 2 Blk books for P&O | $1.50} | |||
| 26 | " a saw to 10/ | 1.25 | ||
| " by iron Chest at Bill & transportation the Bill never handed us, nor have we the keys to the little drawer—} | ||||
| To Interest on ballance one year—— | ||||
“Dr” is an abbreviation that indicates a debit on a financial account. (Jones, Principles and Practice of Book-Keeping, 20.)
Jones, Thomas. The Principles and Practice of Book-Keeping, Embracing an Entirely New and Improved Method of Imparting the Science; with Exemplifications of the Most Concise and Approved Forms of Arranging Merchants’ Accounts. New York: Wiley and Putnam, 1841.
The March 1837 term of the Geauga County Court of Common Pleas began on 21 March. (An Act to Regulate the Times of Holding the Judicial Courts [4 Feb. 1837], Acts of a General Nature [1836–1837], p. 13, sec. 4.)
Acts of a General Nature, Passed at the First Session of the Thirty-Fifth General Assembly of the State of Ohio; Begun and Held in the City of Columbus, December 5th, 1836. And in the Thirty-Fifth Year of Said State. Columbus: S. R. Dolbee, 1837.
The term fee was the amount Perkins & Osborn charged for legal services during that term of court. A term fee of five to ten dollars was common; as a frontier lawyer, Abraham Lincoln generally charged such amounts. (See “The Law Practice of Abraham Lincoln: A Narrative Overview,” in Benner and Davis, Law Practice of Abraham Lincoln; and Pratt, Personal Finances of Abraham Lincoln, 25–57.)
Benner, Martha L., Cullom Davis, Daniel W. Stowell, John A. Lupton, Susan Krause, Stacy Pratt McDermott, Christopher A. Schnell, and Dennis E. Suttles, eds. The Law Practice of Abraham Lincoln: Complete Documentary Edition. 2nd ed. Springfield, IL: Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, 2009. Accessed 3 Nov. 2016. http://www.lawpracticeofabrahamlincoln.org.
Pratt, Harry E. The Personal Finances of Abraham Lincoln. Springfield, IL: Abraham Lincoln Association, 1943.
A qui tam court case is a lawsuit in which the plaintiff sues on his or her own behalf as well as on behalf of the state for the monetary amount permitted by statute. In this case, Rounds was suing for himself and for the state of Ohio. (“Qui Tam,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 2:320; Transcript of Proceedings, 24 Oct. 1837, Rounds v. JS [Geauga Co. C.P. 1837], Final Record Book U, pp. 362–364, microfilm 20,279, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL.)
Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; with References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: T. and J. W. Johnson, 1839.
The June 1837 term of court began on 5 June. (An Act to Regulate the Times of Holding the Judicial Courts [4 Feb. 1837], Acts of a General Nature [1836–1837], p. 13, sec. 4.)
Acts of a General Nature, Passed at the First Session of the Thirty-Fifth General Assembly of the State of Ohio; Begun and Held in the City of Columbus, December 5th, 1836. And in the Thirty-Fifth Year of Said State. Columbus: S. R. Dolbee, 1837.
A demurrer is a legal document given to the court to indicate that the “objecting party will not proceed with the pleading, because no sufficient statement has been made on the other side; but will wait the judgment of the court whether he is bound to answer.” (“Demurrer,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 1:307, italics in original.)
Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; with References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: T. and J. W. Johnson, 1839.
On 13 April 1837, Newell brought a complaint against JS to Justice of the Peace Flint in Painesville, Ohio, accusing JS of directing two men to murder Newell. Flint held a court of inquiry in early June 1837, and the case was then brought before the Geauga County Court of Common Pleas on 10 June. After disparate witness testimonies, JS was acquitted and discharged. (Transcript of Proceedings, 5 June 1837, State of Ohio on Complaint of Newell v. JS [Geauga Co. C.P. 1837], Final Record Book T, pp. 52–53, microfilm 20,279; Geauga Co., OH, Court of Common Pleas, Journal N, p. 225, 10 June 1837, microfilm 20,271, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL.)
U.S. and Canada Record Collection. FHL.
Flint and Miller were justices of the peace in Painesville; the cases referenced here were probably trials in the justice of the peace court. Kingsbury’s identity is unknown, but he may have been a justice of the peace in Painesville. Two prominent Kingsbury families lived in Painesville in the 1830s, but extant records do not list a justice with the surname of Kingsbury. (See Historical Introduction to Letter from Newel K. Whitney, 20 Apr. 1837; Transcript of Proceedings, 25 Apr. 1835, State of Ohio v. JS [J.P. Ct. 1835], Lewis Miller, Docket Book, 332, Henry E. Huntington Library, San Marino, CA; and History of Geauga and Lake Counties, Ohio, 20, 22, 41.)
Miller, Lewis. Docket Book. Henry E. Huntington Library, San Marino, CA.
History of Geauga and Lake Counties, Ohio, with Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of Its Pioneers and Most Prominent Men. Philadelphia: Williams Brothers, 1878.
This case involved a promissory note JS and Cowdery gave to William Barker in July 1836 and that Barker later transferred to Jacob Bump. Barker claimed the note had not been fully paid by July 1837, but he discontinued the lawsuit when the case was brought before the court in October 1837. (See Transcript of Proceedings, 24 Oct. 1837, Barker for use of Bump v. JS and Cowdery [Geauga Co. C.P. 1837], Final Record Book U, p. 237, microfilm 20,279, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL.)
The identity of Holbrook is not clear. Holbrook may have been a sheriff. JS’s history recounts that litigation in Painesville prevented him from leaving on a trip to Canada in late July 1837. In response to a writ the sheriff served, JS gave the sheriff his watch as security that JS would appear before the court. Alternatively, the Holbrook mentioned in the account statement may have been Chandler or Joseph Holbrook; both men were church members living in Kirtland. (JS History, vol. B-1, 767, addenda, 6nS; Backman, Profile, 36.)
Backman, Milton V., Jr., comp. A Profile of Latter-day Saints of Kirtland, Ohio, and Members of Zion’s Camp, 1830–1839: Vital Statistics and Sources. 2nd ed. Provo, UT: Department of Church History and Doctrine and Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1983.
Geauga County deed records do not list a land transaction between the Knights and the Whitneys.
On 12 September 1837, JS brought a complaint against Abram Ritch—a constable in Geauga County—to Cowdery, who was a justice of the peace in Kirtland Township in 1837. JS accused Ritch of “unlawful oppression by color of office.” (Docket Entry, 12 Sept. 1837, State of Ohio v. Ritch [J.P. Ct. 1837], in Cowdery, Docket Book, 224.)
The October 1837 term of court began on 24 October. (An Act to Regulate the Times of Holding the Judicial Courts [4 Feb. 1837], Acts of a General Nature [1836–1837], p. 13, sec. 4.)
Acts of a General Nature, Passed at the First Session of the Thirty-Fifth General Assembly of the State of Ohio; Begun and Held in the City of Columbus, December 5th, 1836. And in the Thirty-Fifth Year of Said State. Columbus: S. R. Dolbee, 1837.
A bill of exception is a written statement objecting “to the decision of the court on a point of law, which, in confirmation of its accuracy, is signed and sealed by the judge or court who made the decision.” According to Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, “The object of the bill of exceptions, is to put the question of law on record for the information of the court of error having cognizance of such cause.” A writ of error directs a judge who has rendered a final judgment to either reexamine the case or send it to a higher court to address an allegation of an error in proceedings. Both writs represent the preliminary steps for making an appeal. (“Bill of Exception,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 1:129; “Writ of Error,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 2:501.)
Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; with References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: T. and J. W. Johnson, 1839.
Nothing is known about the suits referenced here. These suits may represent cases before a Columbus justice of the peace or suits brought before the Ohio Supreme Court. In the nineteenth century, Ohio circuit court cases that were appealed had to be brought before the state’s supreme court justices, who did not review the cases until December, when the justices met in Columbus. No extant records of the proceedings of the Ohio Supreme Court include cases involving JS. (An Act to Regulate the Times of Holding the Judicial Courts [4 Feb. 1837], Acts of a General Nature [1836–1837], pp. 11–13, secs. 1–4.)
Acts of a General Nature, Passed at the First Session of the Thirty-Fifth General Assembly of the State of Ohio; Begun and Held in the City of Columbus, December 5th, 1836. And in the Thirty-Fifth Year of Said State. Columbus: S. R. Dolbee, 1837.
Cowdery had purchased engraved plates and bank notes for the Kirtland Safety Society from the firm Underwood, Bald, Spencer & Hufty in fall 1836. In June 1837 the engraving firm began a lawsuit against Rigdon, JS, and fourteen others for payment on the $1,450 owed to the firm. (Transcript of Proceedings, 16 Apr. 1839, Underwood et al. v. Rigdon, JS, et al. [Geauga Co. C.P. 1839], Final Record Book X, pp. 34–36, microfilm 20,281, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL; see also Historical Introduction to Kirtland Safety Society Notes, 4 Jan.–9 Mar. 1837.)
“Cr” is an abbreviation used to indicate credits on an account. Several of the entries in this section indicate that Perkins and Osborn purchased goods from one of the Kirtland-area stores in which JS was a partner but that instead of paying for the goods, the attorneys deducted the cost from JS’s account with Perkins & Osborn. (Jones, Principles and Practice of Book-Keeping, 20.)
Jones, Thomas. The Principles and Practice of Book-Keeping, Embracing an Entirely New and Improved Method of Imparting the Science; with Exemplifications of the Most Concise and Approved Forms of Arranging Merchants’ Accounts. New York: Wiley and Putnam, 1841.
Knight was a clerk at the store run by the firm H. Smith & Co. He may also have occasionally clerked in stores run by Rigdon, Smith & Co. and may have written the bill listed here or accepted it as payment from Perkins & Osborn. (See Bailey Hewitt, Receipt, Kirtland, OH, to Vinson Knight, 27 Sept. 1836, JS Office Papers, CHL; and H. Smith & Co. Ledger, in Trustees Land Book A, CHL.)
Trustees Land Books / Trustee-in-Trust, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Land Books, 1839–1845. 2 vols. CHL. MS 3437.
The term iron chest is another name for a safe. The iron chest referenced in the account may be one of several safes that agents for the mercantile firm Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery bought in October 1836 from New York merchant Jesse Delano, who patented the first fireproof safe in 1826. (Digest of Patents, 58; Jesse Delano, Invoice, New York City, for JS and Oliver Cowdery, 15 Oct. 1836, JS Office Papers, CHL.)
A Digest of Patents, Issued by the United States, from 1790 to January 1, 1839: Published by Act of Congress, under the Superintendence of the Commissioner of Patents, Henry L. Ellsworth. To Which Is Added the Present Law relating to Patents. Washington DC: Peter Force, 1840.