History, 1838–1856, volume F-1 [1 May 1844–8 August 1844]

  • Source Note
  • Historical Introduction
Page 112
image
<​June 17​> and forbid him; door was opened by , as witness thought; the press and fixtures were destroyed; some paper and a desk belonging to containing several thousand dollars of property, $4000 auditor’s warrants, and other valuable papers.
“Cross-examined— Did not know the amount of warrants and papers; presumed they were destroyed. Did not know whether they were destroyed; was from the office long enough to have them taken out. Said , , , , , and helped move the press. Never knew any thing against Joseph Smith personally.
sworn— Was present at the council when the bill passed to destroy the press.
“Joseph Smith objected to calling in question the doings of the city council, and referred to the proceedings of Congress to show that all legislative bodies have a right to speak freely on any subject before them; and that Congress is not responsible for a riot which might arise on the execution of their order by the Marshal; that the execution of such order could not be a riot, but a legal transaction; that the doings of the city council could only be called in question by the powers above them; and that a magistrate had not that power; that the city council was not arrayed here for trial; but individuals were arraigned for a riot;— if the city council had transcended their powers they were amenable to the supreme court, and that had decided that an action could not lie if no riot had been committed.
said if the act was committed under an ordinance of the they might show it in justifiation. [HC 6:489]
“Court decided that the gentlemen arraigned <​were arraigned​> in their individual capacities, and could not be recognized by the Court in their official capacity.
said that all he heard the prisoners say, was said as councilors.
“Testimony on the prosecution closed.
moved that the prisoners be dismissed for want of a case being made out.
read the riot act, and plead a case had been made out.
“Motion overruled by the court.
, , and Edward Wingett sworn.
“Dr. , (of ) said he went on the hill after the order passed the Council, saw some portion of the Legion collected, walking quietly along as though they were walking to the ‘dead march in Saul’; there was no noise or tumult. asked the his authority; stated his authority from the Mayor for abating the nuisance. set them all at defiance; some twelve men were called out who went up stairs and opened the door, did not know how the door was opened, there was not more than one thump; asked one of the officers if anything was destroyed except what belonged to the Press and the officer replied, no! All was done in perfect order, as peaceably as people move on a Sunday; was present all the time; all that was done, was done in their official capacity as officers of the .
objected to the testimony, as it was not before the court that there was any city.
“Court decided that any knowledge in possession of the Court was testimony in the Court.
“E. Wingott, (of ) concurred in ’s statements, was by the door when it was opened, and knew that nothing more than a knee was put against it; all was done quietly; was present in the city council when the order passed, nothing said in council [p. 112]
June 17 and forbid him; door was opened by , as witness thought; the press and fixtures were destroyed; some paper and a desk belonging to containing several thousand dollars of property, $4000 auditor’s warrants, and other valuable papers.
“Cross-examined— Did not know the amount of warrants and papers; presumed they were destroyed. Did not know whether they were destroyed; was from the office long enough to have them taken out. Said , , , , , and helped move the press. Never knew any thing against Joseph Smith personally.
sworn— Was present at the council when the bill passed to destroy the press.
“Joseph Smith objected to calling in question the doings of the city council, and referred to the proceedings of Congress to show that all legislative bodies have a right to speak freely on any subject before them; and that Congress is not responsible for a riot which might arise on the execution of their order by the Marshal; that the execution of such order could not be a riot, but a legal transaction; that the doings of the city council could only be called in question by the powers above them; and that a magistrate had not that power; that the city council was not arrayed here for trial; but individuals were arraigned for a riot;— if the city council had transcended their powers they were amenable to the supreme court, and that had decided that an action could not lie if no riot had been committed.
said if the act was committed under an ordinance of the they might show it in justifiation. [HC 6:489]
“Court decided that the gentlemen arraigned were arraigned in their individual capacities, and could not be recognized by the Court in their official capacity.
said that all he heard the prisoners say, was said as councilors.
“Testimony on the prosecution closed.
moved that the prisoners be dismissed for want of a case being made out.
read the riot act, and plead a case had been made out.
“Motion overruled by the court.
, , and Edward Wingett sworn.
“Dr. , (of ) said he went on the hill after the order passed the Council, saw some portion of the Legion collected, walking quietly along as though they were walking to the ‘dead march in Saul’; there was no noise or tumult. asked the his authority; stated his authority from the Mayor for abating the nuisance. set them all at defiance; some twelve men were called out who went up stairs and opened the door, did not know how the door was opened, there was not more than one thump; asked one of the officers if anything was destroyed except what belonged to the Press and the officer replied, no! All was done in perfect order, as peaceably as people move on a Sunday; was present all the time; all that was done, was done in their official capacity as officers of the .
objected to the testimony, as it was not before the court that there was any city.
“Court decided that any knowledge in possession of the Court was testimony in the Court.
“E. Wingott, (of ) concurred in ’s statements, was by the door when it was opened, and knew that nothing more than a knee was put against it; all was done quietly; was present in the city council when the order passed, nothing said in council [p. 112]
Page 112