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

  • Source Note
  • Historical Introduction
Page 158
image
<​June 25​> which Joseph replied,
“Very true, gentlemen, you cannot see what is in my heart, and you are therefore unable to judge me or my intentions; but I can see what is in your hearts, and will tell you what I see: I can see you thirst for blood, and nothing but my blood will satisfy you. It is not for crime of any description that I and my brethren are thus continually persecuted and harassed by our enemies, but there are other motives, and some of them I have expressed so far as relates to myself, and inasmuch as you and the people thirst for blood, I prophesy in the name of the Lord that you shall witness scenes of blood and sorrow to your entire satisfaction. Your souls shall be perfectly satiated with blood, and many of you who are now present shall have an opportunity to face the cannon’s mouth from sources you think not of; and those people that desire this great evil upon me and my brethren, shall be filled with regret and sorrow because of the scenes of desolation and distress that await them. They shall seek for peace, and shall not be able to find it. Gentlemen, you will find what I have told you to be true.”
12 min. to 4. Report came to Joseph that and , , , and had said that there was nothing against these men; the law could not reach them, but powder and ball would, and they should not go out of alive. [HC 6:566]
Joseph, , and thirteen others were taken before Robert F. Smith, a justice of the peace residing in (he being also Captain of the Carthage Greys) on the charge of riot in destroying the printing press of the Nauvoo Expositor.
It is worthy of notice here that when the Defendants went before , the prosecution objected, and insisted that they should be taken before the Justice who issued the writ, viz, ; and that had also stated in his letter to Gen. Joseph Smith, that he must go before the Justice in who issued the writ. But when the Prosecution had the Defendants in their own power in , they would then ride over their own objections by taking them before another Justice who was known to be a greater enemy to the defendants than , and moreover before one who was not only a Justice of <​the​> Peace, but also the Military Commander of a Company of Carthage Greys who had already been arrested for mutiny.
one of the prosecution <​prosecutors​> moved an adjournment and , on behalf of the Defendants, objected to an adjournment, and said that the Court was not authorized to take recognizance without their acknowledging their guilt, or having witnesses to prove it, and we admit the press was destroyed by order of the Mayor, it having been condemned by the City Council as a nuisance.
They read law to show that justices could not recognize without admission of guilt, and offered to give bail.
stated that the law quoted by the prosecution belonged to civil, not criminal cases.
The Prosecution insisted to have a commission of the crime acknowledged.
After a good deal of resistance on the part of the prosecution; Court asked if the parties admitted that there was [HC 6:567] sufficient cause to bind over; and the Council for the defence admitted there was, and offered to enter into cognizance in the common [p. 158]
June 25 which Joseph replied,
“Very true, gentlemen, you cannot see what is in my heart, and you are therefore unable to judge me or my intentions; but I can see what is in your hearts, and will tell you what I see: I can see you thirst for blood, and nothing but my blood will satisfy you. It is not for crime of any description that I and my brethren are thus continually persecuted and harassed by our enemies, but there are other motives, and some of them I have expressed so far as relates to myself, and inasmuch as you and the people thirst for blood, I prophesy in the name of the Lord that you shall witness scenes of blood and sorrow to your entire satisfaction. Your souls shall be perfectly satiated with blood, and many of you who are now present shall have an opportunity to face the cannon’s mouth from sources you think not of; and those people that desire this great evil upon me and my brethren, shall be filled with regret and sorrow because of the scenes of desolation and distress that await them. They shall seek for peace, and shall not be able to find it. Gentlemen, you will find what I have told you to be true.”
12 min. to 4. Report came to Joseph that and , , , and had said that there was nothing against these men; the law could not reach them, but powder and ball would, and they should not go out of alive. [HC 6:566]
Joseph, , and thirteen others were taken before Robert F. Smith, a justice of the peace residing in (he being also Captain of the Carthage Greys) on the charge of riot in destroying the printing press of the Nauvoo Expositor.
It is worthy of notice here that when the Defendants went before , the prosecution objected, and insisted that they should be taken before the Justice who issued the writ, viz, ; and that had also stated in his letter to Gen. Joseph Smith, that he must go before the Justice in who issued the writ. But when the Prosecution had the Defendants in their own power in , they would then ride over their own objections by taking them before another Justice who was known to be a greater enemy to the defendants than , and moreover before one who was not only a Justice of the Peace, but also the Military Commander of a Company of Carthage Greys who had already been arrested for mutiny.
one of the prosecutors moved an adjournment and , on behalf of the Defendants, objected to an adjournment, and said that the Court was not authorized to take recognizance without their acknowledging their guilt, or having witnesses to prove it, and we admit the press was destroyed by order of the Mayor, it having been condemned by the City Council as a nuisance.
They read law to show that justices could not recognize without admission of guilt, and offered to give bail.
stated that the law quoted by the prosecution belonged to civil, not criminal cases.
The Prosecution insisted to have a commission of the crime acknowledged.
After a good deal of resistance on the part of the prosecution; Court asked if the parties admitted that there was [HC 6:567] sufficient cause to bind over; and the Council for the defence admitted there was, and offered to enter into cognizance in the common [p. 158]
Page 158