Can anyone point me to a link that shows the Nauvoo polygamy denial affadavit? The one where Joseph and many of his plural wives all swore before God, on the bible, that they only practiced monogamy?

Thanks in advance to all you super-knowledgable people.

Here's several listings where the church or Joseph denied it:


http://mormonthink.com/joseph-smith-polygamy.htm#condemned

http://mormonthink.com/joseph-smith-polygamy.htm#lied

Thanks, the second link was the one!

There is also the Temple Lot case of 1892 where Joseph Smith III denied that his father had introduced polygamy. Court documents:
It appears that Joseph Smith III developed credibility with the Court when he testified atlength on how purported revelations became law in the primitive Church (under the leadershipof his father, Joseph Smith Jr.)

Further, he seems to have solidified his credibility when heencouraged opposing counsel, during the plaintiff’s rebuttal, to ask any question concerning hisfather’s alleged practice of polygamy: “proceed with your inquiry without regard for myfeelings for I have none whatever in the matter, I am here to answer every question that islegitimate, or that has any bearing on this case in any way, shape, or form. I will answer anyquestion you put to me that meets these requirements.”

The balance of the plaintiff’s (RLDS)witnesses also took this tack and none refused or evaded questions posed them by either party’scounsel.In contrast, the LDS/Hedrickite witnesses openly evaded questions. The following is anexcerpt of the testimony of Lyman O. Littlefield, president of the Quorum of Seventy in theLDS Church:

Q:Did you in your correspondence with Joseph Smith [III] . . . in relation to this revelation on polygamy . . . say that Brigham Young . . . claimed that no man on earth ever saw that revela-tion until . . . 1852, or that had a copy of it?A:I do not remember that.Q:Could you swear you did not write that?A:I cannot say. I do not remember anything about it. The correspondence speaks for itself, and isstill in existence, I suppose.Q:Well, if it is in there, is it true?A:I do not remember if it is in there or not. I remember nothing about it.Q:Well, if it is in there, is it true?A:The correspondence speaks for itself, and is still in existence.Q:If that statement is in reply that you wrote to Joseph Smith [III] is it true?A:I guess you are familiar with it.Q:Well, yes, I guess I am just as familiar with it as you are, just exactly . . . I have no doubt butthat you know right well what is in it, but if you are willing to go on record as evading thequestion in that way, all right.

The defense witness (Littlefield) did not answer the question and, a little later in theexamination, the following exchange took place:

Q:Who notified you to appear as a witness?A:I am willing to answer the question if I am compelled to answer it.By the examiner: “Answer the question.”Answer of witness: Wilford Woodruff, the President of the Church in Utah; he notified me to appear.

Thus, we see that this was a gratuitous attendance by the witness; he was not subpoenaedto appear, he testified merely because another witness requested his presence.
http://www.academia.edu/10114702/Temple_Lot_Suit_Fraud_in_Gods_Vinyard_-_Baggette



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2015 08:07PM by dydimus.