mony not true.

Was his testimony of that character that he could be deceived regarding it? When his sincerity is admitted (and surely Mr. Smucker gives good reasons why we should admit it), is it not virtually admitting the truth of his testimony?

Professor An

thon writes two letters.

It appears that Professor Anthon has written two letters concerning this matter, and his connection therewith. One was written to E. D. Howe, of Painesville, Ohio, February 17, 1834, a copy of which is found on pages 37-39 of Smucker's work; the other was written in 1841 to an Episcopal minister, of New Rochelle, New York, extracts of which are found in O. Pratt's writings, where reference is made to a periodical called "The Church Record, vol. 1, No. 22."

In both of these letters he admits that a man whom he describes as "a plain, apparently simple hearted farmer,” “a plain looking country man," etc., called on him with a copy of characters, which he requested him to decipher.

In the letter of 1834 the Professor says:

"The whole story about my pronouncing the Mormonite inscription to be 'Reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics,' is perfectly false."

The reader will observe that Martin Harris does not represent the Professor as pronouncing them "Reformed Egyptian," etc. This is doubtless the language of Howe to Professor Anthon, and is a misrepresentation of the claim made by Martin Harris, hence the denial has no force.

Howe misrepresents.

In the letter of 1834 the Professor describes the paper as follows:

"This paper, in question, was in fact a singular scroll. It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters, disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a

Anthon describes the

characters. book containing various alphabets, Greek and

Hebrew letters, crosses, and flourishes; Roman letters inverted or placed sideways, were arranged and placed in perpendicular columns; and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle, divided into various compartments,

decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calendar, given by Humboldt, but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it was derived."

In the 1841 letter he says:

"The characters were arranged in columns, like the Chinese mode of writing, and presented the most singular medley that I ever beheld. Greek, Hebrew, and all sorts of letters, more or less distorted, either through unskillfulness or from actual designs, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac."

Though the Professor gives it as his opinion "that it was a mere hoax, and a very clumsy one too," it will be seen that he corroborates the testimony of Martin Harris on the most important points; and though differing from him in opinion, agrees with him as to the events happening.

In 1870 Mr. Harris in his declining years renewed his testimony in a letter written to Mrs. H. B. Emerson, of New Richmond, Ohio. He writes from Smithfield, Utah, Novem ber 23, 1870, and says:

"I do say that the angel did show to me the plates contains ing the Book of Mormon. Further, the translation that I

Jarris renews his

test mony.

carried to Professor Anthon was copied from
these same plates; also, that the Professor did
testify to it being a correct translation."-- Saints'

Herald, vol. 22, p. 630.

The paper containing the characters (not translated) which Martin Harris carried to Professor Anthon was carefully Facsimile of preserved, copied, and photographed. We have character. examined them when in the hands of the late David Whitmer. Without further comment we herewith present a facsimile, from a plate used in Presidency and Priesthood by W. H. Kelley. The reader can examine them, compare them with Professor Anthon's statements, examine the evidence, and form conclusions accordingly.

CHAPTER 3.
1828-1829.

M. HARRIS WRITES FOR JOSEPH-DESIRES AND OBTAINS PERMISSION TO SHOW MANUSCRIPT-VIOLATES OBLIGATIONS-JOSEPH AND HARRIS REBUKED-THE URIM AND THUMMIM AND GIFT TAKEN FROM JOSEPH-ANOTHER RECORD SUBSTITUTED FOR THE LOST ONE-FRANSLATION DELAYED ON ACCOUNT OF CIRCUM. STANCES-OLIVER COWDERY COMES TO JOSEPH-BECOMES HIS SCRIBE-COWDERY DESCRIBES HIS EXPERIENCE-CONCERNING JOHN THE APOSTLE TARRYING-AARONIC PRIESTHOOD CON

FERRED.

MR. HARRIS returned home and arranged his business affairs, then went to Harmony, Pennsylvania, where Joseph was, and began writing for him. He commenced writing about April 12, 1828, and continued until June 14, when he had written one hundred and sixteen pages of foolscap.

M. Harris writes for Joseph.

He

He then became very solicitous for permission to show the manuscript to his family and friends. gained this permission, after much importuning, on conditions that he was to show it to none except his brother, his own wife, his father and mother, and a Mrs. Cobb, a sister to his wife.

Desires and obtains permission to show manuscript.

He placed himself under solemn covenant to Joseph Smith to observe these conditions, but when he had gained Violates possession of the manuscript, through anxiety and obligations. zeal to promulgate the record, or for other reasons, he took the liberty to show it to others, contrary to his obligation. In some way some of his supposed friends got the manuscript from him, and it was never recovered.

Joseph and

For this breach of trust he was severely rebuked, and he humbled himself in much sorrow and contrition Harris re- of spirit. Joseph Smith was also rebuked for trusting him, and for repeatedly entreating the Lord for his consent after having been denied.

buked.