My father was a reference librarian at a University here in California. As the only LDS librarian, whenever something relating to the church was being discarded, they were offered to him. He got some interesting items, among them the original three volumes printed by the Government Printing office in 1906 of the “Proceedings before the Committee on Privileges and Elections of the United States Senate in the matter of The Protest Against The Right of Hon. Reed Smoot, A Senator from the State of Utah, to Hold his Seat” While this is all online now, and can be read by anybody with a internet connection, there is something special about holding in my hand the original leather-bound volumes.
Joseph F Smith’s testimony is well documented. Most of the focus is whether he lied about knowing of ongoing plural marriages after the manifesto of 1890, such as the page below where he says he has no knowledge of Wilford Woodruff living in “polygamous cohabitation” after the manifesto.

But what gets overlooked is all the other tidbits that come out when you have sitting President of the Church under oath for several days worth of testimony. Such as the below where President Smith says the rules of succession are “just simply a custom”

Other fun stuff was when they asked him what his business was. He said his principle business was president of the Church. They asked him what other business he was engaged in. He went on to tell them he was president and director of ZCMI, State Bank of Utah, Utah Sugar Company, Zion Saving Bank and Trust, Consolidated Wagon and Machine Company, and several other “small institutions with which I associate” Then Mr Taylor asks Smith if he is associated with the Utah Light and Power Company. he says he is. Taylor asks in what capacity, and Smith says Director and President of the Company. Taylor asks if this is what he had in mind when he said small concerns. Smith says no. Taylor then goes on gets Pres. Smith to admit that he is also Director and President of Salt Lake and Los Angeles Railroad Company, Salt Air Beach Company, Consolidated Light and Power Company, Idaho Sugar Company, the Inland Crystal Salt Company, and the Salt Lake Dramatic Association.
By this time an exasperated Mt Taylor asks Smith “Are you the President of any other corporation?” to which Smith says “I do not know. Perhaps you can tell me. I do not remember any more just now”. Tylor then said “It would seem that the number has grown so large that it would be an undue tax upon your memory to charge you with naming them all”
More interesting items: Pres. Smith says that the First Presidency are NOT Apostles. That a vacancy in the Q12 is filled by the body themselves with consent and approval of the FP. (Still the case today?). The first Q12 (Joseph Smith’s time) was chosen by revelation, the current Q12 by “the choice of the body”, not revelation.
Senator Hoar asked Pres Smith why he kept using phrases like “I presume, My Understanding is, I believe, Not that I know of, So far as I am aware, I think likely” Pres Smith’s reply was when if it was a matter of doctrine, he knows, other stuff he is just remembering the best he can.
Pres. Smith was told by his counsel many times not to answer a question. Most of those pertained to knowledge he had about individuals still cohabitating in plural unions.
Quotes from Pres. Smith that jumped out at me:
“I have never pretended to nor do I profess to have received revelations”
“Not to exceed 3 per cent” (when asked how many practiced polygamy)
One last item, Pres Smith refused to be sworn in for his testimony, he said it was against the scriptures. He was “affirmed”.
So, do any of these jump out to you as unusual, or do you think our current President would come off pretty much the same if put under oath before a congressional committee? This reminded me of Elder Holland in his 2012 BBC Interview, where he was vague answering questions of BofA translation, penalties in the temple endowment, etc.

These hearings are fascinating. The section that blew my mind is where JFS says: “I have never pretended to nor do I profess to have received revelations. I never said I had a revelation except so far as God has shown to me that so-called Mormonism is God’s divine truth; that is all.” He later says: “Well, I can say this: That if I live as I should in the line of my duties, I am susceptible, I think, of the impressions of the spirit of the Lord upon my mind at any time, just as any good Methodist or any other good church member might be. And so far as that is concerned, I say yes; I have had impressions of the Spirit upon my mind very frequently, but they are not in the sense revelations.”
Fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing.
It would be interesting to know what JFS meant by “revelation.” I wonder if there is any way to determine that rather than merely speculate about it.
Truth be told, I think his answers were more honest than if you were to get a modern day apostle to answer these same questions.
Sad thing is. He’s the last one who proclaimed any doctrinal revelation (as opposed to administrative) 100 years ago this October. (D&C 138).
“Pres. Smith says that the First Presidency are NOT Apostles.”
That’s true — all the members of the First Presidency function as presiding high priests, not as apostles. Historically, many members of the First Presidency were never apostles.
So ji, are you saying that today when a new first presidency is called from members of the Quorum of the 12, they are no longer Apostles (ie released as Apostles) but are presiding high priests(ie:set apart as presiding high priests)? If so, i have never in nearly 50 years as a member heard or read that. Where do you get that?
I do know that originally the first presidency was called from OUTSIDE the quorum of the twelve so I could see that those first presidency members were never Apostles and only served as presiding high priests (Like Sidney Rigdon).
I agree with JPV. If a simlar kind of legal questioning were to happen today, we wouldn’t receive answers with the same kind of candor and openness. LDS Newsroom would certainly have to be involved – and the “spin would begin”. Great article. My compliments.
On this: “That a vacancy in the Q12 is filled by the body themselves with consent and approval of the FP. (Still the case today?)” in answer to your question I do not believe that is the case today. My understanding is that the President decides. I believe it is tradition and custom for him to request recommendations, and each Apostle suggests three names. But he makes the call, and he is free to select someone of his own choosing who has not been recommended by the Apostles. There’s no way to know, but I wouldn’t be surprised if SWK selected Elder Nelson and Elder Oaks completely on his own motion, as neither was a General Authority at the time of his calling into the Twelve.
Which congressman said: I respect a polygamist who polys more than a monogamist who doesn’t monog (or words to that effect). I thought it was during the Reed Smoot hearings this was said.
Jan,
I wrote that the counselors in the First Presidency do not function as apostles — that is true. See D&C 107:22 and 29 — the First Presidency is a quorum of three presidents, or three presiding high priests. Members of the First Presidency function as presidents or presiding high priests — they do not function as apostles. They may have previously been ordained as apostles, or not, but that is irrelevant. We have had non-apostle counselors in the First Presidency as recently as David O. McKay.
I just finished Kathleen Flake’s fascinating book on this very topic:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/515434.The_Politics_of_American_Religious_Identity
Regarding ““I have never pretended to nor do I profess to have received revelations”:
Flake goes into detail into how this shook a lot of members at the time. What does the prophet do if not recieve revelation? He tried to explain to members later that he only said it because the Senate backed him into a corner.
Regarding his use of “I presume, My Understanding is, I believe…”
Flake argues that this was very intentional, not just because of lack of memory. He was as good as any lawyer at navigating tricky questions. Perhaps it helped his case in some ways, but it created more problems when he had explain himself to Church membership back home.
JI, I am sure you refer to Alvin Dyer, a counselor in the First Presidency under David O. McKay. Prince says Dyer was an apostle, but not a member of the Quorum of Twelve. Dyer is the only apostle to be later ordained to the First Quorum of Seventy, and never served in the Quorum of Twelve, but Prince argues he was in fact an apostle due to the fact that he was a member of the First Presidency. See https://wp.me/p8l6gx-lG
I should also note that Wikipedia, while not authoritative, says
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_R._Dyer