By Jerald and Sandra Tanner

---

In working on our new book, The Case Against Mormonism, we have decided that we have so much material that it will be necessary for us to write still another book. This book will be entitled The Mormon Kingdom. Because of the limited amount of space we can only present a very small portion of the material here.

A Treasonous Plan?

In the Preface to his new and fascinating book Quest For Empire, The Political Kingdom of God and the Council of Fifty in Mormon History, Klaus J. Hanson states:

. . . the idea of a political kingdom of God, promulgated by a secret “Council of Fifty,” is by far the most important key to an understanding of the Mormon past.

[Bold in quotations added for emphasis and does not appear in originals.]

On page 24 of the same book, we find the following statement:

Certain non-Mormons, curiously enough, seem to have known more about the political ambitions of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young than most faithful Latter-day Saints.

In the year 1838, Thomas B. Marsh, President of the Council of the Twelve Apostles in the Mormon Church, left the Mormons and made an affidavit in which he stated:

The plan of said Smith, the Prophet, is to take this State, and he professes to his people to intend taking the United States and ultimately the whole world. This is the belief of the Church, and my own opinion of the Prophet’s plans and intentions. (Affidavit of Thomas B. Marsh, as printed in A History of the Latter-day Saints in Northern Missouri from 1836 to 1839, by Leland Gentry, Brigham Young University, 1965, page 414)

Not long before his death, Joseph Smith formed a secret organization known as the “Council of Fifty.” The Mormon writer John J. Stewart states:

(The Prophet established a confidential Council of Fifty, or “Ytfif,” comprised of both Mormons and non-Mormons, to help attend to temporal matters, including the eventual development of a one-world government, in harmony with preparatory plans for the second advent of the Savior.) (Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, Salt Lake City, 1966, page 204)

Klaus J. Hanson makes this statement concerning members of the “Council of Fifty”:

. . . members of the Council of Fifty, like the Freemasons, donned special robes in their private ceremonies, and “offered up” secret signs. (Quest For Empire, Michigan State University Press, 1967, page 56)

On page 64 and 65 of the same book Klaus Hanson states:

Secrecy at times went so far that papers accumulated during a meeting were burned at the close of the session. . . . Ultimately, . . . the whole world would be aware of the existence of the Council of Fifty. In fact, it is difficult to see how it could have been otherwise, since world government was to be one of the Council’s primary missions.

The Mormon writer J. D. Williams made this statement:

And in the case of the Grand Council of the Kingdom, the Church obviously contemplated far more than “giving advice.” Believed to have been organized in March, 1844, the Grand Council (or “Council of Fifty”) was to be the government of the Kingdom of God (which Kingdom was not the Church but the ultimate governing body for all mankind). The Council was composed of two non-Mormons and forty-eight to fifty Mormon high priests. . . .

The picture is one of a secret government, responsible not to the governed but to ecclesiastical authority, which will provide benign rule for all people, without election. (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer, 1966, pages 47-48)

The Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde once stated:

What the world calls “Mormonism” will rule every nation. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young will be the head. God has decreed it, and his own right arm will accomplish it. This will make the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, page 53)

John Taylor, who became the third President of the Mormon Church, made this statement:

We do believe it, and we honestly acknowledge that this is that kingdom which the Lord has commenced to establish upon the earth, and that it will not only govern all people in a religious capacity, but also in a political capacity. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, page 53)

Heber C. Kimball, who was a member of the First Presidency, made this statement in 1859:

And so nations will bow to this kingdom, sooner, or later, and all hell cannot help it. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, page 170)

On another occasion Heber C. Kimball prophesied:

And the President of the United States will bow to us and come to consult the authorities of this Church to know what he had best do for his people.

You don’t believe this. Wait and see; . . . (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, page 93)

Joseph Smith Ordained King

Thomas Ford, the Governor of Illinois, made this statement a few months after Joseph Smith’s death:

It was asserted that Joseph Smith, the founder and head of the Mormon Church, had caused himself to be crowned and anointed King of the Mormons: . . . (Nauvoo Neighbor, January 1, 1845)

William Marks, who had been a member of the secret “Council of Fifty,” admitted in 1853 that Joseph Smith had been ordained to be a king before his death:

I was also witness to the introduction (secretly,) of a kingly form of government, in which Joseph suffered himself to be ordained a king, to reign over the house of Israel forever; which I could not conceive to be in accordance with the laws of the church, but I did not oppose this move, thinking it none of my business. (Zion’s Harbinger and Baneemy’s Organ, St. Louis, July, 1853, page 53)

According to Dan Jones, Wilson Law heard Joseph Smith say that “the kingdom referred to was already set up, and that he was the king over it” (History of the Church, vol. 6, page 568-569).

The Mormon writer Klaus J. Hanson, who wrote his master’s thesis on the “Political Kingdom of God” at the Brigham Young University, made this statement:

The scriptures indicated that Christ would rule as king over the kingdom of God. Smith took this idea quite literally and thought it only logical that he, as predecessor of the Savior, should enjoy certain prerogatives of royalty. Consequently, shortly before his death, the prophet apparently had himself ordained as “king on earth.” Brigham Young, upon his arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, likewise reportedly had this ceremony performed in the Council of Fifty . . .

The title of king may have been a metaphor, but the power deriving from the office was not. In this respect it is especially important to recall that Smith held his political office by divine right and not by popular sovereignty. However metaphorical these royal pretensions may have been, Smith apparently knew that they were so potentially dangerous as to be entrusted only to the initiated. (Quest For Empire, pages 66-67)

In his master’s thesis, Klaus J. Hanson tells that George Miller, who had been a member of the “Council of Fifty,” admitted the Joseph Smith was ordained to be king:

Rumors implying that the Prophet assumed royal pretensions are somewhat substantiated by George Miller who stated on one occasion that “In this council we ordained Joseph Smith as King of earth.” (“The Theory and Practice of the Political Kingdom of God in Mormon History, 1829-1890,” Master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1959, typed copy, page 114)

In Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Klaus J. Hanson frankly admitted:

. . . Joseph Smith did start a political kingdom of God and a Council of Fifty; He was made King over the organization; . . . (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer, 1966, page 104)

The Mormon Apostle Parley P. Pratt made this statement:

This Priesthood, including that of the Aaronic, holds the keys of revelation of the oracles of God to man upon the earth; the power and right to give laws and commandments to individuals, churches, rulers, nations and the world; to appoint, ordain, and establish constitutions and kingdoms; to appoint kings, presidents, governors or judges, and to ordain or anoint them to their several holy callings, also to instruct, warn, or reprove them by the word of the Lord. (Key to the Science of Theology, 1855, page 66)

Joseph Smith for President

In 1844 the “Council of Fifty” decided to run Joseph Smith for the presidency of the United States. Klaus J. Hanson states:

. . . the Council of Fifty, while seriously contemplating the possibility of emigration, also considered a rather spectacular alternative, namely, to run its leader of the presidency of the United States in the campaign of 1844 . . . Smith and the Council of Fifty seem to have taken the election quite seriously, much more so, indeed, than both Mormons and anti-Mormons have heretofore suspected. (Quest for Empire, page 74)

The Elders of the Church were actually called to electioneer for Joseph Smith. Brigham Young made this statement at a special meeting of the Elders, April 9, 1844:

It is now time to have a President of the United States. Elders will be sent to preach the Gospel and electioneer. (History of the Church, by Joseph Smith, vol. 6, page 322)

At the same meeting, Heber C. Kimball made this statement:

We are going to arrange a plan for Conferences, and we design to send Elders to all the different States to get up meetings and protracted meetings, and electioneer for Joseph to be the next President. (History of the Church, vol. 6, page 325)

Some Mormons have claimed that Joseph Smith was not serious in his attempt to run for the presidency. Klaus J. Hanson, however, makes this statement:

. . . the Council of Fifty decided to send all available elders on missions to campaign for Joseph Smith and to preach Mormonism at the same time . . . In the privacy of the Council of Fifty, Smith clearly viewed his candidacy more seriously than in public. . . . Smith’s own care in keeping the true purposes of his candidacy secret indicates that he knew that the public at large would treat him as demented if it learned of his actual hopes; but this realization also reveals that he at least knew what he was doing. . . .

If Smith had not believed his election in 1844 to be a possibility, why did he enlist the entire manpower of the church in a quixotic venture? (Quest For Empire, pages 78-79)

The attempt by Joseph Smith to become President was evidently a treasonous plot to bring the United States Government under the rule of the Priesthood. Klaus J. Hanson stated:

But what if, through a bold stroke, he could capture the United States for the kingdom? The Council of Fifty thought there might be a chance and nominated the Mormon prophet for the Presidency of the United States. (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1966, page 67)

Joseph Smith was apparently planning to reign as a king over the people of the United States. George Miller, who had been a member of the “Council of Fifty,” made this statement in a letter dated June 28, 1855:

It was further determined in Council that all the elders should set out on missions to all the States to get up an electoral ticket, and do everything in our power to have Joseph elected president. If we succeeded in making a majority of the voters converts to our faith, and elected Joseph president, in such an event the dominion of the kingdom would be forever established in the United States; and if not successful, we could fall back on Texas, and be a kingdom notwithstanding. (Letter written by George Miller, dated June 28, 1855, as quoted in Joseph Smith and World Government, by Hyrum Andrus, Salt Lake City, 1963, page 54)

Instead of going to Texas the Mormons settled in the Great Salt Lake valley. Hyrum Andrus admits the Smith and “even considered the alternative of establishing the Saints in the capacity of an independent nation, should all other alternatives fail” (Joseph Smith and World Government, page 60). Klaus J. Hanson stated:

Although the Council of Fifty never fully realized its goal of establishing the Kingdom of God as a separate nation in the Great Basin, it ceaselessly worked in that direction for as long as it seemed at all possible. . . . Although Brigham Young apparently realized in 1847 that it was impossible to cut the political threads with the United States in the near future, he did his best to render those threads as thin and weak as possible. As a result, the Council of Fifty launched the State of Deseret at a time when it was in absolute political control of the Great Basin, . . . The fact is that the Mormons had migrated to the Rockies precisely for the purpose of setting up their own government, . . . (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1966, pages 68-69)

On September 6, 1857, Hosea Stout recorded the following in his journal:

President B. Young in his Sermon declared that the thre[a]d was cut between us and the U.S. and that the Almighty recognized us as a free and independent people and that no officer apointed by goverment (sent to [crossed out]) should come and rule over us from this time forth. (On the Mormon Frontier, The Diary of Hosea Stout, edited by Juanita Brooks, vol. 2, page 636)

The Kingdom in Utah

In a footnote on page 200 of Klaus J. Hanson’s book, Quest For Empire, we find the following:

Former Bishop Andrew Cahoon, whose father Reynolds Cahoon had been a member of the Council of Fifty, testified in 1889: “The King of that Kingdom that was set up on the earth was the head of the Church. Brigham Young proclaimed himself King here in Salt Lake Valley before there was a house built, in 1847.”

Perhaps Heber C. Kimball was referring to this when he said:

The Church and kingdom to which we belong will become the kingdom of our God and his Christ, and brother Brigham Young will become President of the United States.

(Voices responded, “Amen.”)

And I tell you he will be something more; but we do not now want to give him the name: but he is called and ordained to a far greater station than that, and he is foreordained to take that station, and he has got it; and I am Vice-President, and brother Wells is the Secretary of the Interior—yes, and of all the armies in the flesh.

You don’t believe that; but I can tell you it is one of the smallest things that I can think of. You may think that I am joking; but I am perfectly willing that brother Long should write every word of it; for I can see it as naturally as I see the earth and the productions thereof. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, page 219)

The historian Hurbert Howe Bancroft made this statement concerning an incident that happened on July 24, 1857:

All eyes turned at once to Brigham . . . Gathering the people around him, he repeated the words uttered ten years before, prophesying even now that at no distant day he would himself become President of the United States, or dictate who should be President. (History of Utah, photomechanical reprint of 1889 edition, page 505)

The early Mormons accepted Brigham Young as their dictator. On April 6, 1862, Brigham Young stood before the Mormon people assembled in the Salt Lake Tabernacle and made this statement:

As formerly, I present myself before you this morning in the capacity Providence has lead me to occupy, acknowledged and sustained by you as the dictator, counsellor, and adviser of the people of God. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 9, page 267)

Heber C. Kimball made these statements:

President Young is our governor and our dictator. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, page 19)

. . . we look up to President Young as our leader, Prophet, and dictator. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, page 222)

On August 13, 1871, Brigham Young boasted:

I sometimes say to my brethren, “I have been your dictator for twenty-seven years—over a quarter of a century I have dictated this people; that ought to be some evidence that my course is onward and upward.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 14, page 205)

Under the dictatorship of Brigham Young the Mormon people had very little freedom. John Taylor, who later became the third President of the Mormon Church, stated:

Was the kingdom that the Prophets talked about, that should be set up in the latter times, going to be a Church? Yes. And a State? Yes, it was going to be both Church and State, to rule both temporally and spiritually. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, page 24)

On another occasion he stated:

We used to have a difference between Church and State, but it is all one now. Thank God, we have no more temporal and spiritual! (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, page 266)

The Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt remarked:

Ours is an Ecclesiastical Church, and an Ecclesiastical State. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, page 105)

Klaus J. Hanson makes this statement about the Mormon Kingdom:

Church and kingdom thus had come full circle. For the most part, they were separate in theory only. Ultimately, no distinction could be drawn between the two. The priesthood that controlled the church also controlled the state. (Quest of Empire, page 36)

On pages 137-138 of the same book, Klaus J. Hanson gives us this interesting information:

An examination of Utah territorial legislatures from 1851 to 1896 reveals that not until the 1880’s, when the influx of Gentiles into the territory in large numbers began to crack Mormon hegemony, did the Council of Fifty lose its political influence. . . .

Since church members followed the advice of the hierarchy in matters both spiritual and temporal, the Council never had any difficulty in assuring election of its candidates. Nominations were made by leading church authorities; absence of the secret ballot assured that only the most recalcitrant would dare oppose the official slate. Stanley S. Ivins, in a study of eighteen annual elections from 1852 to 1870, observed that “of the 96,107 votes cast, over this 18 years period, 96 per cent went to the regular candidate. And if the known Gentile ballots are eliminated, the percentage rises to 97.4.”

Casting a vote in opposition to approved candidates was severely frowned upon, but was not in and of itself grounds for disciplinary action. Running for political office without church approval, however, was a much more serious matter. In the Mormon colony of San Bernardino, California, B. F. Grouard and F. M. Van Leuven were disfellowshipped simply because they ran for political office against other church members nominated by the authorities, who, incidentally, also happened to be members of the Council of Fifty. Another case of willful opposition to the political counsel of church leaders occurred in 1854. One of the candidates nominated as representative for Salt Lake County in the legislature, Albert P. Rockwood, had incurred the dislike of a group of voters, who nominated a candidate of their own, Stephen H. Hales, in opposition. According to John Hyde, Jr., a Mormon apostate, Hales obtained the majority; “Stephen Hales was accordingly sent for by Brigham, who gave him a severe reprimand for daring to allow his name to be used as an opponent of ‘the church nomination.’” Hales was compelled to resign, and Rockwood seated instead. The most important fact of this incident, apparently unknown to Hales and his supporters, and to Hyde, was that Rockwood belonged to the Council of Fifty.

Brigham Young became the governor of the territory, and Heber C. Kimball boasted that all the members of the Legislature in Utah held the Priesthood:

It is the best legislative body there is upon the face of the earth, because they hold the Priesthood, and there is no person there only those who hold it—the leading men of Israel. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, page 129)

The Mormon people were taught to all vote one way, John Taylor stated:

In political matters we are pretty well united. At our elections we generally vote as a unit. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, page 355)

Brigham Young was very opposed to democratic elections. On April 8, 1871, he disparaged democratic elections:

In 1853 Dr. Bernhisel was chosen as a delegate to Congress in the Mormon Tabernacle. Brigham Young stated:

If we wish to make political speeches, and it is necessary, for the best interest of the cause and Kingdom of God, to make them on the Sabbath, we do it. . . .

Brother Kimball has seconded the motion, that Doctor Bernhisel be sent back to Washington, as our delegate. All who are in favor of it, raise your right hands. (More than two thousand hands were at once seen above the heads of the congregation.)

This has turned into a caucus meeting. It is all right. I would call for an opposite vote if I thought any person would vote. I will try it, however. (Not a single hand was raised in opposition.) (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, page 188)

In The Mormon Kingdom we hope to be able to give a very detailed study of the Mormon struggle for power. Volume one will deal with the Mormon Church in New York, Missouri and Ohio. In other volumes we hope to deal with the Church in Illinois and in Utah. We feel that this will be a very important work and that all of our readers should have a copy.

---

---