In Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? pages 32-49, we show that Joseph Smith was involved in the practice of money-digging for buried treasure and that he used a stone which he placed in a hat to divine where the treasure was located. In 1826 he was brought to trial for this practice and was found guilty. Mormon scholars had always denied these accusations until August, 1971, when Wesley P. Walters found the original of Justice Albert Neely's bill which referred to the trial of "Joseph Smith The Glass Looker." Dr. Clandestine accepts the reality of this document but refuses to face the serious implications of the discovery:

"In drawing conclusions from the evidence they do present, the Tanners are often guilty of the non sequitur: in other words, the conclusions arrived at are not supported by the evidence. For example, they state (on page 33) that the recently discovered bill of charges from the 1826 trial of Joseph Smith 'proves that the published court record is authentic.' The published 'court record' appeared in contradictory versions in 1831, 1873, 1877, and 1883, several of which allegedly quote detailed testimony from this trial. The Tanners' statement would lead the reader to believe that the bill of charges substantiates the entire published versions of the trial (including all alleged testimony--p, 34), whereas these recent discoveries verify quite limited facts: there was a trial in 1826 in which Joseph Smith was described as 'The Glass looker' and charged with a misdemeanor, twelve witnesses were subpoenaed, a mittimus was issued, and the total court costs were $2.68." (Jerald and Sandra Tanner's Distorted View of Mormonism, page 18)

Dr. Clandestine has certainly not done his homework regarding this matter, and therefore he has reached on erroneous conclusion. He states that "The published 'court record' appeared in contradictory versions in 1831, 1873, 1877, and 1883, several of which allegedly quote detailed testimony from this trial." Dr. Clandestine could never have made this statement if he had even briefly examined the original publications to which he refers. To begin with, the 1831 account which he speaks of is not a printing of the "court record" at all; it is merely a statement by A. W. Benton of Bainbridge, N.Y. Mr. Benton said that Joseph Smith "was about the country in the character of a glass-looker: pretending, by means of a certain stone, or glass, which he put in a hat, to be able to discover lost goods, hidden treasures, mines of gold and silver, &c.... At length the public,... had him arrested as a disorderly person, tried and condemned before a court of Justice." (Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate, April 9, 1831, p. 120)

Dr. Clandestine is again in error when he refers to the publication of the "court record" in 1877. This is a newspaper account of the trial which appeared in the Chenango Union under the date of May 3, 1877. It is not a printing of the "court record" as Dr. Clandestine would have the reader believe, but only the reminiscences of Dr. W.P. Purple who was present at the trial. It is a valuable piece of historical writing, but it does not purport to be a reproduction of any part of the written "court record." (For a complete reprint and study of Dr. Purple's account see our book Joseph Smith and Money Digging, pp. 23-29.)

While Dr. Clandestine has struck out twice with regard to the documents, he is right in referring to the 1873 version as a printing of the "court record." It appeared in Fraser's Magazine, Feb. 1873. The 1883 printing is also a copy of the "court record" and is found in New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 1883, Vol. 2. Now, while Dr. Clandestine claims that the accounts of the trial printed in 1831 and 1877 are reproductions of the "court record," he overlooks the fact that the "court record" was also printed in the Utah Christian Advocate in January 1886.

When we compare the three printings of the "court record" we find that they are essentially the same. One short paragraph (40 words) appears to have been accidentally omitted in Fraser's Magazine, but it certainly does not make any substantial difference in the trial and is found in both of the other printings. All three of the printings were copied from the original pages of the document. We feel that the Mormon Church would give almost anything to have the three accounts of the First Vision by Joseph Smith in such harmony.

Since Dr. Clandestine has declared that the printings of the "court record" are contradictory, we will compare the first part of the 1873 printing with that published in 1883. The first part is the most important because it contains Joseph Smith's testimony. In the 1873 printing we read:

"State of New York v. Joseph Smith.

"Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor.

"Prisoner brought before Court March 20,1826, Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed in looking for mines, but the major part had been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them. That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business." (Fraser's Magazine, Feb. 1973, p. 229)

The 1883 printing of the "court record" reads essentially the same:

"People of State of New York vs. Joseph Smith. Warrant issued upon oath of Peter G. Bridgman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor. Prisoner brought into court March 20 (1826). Prisoner examined. Says that he came from town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowell in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed in looking for mines, but the major part had been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school; that he had a certain stone, which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold-mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and informed him where he could find those treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them: that at Palmyra he pretended to tell, by looking at this stone, where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra he had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was, of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account its injuring his health, especially his eyes--made them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having any thing to do with this business," (New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. 2, p. 1576)

We would like to ask Dr. Clandestine this question: where do you find any important difference between these two printings of the "court record"? We feel that it is a misrepresentation to say that they are contradictory. A number of Mormon writers have made this claim, and Dr. Clandestine, who has apparently never taken the time to examine the documents, has followed them into a serious error.

Dr. Clandestine accuses us of using too much repetition, but when we see how he skips over things we are even more convinced that some repetition is necessary. If Dr. Clandestine will reexamine Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? he will see his idea that he can accept the authenticity of Justice Albert Neely's bill and yet reject the printed "court record" is untenable. On page 34 we offer this information:

"The fact that the document says that Joseph Smith was a 'GLASS LOOKER' fits very well with the published version of the trial. In fact, this statement alone seems to show that the published account of the trial is authentic. Besides this, however, Neely's bill provides additional evidence. It states that the trial took place on 'March 20, 1826,' and this is precisely the date found in the published account of the trial: 'Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826, (Fraser's Magazine, Feb. 1873, p. 229) In Albert Neely's bill the fee for this trial is listed as '2.68,' and this is the exact figure found in the printed record: 'Costs:...$2.68."'

The reason the 1826 trial is so devasting [sic] to the claims of Mormonism is that it links Joseph Smith to the occult. According to Joseph Smith's own father-in-law, Isaac Hale, Joseph translated the Book of Mormon by the same means that he used to search for buried treasures: "I first became acquainted with Joseph Smith, Jr. in November, 1825. He was at that time in the employ of a set of men who were called 'money-diggers;' and his occupation was that of seeing, or pretending to see by means of a stone placed in his hat, and his hat closed over his face.... The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret, was the same as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, and his hat over his face, while the Book of Plates were at the same time hid in the woods!" (The Susquehanna Register, May 1, 1834)

David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, frankly admitted that Joseph Smith placed the 'seer stone' into a hat to translate the Book of Mormon:

"I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing.... Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man." (An Address To All Believers In Christ, by David Whitmer, Richmond, Missouri, 1887, p. 12)

For additional material concerning this matter see Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? pp. 41-46.