William Marks is considered one of the most fascinating figures in Nauvoo Mormonism, as the Nauvoo Stake President and a member of Joseph Smith’s inner circle. He later became a leader of the RLDS Church, serving in their First Presidency, and was the individual who ordained Joseph Smith III to be the President of the High Priesthood of the RLDS Church. His testimony concerning Nauvoo polygamy is significant, as an insider who was close to Joseph Smith yet later rejected Joseph Smith’s Nauvoo teachings. William Marks bore testimony that Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith taught and introduced polygamy, but William Marks also believed that Joseph Smith repented of practicing plural marriage shortly before his death and wanted to remove it from the Church.
  Marks made a number of public and private statements regarding plural marriage to others during his lifetime. This page will attempt to provide a comprehensive list of all known statements made by William Marks about polygamy in Nauvoo.

“I always believed the work was of Divine origin, and that Joseph Smith was called of God to establish the church among the Gentiles. During my administration in the church I saw and heard of many things that was practiced, and taught that I did not believe to be of God; but I continued to do and teach such principles as we plainly revealed, as the law of the church, for I thought that pure and holy principles only would have a tendency to benefit mankind. Therefore when the doctrine of polygamy was introduced into the church as a principle of exaltation, I took a decided stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular, with many of the leading ones of the church. I was also witness of 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.

Joseph, however, became convinced before his death that he had done wrong; for about three weeks before his death, I met him one morning in the street, and he said to me, Brother Marks, I have something to communicate to you, we retired to a by-place, and set down together, when he said; ‘We are a ruined people.’ I asked, how so? He said; ‘This doctrine of polygamy, or Spiritual-wife system, that has been taught and practiced among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow. I have been deceived,’ said he, ‘in reference to its practice; it is wrong; it is a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down, and its practice stopped in the church.’ ‘Now,’ said he. ‘Brother Marks, you have not received this doctrine and how glad I am. I want you to go into the high council and I will have charges preferred against all who practice this doctrine; and,’ said he, ‘I will go into the stand, and preach against it, with all my might, and in this way we may rid the church of this damnable heresy.’ But before this plan could be put into execution, the mob began to gather, and our attention, necessarily, was directed to them. I again met Joseph when he was about to start for Carthage. He said to me, ‘Bro. Marks, I have become convinced since I last saw you, that it is my duty to go to Carthage and deliver myself up as a lamb to the slaughter.’ I mentioned the circumstances of these conversations with Joseph to many of the brethren, immediately after his death; but the only effect it had was to raise a report that Brother Marks was about to apostatize: and my statement of the conversation in reference to the practice of polygamy, was pronounced false by the Twelve, and disbelieved; but I now testify that the above statements are verily true, and correct.” (William Marks letter, 15 June 1853, Zion’s Harbinger and Baneemy’s Organ vol. 3 <7 July 1853> page 53)

“Brother Sheen: —I feel desirous to communicate through your periodical a few suggestions made manifest to me by the Spirit of God, in relation to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. About the first of June, 1844, (situated as I was at that time, being Presiding Elder of the Stake at Nauvoo, and by appointment the presiding officer of the High Council,) I had a very good opportunity to know the affairs of the church; and my convictions at that time were, that the church in a great measure had departed from the pure principles and doctrines of Jesus Christ. I felt much troubled in mind about the condition of the church. I prayed earnestly to my heavenly Father to show me something in regard to it, when I was wrapped in vision, and it was shown me by the Spirit that the top or branches had overcome the root, in sin and wickedness, and the only way to cleanse and purify it was to disorganize it and in due time the Lord would reorganize it again. There were many other things suggested to my mind, but the lapse of time has erased them from my memory.

A few days after this occurrence I met with Brother Joseph. He said that he wanted to converse with me on the affairs of the church, and we retired by ourselves. I will give his words verbatim, for they are indelibly stamped upon my mind. He said he had desired for a long time to have a talk with me on the subject of polygamy. He said it eventually would prove the overthrow of the church, and we should soon be obliged to leave the United States, unless it could be speedily put down. He was satisfied that it was a cursed doctrine, and that there must be every exertion made to put it down. He said that he would go before the Congregation and proclaim against it, and I must go into the High Council, and he would prefer charges against those in transgression, and I must sever them from the church, unless they made ample satisfaction. There was much more said, but this was the substance. The mob commenced to gather about Carthage in a few days after, therefore there was nothing done concerning it.

After the Prophet’s death, I made mention of this conversation to several, hoping and believing that it would have a good effect; but to my great disappointment, it was soon rumored about that Brother Marks was about to apostatize, and that all that he said about the conversation with the Prophet was a tissue of lies. From that time I was satisfied that the church would be disorganized, and the death of the Prophet and Patriarch tended to confirm me in that opinion. From that time I was looking for a reorganization of the church and kingdom of God. I feel thankful that I have lived to again behold the day, when the basis of the church is the revelations of Jesus Christ. which is the only sure foundation to build upon. I feel to invite all my brethren to become identified with us, for the Lord is truly in our midst.
WILLIAM MARKS.
SHABBONA, DeKalb County, Illinois, Oct. 23, 1859.” (William Marks letter, 23 October 1859, in The True Latter Day Saints’ Herald vol. 1 no. 1 <January 1860> pages 22–23)

“The Question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the Doctrine of polygamy. President [William] Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it, and after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and He Marks felt it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.” (RLDS First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve meeting, 1 May 1865, Community of Christ Library-Archives; quoted in Richard P. Howard, The Church through the Years – Volume 2: The Reorganization comes of Age, 1860-1992 <1992> page 75; also quoted in Brian Hales, Joseph Smith’s Polygamy: Volume 2: History page 247)

“I must give you a short history of my experience at Nauvoo before I left. In a prayer meeting some six weeks before there was any appearance of polygamy, we were warned by the spirit that the Lord was going to endow the church with the greatest endowment that was ever bestowed on man, and the evil was much displeased with it and determined to prevent it, and would pour out the spirit of adultery upon the whole church which was the easiest spirit to take there was in the world and he would very near succeed in over throwing the church but would not quite succeed and giving directions how we might know when it began and ended with a long exhortation to the saints to beware of that spirit. This warning sank deep into my mind and did keep me on the look out and another thing decided the thing in my mind. Brother Joseph came to me about two weeks before he was killed and says: — ‘Brother Marks, I want to talk with you.’ We went by ourselves and he said ‘This polygamy business in the church must be stopped or the church is ruined and we can’t stay in the United States. I have been deceived in this thing and it must be put down. I thought it would be an advantage to mankind, but I find it proves a curse. I must go into the high council and he would prefer charges against those in adultery and I must cut them off, and he would go on the stand and preach against it, and thought that by so doing we might put it down[’] but the mob soon commenced gathering and there was nothing done. I told some of my friends what Brother Joseph had told me. ‘O, Brother Marks has apostatized, it is only some of his lies.’ I thought [if] that was all they cared about it they might take their course and I would take mine. These are all solemn truths though there was much other conversation at that time that I have not written.” (William Marks letter to Hyrum Faulk and Josiah Butterfield, 1 October 1865, Community of Christ Library-Archives)

“In the morning visited Father Marks, who interested me very much with a recital of things that are past. In speaking of polygamy, he said, ‘Near two weeks before Joseph was killed he told me that I was the only one of the authorities of the Church not in polygamy; that polygamy was an evil, and that in it he had been deceived. I ask him why he did not speak to Brigham or some of the twelve about it, and he said that they would kill him if he did. He told me, I must deal with those in polygamy, if they would not repent and reform…’ He also said That ‘Joseph and Hyrum went to Montrose, intending to take a boat and leave; but they returned.’ He, Bro Marks, met them on the Nauvoo side, and Joseph told him they were intending to leave, but the Lord told him to return, and give himself up, and that if he went away, he should become a castaway. He then added, ‘I have come back to deliver myself up to atone for the crimes I have committed, and I shall like go like a lamb to the slaughter.’

I ask Bro Marks, if Joseph was in polygamy? He said, Yes he and Dr. Bennett were the first that went into it. Speaking of events before after Joseph’s death, he said, I attended one night when a few were to receive endowments, and he spoke as I have never heard any other man speak. Bro Hyrum he ordained to be his successor, remarking, My course is about finished on earth – I have done all the Lord wants me to do. He then called on Bro Hyrum and myself and we ordained him to be a king, and Sister Emma to be a queen. There were many things. I did not under-stand in that meeting.

After Joseph’s death, I wrote to Sidney Rigdon, who had been Joseph’s first counselor, and he came to Nauvoo. I called a meeting of the Church, and Sidney presented his claims. The church seemed generally to fall in with him; but he did things too much in secret. He ordained me to be his first counselor; and everything he did in organizing was done in secret meetings in a room at my house. He was so unwise, however, that confidence was lost in him; and when the twelve returned from their missions, they presented their claims and were accepted.” (Mark Forscutt Journal, 24-25 May 1867, BYU Special Collections, credit to John Dinger for discovering this statement.)

“John Hawleys testimony of what Br Marks said to him in July 1868 at Plano Kendall Co Illinois on the Subject of the Poligamy revelattion, I John H was a fol[l]ower of B Young at that time, when the conversation came up between us on the Subject of the Revelation of 43 on Poligamy, he told me he knew the very day that Revilation was given, he Said one morning Br Hiram, was walking down the Streat pritty fast, and I ha[i]led him and Said Br Hiram which way, and he toald me he was going downe to Josephs, and wase going to get a Revelation on Patriarchal mar[ri]age to day if we can, and in the eavning he came along back and handed him the Revelation and asked him to call the High Counsel together and read it to them, and said Br Marks did So and asked them to express their beleafe or disbleaf of it, and the high Counsel all said they beleaved it to be of God, but he did not and from that time on he said the leading men in the Church looked upon him as on the eav of apostasy. but times went on tell Joseph saw it would be the means of the distruction of the Church, and he came to me and said, Br Marks I wish to talk with you on the Subject of the Revelation on Poligamy we have got to put that Revelation down or it will be the means of the distruction of the Church, and Said he, you must go in the high Counsel and I will prefer Charges againce all that have gon into Poligamy, and if they do not repent you must cut them off, but I said to him, Br Joseph it is not my plase and I refused to obey his Counsel, and he Marks said this was the first Counsel that Joseph gave to me that I refused to obey, I toald him he was the one to put it downe as he was the one that it was given thrue, and some time elapsed when he came to me the 2nd time and toald me the Church would go to distruction if we did not put it down, and we must proclame againse it, Some more time passed by and I met Joseph on the beach of the River and hear we had our 3rd talk on the Revelation and he toald me that this wicked pract[ic]es had gon[e] to[o] fare to try to put a stop to it, and I must now give my life for this Revelation, I am now going to Carthage and deliver my Self up to the Slaughter, this is Br Marks testimony to me as near as I can remember[.] Jno Hawley” (“The Life of John Pierce Hawley Written from Memory,” written from January 1st 1885 according to 1st page, Last entry 1889, Community of Christ Library-Archives, pages 95–96)

“Brother [William] Marks said this to me personally, referring to his talk with President Smith upon this conversation, set out in [the October 23, 1859] letter he wrote on this [first issue of the True Latter Day Saints] Herald. He has not given it in full as he did to me. I said to him, ‘Did you, when you had that conversation with Brother Joseph, think he had been in any way mixed up in polygamy, or had favored it?’ He replied, ‘No. I had more confidence in him at that time than I ever had in all my life before, and was satisfied that he was pure from that gross crime.’

‘I had been troubled over the condition of the Church for some time, and been fearful that Joseph did not bring the pressure against some men in the Church that he should have done. You see, from John C. Bennett’s time there had been so many rumors going the rounds, I was fearful that there might be something in the stories afloat that might implicate Joseph. But Joseph was so free and positive in his denunciation of polygamy in every form, that I took courage; and I could see Joseph was in earnest and felt just as I did about it. But before the Sunday following our conversation, Joseph was having his suit and he was killed before he had a chance to commence his investigation against those whom he had suspicioned of teaching it privily. But I thought he had been deceived in some of the men and elders of the Church, and had too much confidence in some of them. But I guess it was to be so, to fulfill the Scriptures in relation to the latter-day apostasy.’

I then said, ‘Brother Marks, did you ever see the revelation on polygamy before it was published in 1852 by Mr. Pratt?’ Marks emphatically replied, ‘No, never.’

‘You were president of the stake at Nauvoo, and if Joseph had such a revelation, would you not have been privileged, according to custom, to have seen it or heard of it?’ He replied, ‘Yes, without a doubt. There was no such revelation in existence when I lived in Nauvoo, just after Joseph’s death; Brigham Young would have showed it to me when I opposed his measures. But he never pretended to any such thing to me — that there was such a revelation on the subject from Joseph’.” (Edmund Briggs, “Early History of the Reorganization,” published in Saints’ Herald vol. 50 <22 April 1903> pages 363–364)

Note: It should be observed that Edmund C. Briggs, writing as a church leader and apologist for the RLDS Church, puts words into William Marks’ mouth that directly contradict multiple earlier accounts of William Marks that stated that Joseph was involved with polygamy and that Hyrum read a revelation about polygamy to the Nauvoo High Council.

“Referring again to the ‘Spiritual Wife System,’ I feel best satisfied to say, that since our return from Nauvoo I have returned with several Mormons, who admit, that Joseph Smith, and a number of others who are now leaders among the people, were involved in those immoralities which made them a reproach to religion; but that Joseph Smith repented, and desired to promote again among his people the practices of purity and virtue which they had so grossly violated. For this purpose, he published a revelation which he said he had received, and therefore I suppose his mother thought that if he had lived, he would not have approved of the system which he was then prepared to condemn.” (Correspondence dated September 1846 in the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer vol. 3 <3 October 1846> Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

“We have here the facts as they have transpired an as they will continue to transpire in relation to this subject [of polygamy]. The death of the prophet [Joseph Smith] is one fact that has been realized although he abhorred and repented of this iniquity before his death. This branch of the subject we shall leave to some of our brethren, who are qualified to explain it satisfactorily.

…The Salt Lake apostles also excuse themselves by saying that Joseph Smith taught the spiritual-wife doctrine, but this excuse is as weak as their excuse concerning the ancient Kings and Patriarchs. Joseph Smith repented of his connection with this doctrine, and said that it was of the devil. He caused the revelations on that subject to be burned, and when he voluntarily came to Nauvoo and resigned himself into the arms of his enemies, he said that he was going to Carthage to die. At that time he also said, that if it had not been for that accursed spiritual wife doctrine, he would not have come to that. By his conduct at that time he was proved the sincerity of his repentance, of his profession as a prophet. If Abraham and Jacob, by repentance, can obtain salvation and exaltation, so can Joseph Smith.” (Isaac Sheen, “Polygamy,” True Latter Day Saints’ Herald vol. 1 no. 1 <January 1860> pages 9, 27)

“The brethren were not prepared to receive the doctrine. Brother Kimball and others were in that council. Joseph had meetings in his house time after time and month after month, every Sunday evening. Joseph was worn out with it, but as to his denying any such thing, I never knew that he denied the doctrine of polygamy. Some [i.e. William Marks] have said that he did, but I do not believe he ever did.” — Brigham Young (Complete Discourses of Brigham Young <8 October 1866> page 2382)

“One third of the Council refused to accept it? One of the three was Wm Marks, (who by the way stated that he never saw such a paper nor heard it read).” (Joseph Smith III letter to John Henry Smith, 6 January 1886, Community of Christ Library–Archives)

“William Smith, one of the Twelve, you may understand ‘things unlawful to utter,’ as did Paul; you may, like Paul, ‘speak in parables,’ but you have said to me in language that cannot be mistaken that the Book of Mormon provided for the introduction of the doctrine you have been teaching in your “Elder’s Pocket Companion” written in 1844; you have said further to me— you have said IT HAS BEEN COMMANDED.

Many may be deceived by the sophistry of Joseph the younger [denying his father’s practice of polygamy], but the one man who is picking your words into type will go before the throne of God fully assure[d] that you then had a knowledge of the Celestial Revelation that was not given to the world until August 29, 1852. The world may not heed my words, but when standing before the throne of God in Eternal judgment, William Smith and William Marks shall be my witnesses, and if both of you have lied to me here in time, God help you both then and there in Eternity.” (John Sheen, Polygamy: Or the Veil Lifted <1889> page 21)

“Presidents [William] Marks and [Austin] Cowles were among the good and solid men of the age. Both were opposed to polygamy, but Brother Cowles was far more outspoken, and energetic in his opposition to that doctrine than almost any other man in Nauvoo. In fact, I think his opposition excelled all others. Hyrum opposed it at first, but afterwards became its warmest advocate, to my certain knowledge.

…Gen. [Wilson] Law and myself employed President Wm. Marks to take us in his family carriage to Chicago, Ill., where we took a steamer for Ohio and Penn. On our way to Chicago the subject of spiritual wives, or polygamy, was freely discussed, when President [William] Marks also told us that a revelation had been received on the subject, or, to use his own words, ‘They have got a revelation on the subject.’ From Bro. Marks’ testimony and what I had been told in Nauvoo, before leaving home, as firmly believed that Joseph Smith had given a revelation on polygamy as that he had ever given one on any subject in his life. Notwithstanding the revelation every member of our party were opposed to the doctrine.

We returned home from that mission the latter part of November, 1843. Soon after our return, I was told that when we were gone, the revelation on polygamy was presented to, and read in the High Council in Nauvoo, three of the members which refused to accept it as from the Lord, viz. Presidents Marks and Cowles, and counsellor Leonard Soby. At that time and place, and on that occasion, President Austin Cowles resigned his position as one of the Presidents of the High Council, which necessarily included his presidency of the church at Nauvoo. After that he was looked upon as a seceder, and no longer held a prominent place in the church although morally and religiously speaking, he was one of the best men in the place.” — Ebenezer Robinson (“Items of Personal History by the Editor No. 21”, The Return vol. 3 no. 2 <February 1891> pages 29–30)

“724: Did you ever know one William Marks? A: Yes sir, I was acquainted with him.
725: When were you acquainted with him? A: I was acquainted with him when I was a boy in Nauvoo.
726: When you were a boy in Nauvoo you were acquainted with William Marks?A: Yes sir, I got acquainted with him, but I was acquainted with him after that. I first knew him when I was a boy.
727: Where did you know him afterwards? A: I knew him in Plano after we left Nauvoo. I knew him then in Plano, Illinois.
728: When was that? A: Well I was there in 1868. It was in 1868 that I saw him in Plano.
729: Then when did you see him after that? A:William Marks?
730: Yes sir? A: I never saw him after that.
731: Did you ever talk with him about the church? A: Yes sir I believe so.
732: Where did you talk with him about the church? A: I talked with him some in Nauvoo. I talked with him some there about the church.
733: Did you ever talk with him about the church, and about Joseph Smith in connection with the practice of polygamy? A: No sir I never introduced the subject of Polygamy to him or he to me. Well no I believe we did too, – and I believe there was something said about it between us.
734: You said you never introduced the subject of polygamy to him? A: I never did.
735: Did he introduce it to you? A: Well slightly I believe he did.
736: Then why do you make your answer way, – that you, – that he never introduced the subject to you when you know he did introduce it to you? A: Well he said like this that he knew the thing was practiced, but he did not know how far it was practiced.
737: By the “thing that was practiced” he referred to, and you mean the practice of polygamy? A: Yes sir.
738: There at Nauvoo? A: Yes sir.
739: At what time? [Objection]
740: At what time did he ref to as to polygamy being practiced at Nauvoo? A: At what time?
741: Yes sir? A: Well it was before Joseph’s death?
742: Well did he say it was before Joseph’s death? A: What is that?
743: Well did he say it was first practiced at Nauvoo? A: I don’t know, – he said, __
744: Well do ahead and make your answer? A: He told me that Joseph came to him at one time, and said to him, “Brother Marks I am glad that you have not received the teachings of this doctrine, for now we have got to go to work” he said “and put down this wicked practice, and I want you to call the – High Counkil together, and I will prefer charges against these members of the church who have charges against these members of the church who have entered into this practice of plural marriage, and if they do not repent they will be expelled from the church”. Now that is what he said to me, and shortly after that he was arrested and taken to Nauvoo, – I mean to Carthage. He said “that he had been approached about this matter, – that is about the matter of plural marriage and he had refused to have anything to do with it”, and that he wanted the High Council called together to take action on the cases of the members of the church who had violated the marriage law in taking plural wives, and that he would prefer charges against them.
745: Who said that? A: William Marks.
746: That is what he told you? A: Yes sir, that is what he told me that Joseph Smith told him before his death.
747: Why did he say he refused to have anything to do with it? A: Because he would have nothing to do with practicing it.
748: Did he say anything with reference to Joseph personally practicing it? A: No sir.
749: Did he say anything about Joseph knowing that it was practiced? A: no sir he said nothing further than that they had this conversation about it, and that Joseph said there were persons practicing it, and that they, would be cut off from the church if they did not stop it at once, and repent of their wicked practice, and that he would prefer charges against them before the high council, but he was murdered before he had time to do it, – that is what Marks told me.
750: Was there a revelation with reference to polygamy spoken of?[Objection]
751: Had the revelation ever been spoken of at that time. A: I don’t know. There was no revelation spoken of at that time between us.
752: Well when was the revelation first spoken of? A: It never was spoken of by me at all.
753: Was there anything said in reference to a statement of Joseph Smith that he had been deceived in that doctrine, or any statement to that effect? A: No sir I don’t remember that he said anything about that. I don’t think there was anything said about that, but he said that Joseph said there was certain things practiced in the church, and if it was not put down it would be the fall or ruin of the church, and therefore it had to be stopped.
754: What was that? A: He mean that those who were practicing these practice, –
755: Well just state what he said, and don’t place a construction on what he said? A: Do you want what Marks said to me that Joseph said to him? He said to Marks, so Marks told me, – “I want you to call the High Council together, and all those who have taken plural wives, I will prefer charges against, – I will prefer charges against all those who have gone into that practice, and they must be tried, and if they don’t confess their guilt, and repent they must be out off the church”.
756: Have you not at some time here to fore stated that Joseph Smith, – that it was understood by Marks as related to you in that conversation by Marks, that Joseph Smith sanctioned the practice of polygamy? A: No sir.
757: You did not say that? A: I did not.
758: And that you swear to positively? A: No sir, – no man has ever heard me say so.
759: Then you have made that statement? A: No sir. .” (John Hawley Testimony, Temple Lot Case, United States Testimony 1892, MS 1160, LDS Archives)

Note: John Hawley in this public testimony on behalf of the RLDS Church contradicts his private earlier autobiographical account regarding William Marks both telling him about Hyrum reading the revelation to the High Council, and Marks telling him that Joseph Smith was involved with practicing plural marriage. During Cross examination there seemed to be an indication that John Hawley had prior to this said otherwise, with the question being asked of him “Have you not at some time here to fore stated...that it was understood by Marks as related to you in that conversation by Marks, that Joseph Smith sanctioned the practice of polygamy,” to which Hawley totally denies making any different prior statement regarding it.

“32 I was acquainted with William Marks when I was a boy in Nauvoo. I knew him in Plano after we left Nauvoo; that was in 1868 that I saw him in Plano. I never saw him after that. Yes, sir, I talked with him about the church, talked with him some in Nauvoo. I never introduced the subject of polygamy to him or he to me, but there was something said about it between us. He said that he knew polygamy was practiced, but that he didn’t know how far it was practiced there at Nauvoo. I don’t know that he stated when it was first practiced there at Nauvoo. He told me that Joseph Smith came to him at one time and said to him:—

33 Brother Marks, I am glad that you have not received the teaching of this doctrine, for now we have to go to work and put down this wicked practice, and I want you to call the High Council together and I will prefer charges against these members of the church who have entered into this practice of plural marriage, and if they do not repent, they will be expelled from the church. That was what he said to me, and shortly after that he was arrested and taken to Carthage.

34 He said that he had been approached about this matter, this matter of plural marriage, and he had refused to have anything to do with it, and he wanted the High Council called together to take action on the cases of the members of the church who had violated the marriage law, in taking plural wives, and that he would prefer charges against them. That was what William Marks told me in 1868. He said that was what Joseph Smith told him before his death.

He didn’t say anything further than that he and Joseph Smith had this conversation that I have detailed, and that Joseph Smith said there were persons practicing it, and that they would be cut off from the church if they did not stop it at once and repent of their wicked practice, and that he would prefer charges against them before the High Council; but he was murdered before he had time to do it. That is what Marks told me. There was no revelation spoken of at that time between Marks and I. It was never spoken of between us at all at any time.” (Complainant’s Abstract of Pleading and Evidence <1893> pages 461–462)

“I thought I must not go back to Naperville until I had seen Brother [William] Marks, as father was well acquainted with him in Nauvoo and I had often seen him myself. So I went to his house and introduced myself to him and he seemed glad to hear from many in Utah with whom we were both acquainted. The old gentleman was quite feeble, having passed through great trouble and a good many years, but he seemed to be glad to tell me of many things that had transpired in his Mormon life. He gave me a full history of the revelation on polygamy about as he has stated it in the Baneemy paper, supposed to be his own production. He also said he did not believe the church would be of much power in the land till the churches came together, but said they would never come together with polygamy. We had about two hours’ talk and visited very pleasantly[.]” (Journal of History vol. 4 <1911> pages 230–231)

“...and also, the revelation on polygamy; I could see it was a contradiction to what was revealed before through Joseph Smith, and I threw that to one side as not being profitable for me, let it come through what channel it may have come to the people. I really believed that it was given by Joseph Smith, by my understanding was then and now that I could not in reality serve two masters, so I passed it by.” (Journal of History vol. 4 <1911> page 238)

  John Hawley’s testimony and the RLDS First Presidency minutes both independently record William Marks talking about the “revelation on polygamy” being read to the Nauvoo High Council by Hyrum Smith in 1843. They corroborate each other and so are compelling evidence supporting D&C 132 was indeed read to the Nauvoo High Council. Those records are also supported by Ebenezer Robinson recalling William Marks telling him in the summer of 1843 that he knew there was a revelation on polygamy.
  William Marks’ 1853 letter, 1865 letter, 1867 statement to Mark Forscutt, and John Hawley’s recollection all implicate Joseph Smith as introducing plural marriage. William Marks’ 1865 letter recalls that Joseph Smith told him regarding polygamy “I thought it would be an advantage to mankind, but I find it proves a curse.” Hawley recalled Marks responded to Joseph that he wouldn’t obey the order to prefer charges against those practicing polygamists because “I toald him he was the one to put it downe as he was the one that it was given thrue.” Mark Forscutt also directed records in his journal asking Marks if Joseph Smith practiced polygamy: “I ask Bro Marks, if Joseph was in polygamy? He said, Yes he and Dr. Bennett were the first that went into it.”
  William Marks’ 1853 letter states “when the doctrine of polygamy was introduced into the church as a principle of exaltation, I took a decided stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular, with many of the leading ones of the church” shortly before mentioning that Joseph Smith had “introduction (secretly) of a kingly form of government in which Joseph suffered himself to be ordained a king” (referring to the Council of Fifty) which Marks said he also disagreed with. William Marks also told Mark Forscutt about the temple ordinances being conferred, in speaking of “one night when a few were to receive endowments” and that same day (September 28, 1843) William Marks and Hyrum Smith performed Joseph and Emma’s second anointing:

“Speaking of events before after Joseph’s death, he said, I attended one night when a few were to receive endowments, and he spoke as I have never heard any other man speak. Bro Hyrum he ordained to be his successor, remarking, My course is about finished on earth – I have done all the Lord wants me to do. He then called on Bro Hyrum and myself and we ordained him to be a king, and Sister Emma to be a queen. There were many things. I did not under-stand in that meeting.”

  William Marks’ 1853 letter, 1859 letter, 1865 letter, statement to Mark Forscutt, and conversation with John Hawley all state that Joseph Smith turned against plural marriage before his death and approached William Marks desiring his help to have it removed from the Church. While William Marks is an extremely credible witness regarding the details he told others about Joseph and Hyrum involving polygamy, it seems possible that he exaggerated the language of Joseph Smith’s alleged repentance for polygamy shortly before his death in June 1844.
   One problem with taking William Marks’ claim about Joseph repenting at face value is we know from William Clayton’s diary and William Law’s diary that Joseph was willing to pretend to be against polygamy or pretend to give up polygamy to try to reconcile with others and avoid controversy:

“This A.M. Joseph told me that since E[mma] came back from St. Louis she had resisted the P[resthood] in toto and he had to tell her he would relinquish all for her sake. She said she would [have] given him E[liza] and E[mily] P[artridge], but he knew if he took them she would pitch on him and obtain a divorce and leave him. He however told me he should not relinquish anything. O God deliver thy servant from iniquity and bondage.” (An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton <16 August 1843> page 117)

“After we had got on the road he began to tell me that E[mma] was turned quite friendly and kind. She had been anointed and he also had been a[nointed] K[ing]. He said that it was her advice that I should keep M[argaret] at home and it was also his council. Says he just keep her at home and brook it and if they raise trouble about it and bring you before me I will give you an awful scourging and probably cut you off from the church and then I will baptize you and set you ahead as good as ever.” (An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton <19 October 1843> page 122)

“Hyrum Smith was here a few days ago. He beg’d for peace; we told him of the corrupt operation which had been practiced upon us; he could not deny it, but said he was sorry as we had always been good friends to him and Joseph and done so much good for the church &c. &c. …I told them to cease their abominations, for they were from Hell & that I knew it. He said they were not doing anything in the plurality of wife business now, and that he had published a piece against it; when I came to example the piece referred to [in the Times and Seasons, 15 March 1844 issue] I found that it amounted to this, that no man should preach or practice such things unless by revelation (of course through Hyrum or Joseph). I told Hyrum that we stood on the defensive, we would defend the truth, we would defend ourselves both in character and in person.” (William Law Diary, 29 March 1844, in Lyndon Cook, William Law pages 48–49)

“Since Conference Almon Babbit came to me, and said, that Joseph Smith wished a reconciliation and that if I would let all drop and say nothing about it, and be friendly, he would restore me to my office of the first Presidency and raise me higher than ever, & would send me a writing to that effect. I told Mr. Babbit that I could not be bought, that if J. Smith wanted reconciliation with me he must make public acknowledgement and cease from his abominations &c.” (William Law Diary, 15 April 1844, in Lyndon Cook, William Law page 50)

“May 13. This day Sidney Rigdon came to my house said that he came fully authorized to negotiate terms of peace. I told him to make his proposition. He said it was that if we would let all difficulties drop that we (my wife Jane Law, R. D. Roster and myself[)] should be restored to our standing in the Church and to all our offices, and they would publish it in the papers. We told him that we had not been cut off from the Church legally, and therefore did not ask to be restored. He said he knew that, he knew the proceedings were illegal and very wrong, and said they would publish that fact to the world if we won’t be satisfied. He said they wanted peace. I told him that if they wanted peace they could have it on the following conditions, That Joseph Smith would acknowledge publicly that he had taught and practised the doctrine of the plurality of wives, that he brought a revelation supporting the doctrine, and that he should own the whole system (revelation and all) to be from Hell; to acknowledge also the persecution against me and my friends was unjust; if Smith and his followers will entirely cease from their abominations and fully undeceive the people as to these things, then I would agree to cease hostilities, otherwise would publish all to the world. He said he had not authority to go so far; he could only offer our entire restoration, published to the world, &c.” (William Law Diary, 13 May 1844, in Lyndon Cook, William Law pages 52–53)

  These entries show that pretending to be against polygamy or pretending to give up polygamy were strategies Joseph Smith employed or considered employing. With William Law, Law recorded that he was willing to reconcile if Joseph would just publicly repent of polygamy, but the historical record is clear that Joseph Smith did not do so. Yet notwithstanding that, Brigham Young still considered the possibility that William Marks was telling the truth in saying Joseph Smith gave up polygamy before his death:

“Joseph was worn out with it, but as to his denying any such thing, I never knew that he denied the doctrine of polygamy. Some have said that he did, but I do not believe he ever did.” — Brigham Young (Complete Discourses of Brigham Young <8 October 1866> page 2382)

  Some on the polygamy denier side of this discussion have attempted to say William Marks does not make a good witness to use for the “Utah Mormonism” position on Plural Marriage and D&C 132 being true because Marks said that Joseph Smith repented and rejected it – “if you accept his testimony of Joseph Smith practicing polygamy you have to also accept his testimony that Joseph Smith later opposed it and decided it was a false doctrine!” But that is not how history works. Just as a person with zero credibility can sometimes tell the truth, a person with great credibility can occasionally get factual details wrong.
   William Marks’ testimony of Joseph and Hyrum introducing polygamy is believable not just because of his own credibility but because it coincides with many other witnesses of the same factual details. The problem with William Marks’ claim that Joseph Smith repented of polygamy is there aren’t any other strong witnesses or evidences besides his testimony to indicate that Joseph Smith sincerely was repenting of polygamy. William Marks’ testimony is anomalous in that regard, and should be weighed with skepticism for that reason alone.
   John Henry Smith mentioned in passing to Joseph Smith III that John Taylor denied hearing Joseph Smith repent of plural marriage: “The repentance part was not heard of by the man who was with him in death.” (John Henry Smith letter to Joseph Smith III, 21 April 1886, Community of Christ Library–Archive)
   Additionally, Joseph Smith’s actions and statements near the end of his life do not indicate repentance. On June 10, 1844 Joseph Smith defended the revelation before the Nauvoo City Council, indicating he was not repenting of it. Additionally, his sermons during the last several months of his life did not even suggest or hint at any remorse for his doctrinal teachings or revelations:

“The Great Jehovah has ever been with me, and the wisdom of God will direct me in the seventh hour. I feel in closer communion and better standing with God than ever I felt before in my life.” (Joseph Smith Discourse, 5 April 1844)

“It has always been my province to dig up hidden mysteries – new things – for my hearers. Just at the time when some men think that I have no right to the keys of the Priesthood – just at that time I have the greatest right.” (Joseph Smith Discourse, 12 May 1844)

“if the doctrine that I preach is true, the tree must be good— I have prophesied things that have come to pass, and can still. …I have been chained— I have rattled chains before— I am innocent of all these charges, and you can bear witness When I love the poor— I ask no favors of the rich— I can go to the cross, I can lay down my life, but don’t forsake me. I want the friendship of my brethren— let us teach the things of Jesus Christ—” (Joseph Smith Discourse, 26 May 1844)

“I am bold to declare I have taught all the strong doctrines publicly, and always teach stronger doctrines in public than in private. … I have reason to think that the Church is being purged. …I want to stick to my text [on the plurality of Gods] to shew that when men open their lips— they do not injure me— but injure themselves … I believe all that God ever revealed, and I never hear of a man being damned for believing too much; but they are damned for unbelief.

…The old Catholic church traditions are worth more than all you have said. Here is a principle of logic that most men have no more sense than to adopt. I will illustrate it by an old apple tree. Here jumps off a branch and says, I am the true tree, and you are corrupt. If the whole tree is corrupt, are not its branches corrupt? If the Catholic religion is a false religion, how can any true religion come out of it? If the Catholic church is bad, how can any good thing come out of it? The character of the old churches have always been slandered by all apostates since the world began.

I testify again, as the Lord lives, God never will acknowledge any traitors or apostates. Any man who will betray the Catholics will betray you; and if he will betray me, he will betray you. All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which is after the order of the Son of God.

It is in the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood, but when men come out and build upon other men’s foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust. Did I build on any other man’s foundation? I have got all the truth which the Christian world possessed, and an independent revelation in the bargain, and God will bear me off triumphant.” (Joseph Smith Discourse, 16 June 1844)

  Nothing in Joseph Smith’s final discourses say or even hint that he was repentant or remorseful for any doctrines he had taught, but the opposite. He doesn’t imply or indicate doctrinal error had been introduced into the Church, but instead he doubled down in claiming to still be a true Prophet and in close communion with God with his new revelations and teachings. If William Marks’ testimony was accurate, it seems probable that Joseph Smith was wanting to consolidate support with William Marks shortly before his death by pretending to give up plural marriage, not wanting to risk William Marks joining in league with William Law and other other dissenters. But as to Joseph Smith genuinely repenting of plural marriage, the evidence for that is severely lacking.