"Where is the church of Christ?" He replied it is found among the different sects. I then inquired, "Are you in the church of Christ? for if you are, you must be a member of all the sects." This rather puzzled him. I then asked him "Shew me the sect that resembled the church at the beginning; does any one of them, or do they all put together resemble the church at the beginning?" He said certainly not. I enquired why not? He was shrewd enough to be silent and to see that his own mouth must condemn his sect and all the sects. Observe, in the absence of the spirit, men must do as well as they can. This I am trying to do, only I confess that I am poor, and blind, and naked, bereft of the glory of the certainty of the authority and truth of the church of Christ. The sects, however, are satisfied, though "poor, blind, and naked," to boast of increase of goods, chapels, rich friends, preachers, &c., &c. So much for my present views and standing. I suppose by this time you have acted on your convictions, and are joined to the Saints; in all honesty you ought, I confess. The moment the conviction that divine authority and certainty of teaching is with them, that moment will I join them. ***

Farewell. My respectful regards to Mrs. —, and ever believe me, my dear sir, yours very truly,

First.—The author of the above letter has carefully examined the present state of the world, and declares himself fully convinced of the awful apostacy which now so universally prevails. He unhesitatingly admits that all authority to teach—to administer ordinances—to build up the church of Christ, has entirely ceased from the earth—that "all is uncertain." He also admits that "it is very reasonable to suppose, that under such circumstances, God would raise up and send one invested with authority. Whether Joseph Smith was such a one is the all-important question." Yes, indeed, it is an important question, and one that involves the fate of the present generation. If Joseph Smith was not sent of God, this church cannot be the church of God, and the tens of thousands who have been baptized into this church are yet in their sins, and no better off than the millions that have gone before them. The form, without the power and authority, is no better than the hundreds of human forms that have no resemblance to the ancient pattern; indeed, it is more dangerous, because better calculated to deceive. Other churches do not profess to have inspired apostles, prophets, prophetesses, evangelists, &c., hence we know, if the New Testament be true, that they cannot be the church of God. But the Latter-day Saints profess to have all these officers and gifts among them, and profess to have authority to administer in every form, ordinance, and blessing of the ancient church; hence we know, that so far as the officers, doctrines, ordinances, and ceremonies are evidence, this Church can exhibit a perfect pattern. In these things, then, both ancient and modern Saints are exactly alike. By the New Testament then we cannot be condemned.

If the Latter-day Saints are not what they profess to be, one thing is certain, that no one ever will be able to confute their doctrine by the scriptures; however imperfect the people may be, their doctrine is infallible. Can this be said of any other people who have existed on the eastern hemisphere during the last 1700 years? No. Their doctrines have been a heterogenous mixture of truth and error, that would not stand the test one moment when measured by a pattern of inspiration; some disparity could be seen and pointed out—some deviation either in the organization or in the ordinances of the gospel could be shown to exist. And now after so many centuries have elapsed, and when human wisdom has been exerted to its utmost strength, and the most exalted and gigantic talents displayed to lay a stable foundation whereon to build, we awake and behold all an empty bubble—a vain show—a phantom of man's creation, with scarcely a vestige of the ancient form, to say nothing of the power. In the midst of all this thick darkness, a young, illiterate, obscure, and inexperienced man announces a message from heaven, before which darkness flees away; human dogmas are overturned; the traditions of ages are uprooted; all forms of church government tremble like an aspen leaf at its approach, and the mighty fabric of popular sectarianism is convulsed and shaken to its very foundation. How happens all this? If Joseph Smith were an impostor, whence his superior wisdom? What power enervated his mind in laying the foundation of a church according to the ancient order? How could an impostor so far surpass the combined wisdom of seventeen centuries as to originate a system diverse from every other system under heaven, and yet harmonise with the system of Jesus and his apostles in every particular? What! an impostor discover the gross darkness of ages, and publish a doctrine perfect in every respect, against which not one scriptural argument can be adduced! The idea is preposterous! The purity and infallibility of the doctrine of this great modern prophet is a presumptive evidence of no small moment in favor of his divine mission.

We do not pretend that a perfect doctrine is an infallible evidence in favour of the divine authority of the one who teaches it. We can conceive it possible, though not probable, for a man to teach a doctrine unmixed with error, and yet be without authority to administer its ordinances. Swedenborg, Irving, and many others taught doctrines in some respects true, in other respects false; hence their authority should be rejected, even though they should perform miracles. We have no examples on the records of history, of a doctrine perfect in every respect, being taught by any person or persons, unless they were inspired with divine authority. If Joseph Smith taught a doctrine in any respect false, he should be rejected as an impostor, though he should, like the magicians of Egypt, turn rivers of water into blood, or create frogs in abundance, or even raise the dead like the witch of Endor. On the other hand, if he taught a true and perfect doctrine, he might be sent of God, though he himself should perform no miracle, like John the Baptist, or the Prophet Noah, or many other prophets of the Old Testament.

In ancient times, many great prophets were sent of God, and we have no record of their doing miracles, yet their respective messages were of infinite importance, and could not be rejected without condemnation. Where is there a man, no matter how great his attainments, that can show Mr. Smith's doctrine to be false? Did the ancient saints teach baptism to the penitent believer for the remission of sins? So did Mr. S. Did they teach the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Spirit? So did Mr. S. Did the Former-day Saints teach that apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, deacons, bishops, elders, &c., all inspired of God, were necessary in the church? So did Mr. S. Did the ancient Saints teach that dreams, visions, new revelations, ministering of angels, healings, tongues, interpretations, and all other spiritual gifts were necessary in the church? So did this modern prophet. Where then is the discrepancy between the ancient and modern teachings? No where. The teaching of the one is as perfect as the other; and we again assert that this perfect coincidence in teaching, in every point, is a strong presumptive evidence that Mr. Smith was sent of God.

Second.—In what manner does Joseph Smith declare that a dispensation of the gospel was committed unto him? He testifies that an angel of God, whose name was Moroni, appeared unto him; that this angel was formerly an ancient prophet among a remnant of the tribe of Joseph on the continent of America. He testifies that Moroni revealed unto him where he deposited the sacred records of his nation some fourteen hundred years ago; that these records contained the "everlasting gospel" as it was anciently taught and