[All parts of this post may be found here.]
One of the things that plagued the office of Seventy was its position relative to the high priesthood (I use the term as it was used in the 19th century – a synonym for the office of high priest). While Joseph does not seem to have given too much thought to these kinds of questions, Brigham Young had expansive views on both the apostleship and the office of Seventy. With the huge expansion of seventies quorums, indeed their intended use as the major component of the missionary force of the Church, the question was often raised as to how these officers could manage or ordain high priests should that occasion arise. Brigham saw the apostles as superior to the high priests out of necessity. Moreover, it was the apostles who were in charge when it came to the esoteric ordinances of the future temple. Running counter to this was the considerable status conferred by revelation and history on the high priests. The apostles took every opportunity to assert not only their right to direct and regulate the high priesthood, but Brigham at least saw the Seventy in a similar light.
The question was not resolved in the minds of most people however and that effected the ways in which the First Council of Seventy and missionary seventies might act. The idea that the high priesthood was a superior office is illustrated by Joseph F. Smith’s letter to John Pack during the latter’s struggle over leaving the ranks of the Seventy for the high priesthood.
Brigham and the Q12 had made a move in Nauvoo to send out high priests to preside in the many branches of the church to be created by the massive growth of the Seventy. That idea failed with the Nauvoo exodus and was never revived.
In spite of Brigham’s ideas about the Seventy, he never authorized them to use sealing authority or have any role in temple supervision. The First Council were always an interesting group, given little to do in terms of general Church administration and supervising mostly autonomous highly dispersed quorums with their own presidencies, they weren’t pressed into heavy service until the administration of John Taylor. Taylor sincerely wanted to figure out what to do with both the First Council and the seventies in general.
 Part of the problem was the language of D&C 107 again. It was clear that high priests could and did preside over the church as a body and directed all other authorities. It was understood from the mid 1830s that stake presidencies in developed stakes (with a high council and bishop(s)) were presidents of the high priesthood and stood in special relation to other authorities of the church, even the Q12. See Minute Book 2, p. 96ff. John Corrill’s 1830s take on this is worth a read, though it’s a bit garbled. Instructive though: History of the Mormons. Scroll down to chapter XIII.