A Special Witness
by A. True Ott

I was privileged to serve an LDS mission to the "Latter Day Holy Land" - upstate New York - in 1978-1980. While there, I also was privileged to assist in the production of the Hill Cumorah Pageant, "America's Witness for Christ". On numerous occasions, I served as a 'tour guide' of sorts, wherein I escorted groups of Pageant volunteers to the various LDS Church history sites in the immediate area - specifically the Sacred Grove and the Martin Harris and Peter Whitmer farm sites.

On one occasion after visiting the Harris and Whitmer sites, one of the visiting sisters asked me to comment on the reasons the Three Witnesses left the main body of the Church. I had to tell her that I really didn't know the answer, but I would do my best to find out. I queried my Mission President. His counsel was that each of the Witnesses chose to follow darkness instead of light, that they eventually 'fell into forbidden paths', and the lesson here was to always be sure and follow our leaders and forget about our questions and personal concerns, for Christ is at the head of this particular organization of men. I have since come to understand the danger inherent in this false counsel, for he was in essence telling me to forget about personal revelation, and just follow the 'arm of flesh' - that only certain 'brethren' were able and worthy enough to receive revelation. But wait a minute, is not personal 'revelation' the 'rock' of personal salvation - not 'leaning on the arm of flesh'?

The purpose of this chapter is to hopefully give the reader a clearer understanding of the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon and their life mission. Through the testimony of David Whitmer, we may well learn the true reason why they left, and in so doing explore the questions: 1. Were they correct in leaving? 2. Did they 'apostatize' or was it POSSIBLE that it was Joseph himself who was in error? 3. Why did ALL THREE and the MAJORITY of the original eight witnesses also eventually leave the Church? 4. What was the calling of Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer? 5. If David Whitmer, along with Joseph Smith, was also called to lead the early Church, and if we are supposed to follow our leaders in 'everything they should teach', should we not at least give a 'listening ear' to Elder Whitmer- one of the ORIGINAL SIX 'ELDERS' of the Church - and his final witness?

I was fortunate to receive a copy of the final testimony of David Whitmer that he wrote a few months before his death in 1888. The spirit bore strong witness to my heart and mind that his testimony was and is true. I began to investigate his final claims. I must admit that the evidence inherent in the recorded History of the Church as well as recent events regarding the changing of the 'sacred' temple ordinances strongly supports the truth of his claims. If only we are willing to search and ask, we will find.

In the first few paragraphs of his testimony, he declares that while the Book of Mormon was truly translated from an ancient record of gold, this does not necessarily mean that Joseph was immune from falling into darkness after the translation was finished. His primary evidence of this is the Satanic practice of polygamy Joseph fell into, and quotes from Jacob in the Book of Mormon: "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing WAS AN ABOMINATION BEFORE ME, saith the Lord. ---------- For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none: For I the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." Today, the modern LDS leaders would like you to believe that the Church never practiced such abominations, but do not be deceived - for the Church surely did.

In testifying of the divinity of the Book of Mormon, David asks the reader not to condemn the Book because of the mistakes Joseph made. He asks: "Greater abominations are recorded of David in the Bible, than is recorded today of Joseph Smith; but do you reject the Psalms on this account? Do you reject the Proverbs because Solomon was a polygamist? Stop and think, you who are hasty to condemn."

The first question that the honest seeker of truth needs to answer is this: was David Whitmer correct in his assessment of Joseph Smith, or was Joseph guided exclusively by Christ from day one - including his 'revelation' on polygamy? Was Joseph infallible in everything he did, or did the adversary deceive him on occasion? And if so, does it mean that our modern leaders are truly 'infallible' as well? According to the Doctrine and Covenants itself, David Whitmer was only echoing what the Lord Himself warned Joseph about. Early on, Joseph made some very serious mistakes that resulted in a part of the Book of Mormon manuscript being lost to us forever. He gave the first part of the translation to Martin Harris, who let it fall into the hands of evil and conspiring men who were led of Satan to destroy the work. The Lord reprimands Joseph by the words: "For although a man may HAVE MANY REVELATIONS, and have POWER to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him. Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them. AND BEHOLD, HOW OFT YOU HAVE TRANSGRESSED THE COMMANDMENTS AND THE LAWS OF GOD, AND HAVE GONE ON IN THE PERSUASIONS OF MEN. For behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise his words - yet you should have been faithful; and he would have extended his arm and supported you against all the fiery darts of the adversary; and he would have been with you in every time of trouble. Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, BUT BECAUSE OF TRANSGRESSION, IF THOU ART NOT AWARE, THOU WILT FALL. (D&C 3:4-9) Is it my imagination, or is the Lord pointing out a character flaw to Joseph, that he is prone to listen to men before listening to God? So, if he made such serious errors early on, does it not stand to reason that he could also be just as error-prone in later years as well? And what of David Whitmer? What 'right' did he have to point out to us the error of Joseph's ways?

In D&C Section 10, we learn that the Lord commanded Joseph to basically 'forget about' the lost sections - that He would instead provide a way to thwart the plan of Satan as recorded by Nephi. This plan was to call and ordain three special witnesses, who would be allowed to witness an angelic visitor, and to see and hold not only the golden plates, but also other sacred Book of Mormon relics. (See Ether 5:2-4; 2 Nephi 11:3 and 27:12). The three witnesses were Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris.

In Section 18 we see that Oliver and David were called to a special mission. Verse 9 tells us that the Lord is speaking to them "even as unto Paul mine apostle, for you are called even with THAT SAME CALLING WHICH HE WAS CALLED". For those who may be unaware - what exactly was the "calling" of the Apostle Paul? According to Acts 9:11 and 22:3, before his conversion to Christ, he was a member of the ruling Sanhedrin, and was specifically a Pharisee and a pupil of Gamaliel. In other words, he was a "General Authority" of the apostate Jewish Church who was extremely active in rooting out and persecuting those who dared to follow the heretical teaching of that dangerous apostate Jesus of Nazareth. Following his experience on the road however, Paul became a witness of the divinity of the Savior and was called to teach and perfect the new members of the Church of Christ - TO KEEP THEM FROM STRAYING FROM THE PERFECT TEACHINGS AND GOSPEL OF CHRIST!!! Even the most casual reading of his various epistles will prove this fact. In the 15 years between A.D. 50 and A.D. 65, Paul's epistles were directed at new 'converts' and were written to warn against false practices and to clarify the Church organization. For instance, look at his letters to the Corinthians. Corinth was very similar to modern day New York - it was a great 'melting pot' of many different nationalities due to the fact that it was the primary trade crossroad between Asia and Western Europe. The early converts to Christ located in Corinth were primarily Greeks, who were traditionally blessed with a keen passion for freedom of thought and expression and were often genius in expressing rhetoric and logic. These were their strong points, but their weak points lay in the fact they were in the midst of incredible moral corruption - and once they participated in the same - they tended to become extremely undisciplined, self-conceited and prideful. Paul's letters to them were designed to keep them focused on the Gospel as taught in its purity by Jesus - and to warn them away from ADDING paganistic traditions such as empty, meaningless rituals and fornications such as multiple wives and adulterous relationships.

Paul's letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Ephesians clearly showed that the early church was having a hard time letting go of their pagan customs and traditions, and the letters to Titus and Timothy were basically admonitions to listen to the Savior, and not be led away by the false teachings of other men and the false traditions of their fathers. In short, I would humbly submit that Paul was called of God to keep the faith pure and the Church of Christ on track. Would it not therefore follow logically that this was the same calling given to Oliver and David in D&C 18:9? Would it not also follow that David and Oliver were given an important stewardship over the fledgling Church of Christ? Does this not give new meaning to exactly who the Lord was referring to in verses 14-16 of Section 18 when he says to Whitmer: "Wherefore, you are called to cry repentance unto THIS PEOPLE. (Could 'this people' possibly mean the new converts to the Church of Christ, to be perfected in their new faith in the same Spirit of Paul, as opposed to those outside the fold? It seems I have also heard this term used by Lucifer, when he looks us in the eyes in the Endowment and warns us: "I have a word to say concerning This People"!) And if it so be that you should labor all your days in crying repentance unto THIS PEOPLE, and bring, save it be one soul unto me, how great shall be your joy with him in the kingdom of my Father! And now, if your joy will be great with one soul that you have brought unto me into the kingdom of my Father, how great will be your joy if you should bring many souls unto me!"

I submit that David Whitmer was ultimately true to his calling of crying repentance unto the Latter Day Saints. The only problem, then as now, is that very few have ever listened because of the power and darkness of Lucifer. You don't believe this? Why have you not been exposed to David's most powerful parting testimony until just now? Just a coincidence you say? No, I would submit it is because our wonderful LDS leaders since Brigham Young have wished it to remain hidden under a stone - because they well know that they cannot explain it away through lies and half-truths. They want us to remain in darkness, so they can continue to exert their influence and power to gain and increase in worldly wealth and position. They cannot explain away the tremendous blessing given to David as recorded in D&C 18: 7-8: "WHEREFORE, YOU HAVE RECEIVED THE SAME POWER, AND THE SAME FAITH, AND THE SAME GIFT LIKE UNTO HIM; [Joseph Smith, Jr.] And if you do these LAST COMMANDMENTS OF MINE, [i.e. strive to keep 'This People' on the true Gospel track] which I have given you, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; for my grace is sufficient for you, and you shall be lifted up at the last day." They cannot deny the fact that David, unlike Joseph and Brigham, refused to participate in secret combinations and penal oaths with abominations such as polygamy at their heart and center. They cannot deny the fact that David, unlike Joseph, was not ultimately deceived by Lucifer, but instead remained true and faithful to his original calling. They cannot deny the fact that David died in peace and respect as an old man, while Joseph was murdered by Masonic assassins in his prime. (The gates of Hell did indeed prevail against Joseph, but not David - so WHO was misled, and who kept the faith if both had the same POWER, the same FAITH, and the same GIFT? Did Wilford Woodruff at the issuance of the Manifesto not also declare that God would "take him or any other 'leader' out of his place" if he attempted to lead the Church astray?)

Just how important were David and Oliver to the early Church? Let's take a look. The Lord asks THEM, not JOSEPH, to call and commission the 12 disciples of His Church. Clearly, David truly did have the "same power and the same faith, and the same gift" as the Prophet Joseph, because the Lord says: "And now, behold, I give unto you, Oliver Cowdery, and also unto David Whitmer, that you shall search out the Twelve, who shall have the desires of which I have spoken. And by their desires and their works you shall know them. And when you have found them you shall show these things unto them." (Section 18: 37-40) Given this background, does it not make sense to give at least a vestige of credence to his final testimony and witness, instead of hiding it away like an unwanted bastard son?

So, lets see, David and Oliver were commissioned to call 12 disciples, (they were not to be given the title of Apostle. Why? See 2 Corinthians 11:12-15) and to preach the GOSPEL of Jesus Christ (See D&C 39:5-6) to THIS PEOPLE - i.e. the Latter Day Saints. Do you still doubt the special calling of these men? Or do you believe the official rhetoric of the 'Brethren' that David and Oliver just did not have the 'intestinal fortitude' to withstand the persecutions, so they 'apostatized'? Well consider then the additional words of the Savior to Joseph as found in D&C 5, beginning with verse 11: "And in addition to your testimony, the testimony of three of my servants, whom I shall CALL and ORDAIN, unto whom I will show these things, and they shall go forth with my words that are given through you. Yea, they shall know of a SURETY that these things are true, FOR FROM HEAVEN WILL I DECLARE IT UNTO THEM. I will give them POWER that they may behold and view these things AS THEY ARE. -------- And the testimony of three witnesses I will send forth of MY WORD. ------ And their testimony SHALL ALSO GO FORTH unto the CONDEMNATION of this generation IF THEY HARDEN THEIR HEARTS AGAINST THEM." Joseph is left with yet another solemn warning in verse 21: "And now I command you, my servant Joseph, to REPENT and to WALK MORE UPRIGHTLY BEFORE ME, AND TO YIELD TO THE PERSUASIONS OF MEN NO MORE!"

I ask the reader in all solemnity and humility, did Joseph and others of his generation in the early Church harden their hearts against the warning voice of David and Oliver? Did they truly receive CONDEMNATION because of it? Could David and Oliver possibly be the 'servants of the nobleman' referred to in D&C 101:51? Does this help us to understand the parable given to Joseph in 1833 as recorded in Section 101:44-61? Only by prayerfully considering the final testimony of David Whitmer may one come to any honest conclusion to these answers - but be warned - you may well lose your membership in the Church for "sympathizing with known apostates" once you do so.

Like David, the Spirit of the Lord has told me to "minister unto this people - the Latter Day Saints". Hopefully, I will be successful in bringing at least one soul unto the Savior from among "This People" by pointing out the errors of man, and the depths and breadth of Lucifer's earthly kingdom. I marvel at the fact that Joseph was warned again and again about the secret combination that eternally seeks to destroy the Father's plan of salvation, and yet Joseph -along with the vast majority of modern, faithful, Latter Day Saints - did not and do not "see the forest for the trees" - and walked and continue today to walk in darkness while the brightness of the noon day sun shines all around them. (If you read this paragraph, and mock in self-righteous PRIDE the words "Not Me" - woe be unto you, for you will never see the true light).

So, what was the primary reason that David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery left the Church? What was their 'great sin'? Did they commit adultery or murder? Were they pedophiles that preyed upon unsuspecting children? Were they jealous of Joseph and wanted to form their own church? No, no, and no. They left because their lives were literally in danger if they remained, their lives were jeopardized because evil men had infiltrated the Church hierarchy and Joseph was in the process of being deceived much worse than he had been in 1828. David and Oliver could see it, but Joseph was not listening to their warnings. Two such evil men were Sydney Rigdon and one Dr. Avard. David testifies: "In December, 1830, Sydney Rigdon and Edward Partridge came from Kirtland Ohio, to Fayette, N.Y. to see Brother Joseph, and in the latter part of the winter they returned to Kirtland. (Ever wonder how the Church ended up in Kirtland? - Ott) In February, 1831, Brother Joseph came to Kirtland where Rigdon was. Rigdon was a thorough Bible scholar, a man of fine education, and a powerful orator. (Not to mention a master mason, as was Brigham Young ---- Ott). He soon worked himself deep into Brother Joseph's affections, and had more influence over him than any man living. He was Brother Joseph's PRIVATE COUNSELLOR, and his most intimate friend and brother for some time after they met. (Oops, Joseph, there you go again, did you forget your earlier call to repentance? See D&C Section 3:6 - Ott) -------- Sydney Rigdon was the cause of almost all the errors which were introduced while he was in the church. I believe Rigdon to have been the instigator of the secret organization known as the "Danites" which was formed in Far West, Missouri in June, 1838."

Evidently, this realization was shared by Joseph himself during his last day on earth. On June 26, 1844, Joseph lamented: "Poor Rigdon, I am glad he is gone to Pittsburg out of the way; WERE HE TO PRESIDE HE WOULD LEAD THE CHURCH TO DESTRUCTION IN LESS THAN FIVE YEARS." (See TPJS page 382). It is apparent that Joseph had begun to recognize how he had allowed himself to be misled during the last 6 years of his life, and he was in the process of repentance. Of course, Lucifer's agents could not allow this to happen - hence he was murdered.

So, back to the original question, "why did David and Oliver leave the Church"? Here is his own explanation. "If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice from the heavens, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to "separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them." In the spring of 1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had gone deep into error and blindness. I had been striving with them for a long time to show them the errors into which they were drifting, (don't forget his calling to be as Paul of old ----- Ott) and for my labors I received only persecutions. In June, 1838, at Far West, Mo. A secret organization was formed (the Danites - per Sydney Rigdon - Ott) Doctor Avard being put in as the leader of the band; a certain oath was to be administered to all the brethren to bind them to support the heads of the church in everything they should teach. (Is it the same today? - Follow the Brethren in every thing they teach - no matter what? ------ Ott) All who refused to take this oath were considered dissenters from the church, and certain things WERE TO BE DONE CONCERNING THESE DISSENTERS, by Dr. Avard's secret band. I make no farther statements now; but suffice it to say that my persecutions, for trying to show them their errors, became of such a nature that I had to leave the Latter Day Saints; and, as I rode on horseback out of Far West, in June, 1838, the voice of God from heaven spake to me as I have stated above. I was called out to hold the authority which God gave to me. (What 'authority' was this?? For the answer, see D&C 17:7-8 ---- Ott)

I see from a letter written by the heads of the church, while they were in Liberty Jail, that they repented while in jail of having anything to do with this secret organization, and came out against Dr. Avard, declaring it all wickedness, and resolved to henceforth disapprobate everything that was not of a bold, frank and upright nature. I quote from this letter, printed in the Times and Seasons, July, 1840: "We farther caution our brethren against the impropriety of the organization of bands or companies, by covenants, oaths, penalties, or secrecies; but let the time past of our experience and suffering by the wickedness of Dr. Avard suffice. And let our covenants be that of the everlasting covenant, as it is contained in the Holy Writ, and the things which God has revealed unto us. Pure friendship always becomes weakened the very moment you undertake to make it stronger by penal oaths and secrecy. Your humble servants intend FROM HENCEFORTH to disapprobate everything that is not in accordance with the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and which is not of a bold, frank, and upright nature."

They were put in jail in November, after I had left them. Now you see why I left the Latter Day Saints. After I left them they say they gave me a trial and cut me off. About the same time that I came out, the Spirit of God moved upon quite a number of the brethren who came out, with their families. All of the eight witnesses who were then living (except the three Smiths) came out; Peter and Christian Whitmer were dead. Oliver Cowdery came out also. Martin Harris was then in Ohio. The church went deeper and deeper into wickedness. They were driven out of Missouri, and went to Nauvoo; and were driven out of Nauvoo, and went to Salt Lake, where they are today, believing in the doctrine of polygamy. Nearly all the members at Nauvoo went to Salt Lake. Only a very few rejected the revelation on polygamy."

Clearly then, David Whitmer was following the same voice of God that declared the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon to him a decade earlier. Why? Joseph had sadly embraced the doctrines and covenants of Lucifer that were expounded to him by deluded, Masonic, individuals, instead of following the voice of the Savior. He continued in pursuing vain and prideful ambitions as he was warned not to do in Section 3. Why do I say such things? Because of 6 months research into the origins, practices, doctrine and dogmas of Scottish Rite Masonry - and in so doing I have uncovered the origins and the basis of belief of Brigham Young, Heber Kimball, Sydney Rigdon, Dr. Avard, and over a thousand other "Mason Mormons" and their significant influences on the mind and spirit of Joseph Smith. In so doing, I have also uncovered the true origins of what we LDS call the 'endowment' in the Temple. After completing said research, it is clear to my mind that Joseph should have remained humble and listened to his original three witnesses. Does this make Joseph any less of a man of God? Of course not - it only proves otherwise. Do you think Lucifer would just sit idly by and watch his kingdom destroyed? Or would he IMMEDIATELY MARSHAL ALL OF HIS FORCES TO INFILTRATE AND DESTROY THE GREAT FLEDGLING LATTER-DAY WORK FROM THE INSIDE OUT?

Mormonism - Why it is Yet Called "Celestial Masonry"

To understand the wrong turns that Joseph made, and to understand why David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery were in very real physical danger from Masonic Brethren, the reader needs to understand somewhat concerning the origins of Masonry in 19th Century America. We need to understand just exactly what is involved in Masonry, who they worship, and their ultimate goals and desires. To do this, one must research the writings and texts of pre-eminent Masons and those whose honest heart caused them to leave the 'Craft' and warn their neighbors.

It is clear that from an early age, Joseph Smith was well acquainted with things Masonic. It is impossible for him not to have been. Here is why.

In the 1820's in Upstate New York, there was indeed a "great contest" concerning religion, especially the Masonic debate. Joseph Smith Sr. as well as Hyrum and Alvin joined the Masons - but soon realized their deception. Most of the debate that awakened the Smith household centered around the revelations of a neighbor of the Smiths, a former "Master Mason" named Captain William Morgan. Captain Morgan printed an expose' wherein he divulged the hidden secrets of the Masonic Brotherhood - that among other charges, he declared that they covenanted with their God Lucifer to literally murder and get gain. He declared that their ultimate goal was to establish a 'new world order' and a 'new world religion' dedicated to Lucifer, Son of the Morning, and to this end, they planned to use wars, intrigue, religion, false prophets and apostles, combined with immense bloodshed over time to accomplish their goals. Captain Morgan wrote from experience, for he was at the time of his writing a most trusted member of the hierarchy.

Because of Morgan's stunning expose, the entire country, not to mention Upstate New York, became divided quickly into pro-Masonic, and anti-Masonic camps. Joseph apparently subscribed to the latter, as he was one of 10 men who signed their names to a very strongly worded anti-Masonic article that appeared in the Seneca Farmer and the Waterloo Advisor newspapers. Joseph, who was already establishing somewhat of a reputation of a 'visionary' - clearly gained even more notoriety with the forces of Lucifer with this action, for he did all he could to help Morgan expose this satanic secret combination. He did all of this in 1825 - while he was busy preparing to bring forth the Book of Mormon.

So what happened to Captain Morgan because of his expose? In a 1933 book entitled "Occult Theocracy" the author Edith Starr Miller writes on page 229: "Carlile, in his Manual of Freemasonry, gives the following particulars: "My exposure of Freemasonry, in 1825, led to its exposure in the United States of America; and a Mason there, of the name of William Morgan, having announced his intention of assisting in the work of exposure, was kidnapped, under pretended forms and warrants of law, by his brother Masons, removed from the State of New York to the borders of Canada, near the falls of Niagara, and there most barbarously murdered. This happened in 1826 ------- Several persons were arrested for the abduction of Morgan; but the murderers were sheltered by Masonic lodges, and rescued from justice."

In 1848, some of the grisly details of Morgan's murder were disclosed through a deathbed confession by one of the murderers. Years later, in 1875, more details were also provided by the publication of two letters by a Mr. Thurlow Weed, who had the particulars related to him personally by one of the murderers. Only after ALL of the Masonic murderers were dead and buried did the truth become public. As Miller writes: "The story of the murder of William Morgan for the crime of violating Masonic secrecy has long been a well known historical fact; but in August, 1875, the full particulars were brought to light by the publication of two letters from the Venerable Thurlow Weed. The facts are as follows: In the year 1826, Morgan, who had passed through all the degrees of Masonry and held a very high priesthood position in the Order, conceived the idea of publishing a book disclosing all the secrets of the sect. Mr. Weed was living at that time in the town of Rochester, New York, and Morgan requested him to publish the projected book. Mr. Weed declined, and Morgan went to the adjoining town of Batavia, where he arranged with another person for the publication. He had written a portion of the book, and was engaged in completing it when he was arrested on a false charge of larceny, on the 10th of September, and conveyed to the jail of Ontario County. The sheriff and officers of the prison were all Masons. His house was searched, and his manuscripts were all seized and destroyed.

On the evening of the 12th Sept, he was discharged by the interference of some of the conspirators, and, as he passed out of the door of the jail, was seized by them, taken a short distance, and forcibly put into a carriage. He was carried, in the course of that night, on to the ridge-road about two miles beyond the village of Rochester. These conspirators were Whitney, a stonemason, Chubbuch, a farmer' Farside, a butcher' and Howard, a bookbinder. 'They were all' says Mr. Weed, 'men of correct habits and good character, and all, I doubt not, were moved by an enthusiastic but most misguided sense of DUTY'. The leader, King, told them that they had an order from the Grand Master, the execution of which required their assistance, and they replied that they would obey it and question not. The five murderers were then driven in a carriage to the fort where Morgan was confined. It was just midnight. They told the doomed man that his friends had completed their arrangements for his removal to Canada, where his life would be safe.

The next pages tell that Morgan was then taken away and soon thereafter murdered. His hands were pinned behind his back, while his throat was ceremoniously and ritually cut from left ear to right ear. Miller concludes the story of Captain Morgan's death on page 232: "it is only now, when all the criminals are dead, that he makes the fact public. The body of Morgan was found a year afterwards, identified by his wife and friends, and buried; and although the Masons tried to dispute the identification, their efforts were futile. None of the murderers were ever brought to justice."

The question begs to be asked, what could possess "men of good character and good habits" to blindly follow their leader, the Grand Master, and commit cold-blooded murder - and what would cause them to remain free from the arm of justice? Obviously, the same delusion that would cause the same type of good men to murder innocent women and children in a place called Mountain Meadows in Southern Utah.

GO TO:
Part 2
Part 3