The Age Of Unreason Dissecting The Infamy Of The Morgan Affair And Its Aftermath

THE AGE OF UNREASON

Dissecting The Infamy
Of The Morgan Affair And Its Aftermath

John W. Bizzack, Ph.D.

This paper is an excerpt from The Age of Unreason: Dissecting the Infamy of the Morgan Affair And Its Aftermath, BSF Foundation, 2020.

The Age of Unreason is a 21st century investigation into the contradictions, deceit, and hysteria surrounding the scandal that almost destroyed American Freemasonry.

In contrast to many past writings about the Morgan Affair, The Age of Unreason puts the writings, events, and circumstances of the era in factual context, bringing to light of the motives of many who were involved on both sides of the scandal leading to much of the hysteria surrounding it for more than a decade.

The book reappraises the hasty actions, injudicious reactions, politics, deceit, incautious behavior, loss of trust and reputation, and the lasting effects of the Morgan Affair on American Freemasonry.

In Batavia, New York, the few people who knew for sure where William Morgan was on the morning of September 12, 1826 were all Freemasons. The previous night Morgan had been abducted. His abductors were Freemasons. Months prior to his abduction, Morgan was writing an exposé of Freemasonry. Despite his disappearance, the book was published three months later.

Twenty grand juries were empanelled from 1827-1831 returning indictments on 54 Freemasons, of which 39 were brought to trial resulting in 10 convictions for the abduction. Sentences ranged from 1-28 months. Under New York law, kidnapping was not made a felony offense until April 1827. Still, when all the trials were over, the only people who knew for sure what happened to William Morgan following his abduction were the Freemasons involved in holding Morgan in confinement. Their accounts were conflicted and unconvincing, with only indirect evidence of the circumstances supporting them since Morgan’s body was never found. No one was indicted for murder, which was the real crime many people believed the Masons were guilty of committing.

The abduction and disappearance of Morgan fueled the flame of anti-Masonic sentiments of the era, creating a firestorm and scandal that tarnished and has haunted American Freemasonry for almost two centuries. That firestorm and its aftermath, at least for a brief period, also put an end to one of the reasons the event occurred in the first place: the unbridled rapid expansion of members and lodges that resulted in the fraternity losing sight of what historically the Institution of Freemasonry was designed to be. Too many lodges were created to be properly supported. Likewise, as a result, unworthy candidates were admitted.

The excitement surrounding this chapter of American history was a momentous catalyst changing the course of Freemasonry in the United States and led to the creation of a short-lived third national political party. Putting the events in context of the era, The Age of Unreason reappraises the hasty actions, injudicious reactions, politics, deceit, incautious behavior, loss of trust and reputation, and the lasting effects of the Morgan Affair, and fittingly illustrates how fitting the saying is that lies and rumor can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its boots.

PROLOGUE

Inquiry into the Morgan Affair and the anti-Masonic excitement in American Freemasonry without historical context is like reading first the final chapter of a lengthy book without understanding the basics provided in the first chapters. Examination of these two subjects must be considered in the light of the conditions of those days. William Morgan was not just a missing person case, and the ramifications of the anti-Masonic movement in America were not merely a minor chapter in the unfolding history of a young nation. After the 1820s, Freemasonry never held the kind of prominence it had previously enjoyed in America.

The circumstances surrounding the Morgan Affair and the ravaging effects of anti-Masonic sentiments on American Freemasonry form an intricate labyrinth of skewed and knotted details. Intertwined in this labyrinth we find religious perspectives, politics, and the conflicting values of a young nation. Seasoning those features, we find widespread suspicions, corruption, and a rush to judgment fueled by biased perspectives that created a confluence of errors from those on both sides. No period prior or since influenced the course of Freemasonry in the United States and determined its path as did anti-Masonry and the kidnapping and disappearance of William Morgan.

Delving into the entanglement between the history constructed by anti-Masonic forces and the defenders of Freemasonry is challenging. The primary 19th-century sources on the anti-Masonic movement and the murder of William Morgan are not just biased but old—written years and even decades after the rise and fall of the anti-Masonic movement (sometimes in the context of a contemporary revival) by men picking through the history of 40, 50, even 60 years earlier as they sought to either attack or defend. Those interested, the Masons themselves, and certainly historians need to carefully analyze these sources.^[1] Contemporary newspapers and websites are another fertile field begging contextual historical analysis.

A surplus of books and other writings about both topics complicate the narratives presented by anti-Masons and defenders of Freemasons since the late 1820s. Few writings have provided a comprehensive, factual, and fair overview of the numerous details involved. Stephen Dafoe’s 2009 book, Morgan: The Scandal That Shook Freemasonry, and William L. Cummings’s Bibliography of Anti-Masonry with a Sketch of the Morgan Affair and Appendix Containing Several Important Documents, Etc., published in 1934, are essential reading. Steven Bullock’s Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840, published in 1998, offers the kind of cultural and organizational histories few historians previously provided regarding anti-Masonry and the Morgan Affair. William L. Stone’s 579-page volume of 49 letters published in 1833 and Peter Ross’s A Standard History of Freemasonry in the State of New York, made available in 1899, is important foundational reading, and Michael A. Davis’s Jacksonian Volcano: Anti-Secretism and Secretism in 19th-Century American Culture and his Life, Death and Masonry: The Body of William Morgan, published in 2013, offers perhaps the latest solid core of useful and balanced information. There are undoubtedly other writings that offer reliable background, valid references, and facts. Still, the bulk of those writings and particularly many website postings are little more than a rehash of earlier materials. Those materials impart long-embedded factual flaws, some exaggerating and embellishing the reliability of certain sources, and overstate the authors’ familiarity with the topic.

This work is not an exhaustive compilation of information about anti-Masonry or the Morgan Affair, nor is it intended to convict or exonerate the Masons responsible for the kidnapping of Morgan. In these pages, information is assembled that illustrates the complexity of the circumstances and highlights the inconsistencies of writings offered on both topics. Regrettably, Masons and non-Masons have come to see and accept much of the flawed information as facts without contesting their validity.

The historically intended formative role of Freemasonry was one reason the Institution was once so widely recognized and held in such high regard. There was a public trust of the Institution prior to the 1820s because Masons and their leaders were viewed as upstanding and dedicated men seeking character development, the pursuit of excellence in their lives, and serving as examples to others.

The idea that the greater the number of Freemasons, the wider their influence and example does not hold true, unless all men who were made members were good men before their names were entered on a roster, and who were committed to, and sufficiently instructed in, the specific principles of Freemasonry. Equally importantly is practicing what is learned in and outside the lodge room. The same remains true today.

Examining the consequence of the unbridled and rapid expansion of membership at various times in the history of the fraternity in America, we find the enemy of that truth. Aside from the financial gain achieved, the notion that Freemasonry can also achieve its historical intent and can do better by simply adding more members has been demonstrably proven false. The first evidence of that false notion is rooted in what was made manifest in the Morgan Affair.

The concept and purpose of Freemasonry are unquestionably laudable. Clearly, many men have and continue to love the idea of the Institution and from it the fraternity it offers. But the underlying challenge has always been how to consistently ensure that the concept of Freemasonry, along with its historically intended purpose, is thoroughly understood.

Following his retirement from the presidency in March 1797, George Washington returned to Mount Vernon, fully expecting to go back to private life, with no more interruptions. When conflict with France loomed about a year later, Washington’s successor, President John Adams, asked him to come back to act as Commander in Chief of the American Army. Washington, in response to Adam’s inquiry, wrote a letter to Secretary of War James McHenry discussing a plan to begin recruiting for the army that would be needed in case the dispute with France led to war.^[2]

In the sixth paragraph of that letter, Washington informed McHenry:

It is much easier at all times to prevent an evil than to rectify mistakes. It is infinitely better to have a few good men, than many indifferent ones and officers whose recruiting emoluments depend upon numbers, will not be over scrupulous in their choice, without the fullest conviction that the inspection of the men will be as rigid as the instructions that are given.^[3]

Washington, of course, was speaking to the issue of recruiting men versus voluntary membership. Nonetheless, his insight and advice was and remains applicable and corresponds with the same problem the Institution of Freemasonry faced as it began to depart from the prescribed practice of being consistently scrupulous in the admittance of petitioners and providing them instruction. The consequences following each period of unbridled, rapid expansion of membership in American Freemasonry illustrate that numbers merely give the illusion of strength.

INTRODUCTION

In Batavia, a remote area in upstate New York, the few people who knew for sure where William Morgan was on the morning of September 12, 1826, were all Freemasons. The previous night, Morgan had been abducted from the city jail in Canandaigua, a town some 50 miles west of Batavia. His abductors were Freemasons. Months prior to his abduction, Morgan was writing an exposé of Freemasonry. Despite his disappearance, the book was published three months later.

Twenty grand juries were empanelled from 1827-1831, returning indictments on 47 Freemasons, of which 35 were either acquitted or not brought to trial, resulting in 9 convictions for the abduction.^[4] Sentences ranged from 1 to 28 months. Under New York law, kidnapping was not made a felony offense until April 1827. Still, when all the trials were

over, the only people who knew for sure what had happened to William

Morgan following his abduction were the Freemasons involved in holding Morgan in confinement. Their accounts were conflicted and unconvincing with only indirect evidence of the

circumstances supporting them, since Morgan’s body was never found.

No one was indicted for murder, which was the real crime believed by many to have been committed—and for which the Masons were guilty. Those who were tried had the means to commit the suspected crime of murder, the motive, and the opportunity. However, showing the presence of these three elements is not, in and of itself, sufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt; the standard of proof must be met and must prove that the opportunity presented was indeed taken by the accused, and the crime with which the accused is charged subsequently occurred.

Regardless, embracing means, motive, and opportunity was enough to fan the flame of anti-Masonic sentiments of that era, which fueled a firestorm and created a scandal that tarnished and has haunted American Freemasonry for almost two centuries. The firestorm and its aftermath, at least for a brief period, also put an end to one of the reasons the event occurred in the first place: the unbridled, rapid expansion of members and lodges that resulted in the fraternity losing sight of what historically the Institution of Freemasonry was designed to be. Too many lodges were created, exceeding the ability to be properly supported. As a result, standards slipped, and unworthy candidates were admitted.^[5]

The excitement surrounding this chapter of American history was a momentous catalyst that changed the course of Freemasonry in the United States and led to the creation of a short-lived third national political party, the Anti-Mason Party.

This reappraisal provides a closer examination of the hasty actions, injudicious reactions, schemes, deceit, incautious behavior, politics, loss of trust and reputation, and the lasting effects of the Morgan Affair in context with the era. The paths taken at the time—by accusers and defenders of Freemasonry alike—illustrate how fitting the saying is that “lies and rumor can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its boots.

PART I
REAPPRAISAL

Much has been written about William Morgan, his abduction, and his subsequent disappearance at the hands of Masons. The first researched publication on the Morgan Affair appeared in 1827, only months after Morgan’s disappearance.^[6] The first historical analysis of the rise of the Anti-Masonic Party is found ten years following Morgan’s disappearance.^[7] On these subjects, explanations between historians, Masonic writers, journalists, and anti-Masons range widely.^[8]

The events surrounding the Morgan Affair and the Anti-Masonic Party have been the subject and basis of considerable speculation. In fact, numerous grand lodge proceedings of the time, as well as other publications of the period, are laden with stories about the incident, either defending the Institution of Freemasonry or vilifying it.^[9] Much of the writings of the era (and later) were reprints or passed-along articles filled with supposition and woefully light on facts. It can safely be said that the facts constitute less than half of the volumes of writing on the subject.^[10] There was little precaution against falling into the easy snare of generalizations and judgments spun from whole cloth.

Historians and Masonic writers alike have often portrayed the anti-Masonic movement as irrational but fail to account for the legitimate and blatant obstructions to justice perpetrated by Masons throughout the entirety of the five-year-long Morgan Trials. Furthermore, some of these historical evaluations ignore the perceived failure of the judicial system and the ramifications such continued perceived injustice had on the rise of the Anti-Masonic party. Although the conspiracy could not have been as far-reaching as the anti-Masons suggested, it was not inherently irrational.^[11] While the scale of Masonic corruption was much smaller than the anti-Masons insinuated, jury-rigging, recalcitrant and perjuring witnesses, and the outright absconding of several key witnesses and possible conspirators throughout the length of the Morgan trials gave Anti-Masons legitimate reasons to fear for the state of the justice system.^[12]

Citizens of Batavia became increasingly alarmed about the disappearance and fate of Morgan over the weeks following his abduction, which ultimately resulted in the formation of a Genesee County investigative committee. That committee led to the birth of similar investigative committees in Rochester, Lewiston, Victor, Chili, Wheatland, and Bloomfield, New York. By January of 1827, the committees had traced Morgan’s path from his abduction to where he was held for days and had assembled considerable information warranting their alarm.^[13] One early report, known as the Lewiston Report, concluded that at least a dozen men were directly involved in Morgan’s disappearance and at least several dozen more knew of Morgan’s kidnapping, assisted the kidnappers in their travels, or knew Morgan was being held without taking any action to prevent or report the matter.^[14] The large number of participants suggested a darker collusion with many actors working with the intention of undermining the rule of law.

At the time, the institution of Freemasonry, which first appeared in the 1730s in America, was composed of 26 separate Grand Lodges, each sovereign in their administration of the Institution, boasting an excess of 100,000 members.^[15] There was no central, over-arching governing body and no cohesive national representation. The body in America was, on close examination of its early years, amorphous and less organized with a weak structure that did not ensure as much effective oversight of its subordinate lodges as it may have appeared—especially in the far reaches of grand lodge jurisdictions in several states.

This writing is not an exhaustive reconstruction of the Morgan Affair, nor is it intended to serve as one. It is a reappraisal and overview of the scandalous events and conflicting explanations that ultimately changed the course of American Freemasonry. In examining the times and contradictions of early writings, we find guidance toward better understanding the complexity of the issues involved. Looking at them in a way that requires the fewest assumptions is valuable toward that end, and the simplest explanation is more likely to be accurate than the one (or many explanations put forward, in this case) that is more complicated.

The following facts are well established:

1. In early 1826, William Morgan was writing an exposé of Freemasonry.
2. Freemasons had held meetings in the summer of 1826 to consider the subject of Morgan’s plan to publish an exposé, seeding the orchestration of what followed.
3. On August 19, 1826, Freemasons unlawfully seized private papers belonging to Morgan.
4. On September 8, 1826, Freemasons made preparations to assault the private lodgings and business of David C. Miller, the printer who planned to publish Morgan’s exposure.
5. Freemasons tried but failed to purchase Morgan’s manuscript to prevent it from being published.^[16]
6. On September 10, 1826, Freemasons attempted to burn Miller’s printing office where Morgan’s exposé was thought to be located.
7. On September 11, 1826, Morgan was arrested for supposed nonpayment of a loan and allegedly stealing a shirt and a tie. According to the laws of the time, he could be held in debtors’ prison until restitution was made, making it more difficult to complete and publish his exposé.
8. On September 11, 1826, around 9:00 p.m., while incarcerated at the Canandaigua Jail, Morgan was abducted by Freemasons and forced into a waiting coach. Four non-Mason witnesses at the jail heard a man “scream or cry in the most distressing manner,” and the cry of “Murder!”
9. Morgan was taken to Fort Niagara (an abandoned military facility) by carriage, where he was held until around September 19, after a supposed plan to turn Morgan over to Canadian Masons failed.
10. While held at Fort Niagara, Morgan had “a handkerchief drawn completely and tightly over his face.” As affirmed by two Freemason witnesses, Morgan’s face was covered so he could not see who was with him. A discussion was held between Masons as early as September 15 about “putting Morgan to death.”^[17]
11. Two Freemasons accused of being part of the abduction fled the state to avoid prosecution.^[18]
12. A deputy sheriff who summoned citizens to grand jury duties was ordered to not summon anyone who was not “particularly friendly to the Masonic institution.” No grand jury was to be composed of less than two-thirds Masons. The District Attorney was a Royal Arch Mason.^[19]
13. No motions were made to change the venue of trials to another or distant area of New York by the prosecution or defense attorneys.
14. There are no verifiable or credible reports known to exist of Morgan ever being seen alive after he was abducted by the Freemasons and held in their custody.^[20]

Applying the principle that the simplest explanation is more likely to be accurate, these 14 facts alone tell us that Freemasons had the means, motive, and opportunity to not only abduct Morgan but also to murder him. Showing the presence of means, motive, and opportunity, however, is not, in and of itself, sufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt; the evidence must prove that an opportunity presented was taken by the accused and the crime was committed by the accused.

Under the concept of an average person and their conduct, against which the actions of another are weighed (often used as the definition of a reasonable man), the totality of the circumstances combined with just the 14 established facts previously listed is convincing: Morgan was not only abducted by Masons but he also met his fate at their hands. Regardless, neither the totality of the circumstances nor those 14 facts prove that Masons acted on the opportunity to murder Morgan.

The assertions that Morgan was not murdered but was later released by his Masonic abductors, and that he then traveled on to Canada and was later seen in Smyrna, the Caribbean—plus a host of other untenable stories—are all sheer and unsupported folly. Such reported sightings led many defenders of Freemasonry to assume that there were facts to support the sightings. Closely examined in context and source, however, it becomes clear these evidence-flawed sightings were convenient to the defense against the idea that Morgan was murdered and were readily embraced by apologists; yet they remained without necessary corroboration to make them more than unsustainable stories.

Morgan’s body was never found. There were no indictments for the crime of murder. The indictments handed down at the time centered around the abduction and holding Morgan against his will, which was a misdemeanor in the state of New York in 1826. Kidnapping did not become a felony until April 16, 1827, when the New York Assembly passed an act making kidnapping a felony “punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for a term not exceeding fourteen years,” as a response to Morgan’s kidnapping.^[21]

A TIME OF PERSECUTION

The failure of Masonic writers to establish a coherent counter-narrative demonstrates the cultural weakness that would lead to the collapse of American Masonry for a generation after the abduction of William Morgan. Morgan’s murderers may have escaped justice, but in death, Morgan became far more important than he ever could have been in life.^[22]

Examining the counter-narratives today makes it clear how the fraternity at large was genuinely aghast at the events in

Batavia and remained for years in a state of frenzy as they attempted to refute anti-Masonic disinformation (which was also frenzied and plentiful) that portrayed the Institution of Freemasonry as incompatible with religion and the republic. Although careful not to appear as defending the behavior of those found guilty of the crime, many Masonic writers took bits and pieces of information about the event and often, with some creative rhetoric, filled in the blanks, pushing back the tide and consequences of anti-Masonic sentiment to defend and restore the reputation of the fraternity.^[23] The anti-Masonic sentiments, however, were too powerful to subdue. The circumstances of Morgan’s disappearance provided ideal ammunition to advance the anti-Masonic agenda.

1. Michael A. Davis, Jacksonian Volcano: Anti-Secretism and Secretism in 19th Century American Culture,A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati—Main CampusLangsam Library, 2012. ↑
2. Letter “From George Washington to James McHenry, 10 August 1798,” Founders Online, National Archives, accessed September 29, 2019, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/06-02-02-0406. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Retirement Series, vol. 2, 2 January 1798–15 September 1798, ed. W. W. Abbot. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1998.] ↑
3. Ibid. ↑
4. Stephen Dafoe, Morgan: The Scandal That Shook Freemasonry, Cornerstone, 2009. ↑
5. NOTE: As Steven C. Bullock explains in his 1996 groundbreaking book, Revolutionary Brotherhood, Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press), “In the end, ironically, Masonry could not fight back effectively because of the same factors that previously made it popular. A more inclusive order might have muffled broader questioning. A smaller fraternity made up entirely of strongly committed members might have organized a powerful defense [against anti-Masonry sentiment]. Yet either of these options would have required a very different fraternity, one that had lost its extraordinarily fruitful tension between inclusiveness and exclusivity—and one that would never have attracted strong opposition in the first place.” ↑
6. T. F. Talbot, A Narrative of the Facts and Circumstance Related to the Kidnapping and Presumed Murder of William Morgan, Brookfield: E. and G. Merrian, 1827. ↑
7. Jabez D. Hammond, The History of Political Parties in the State of New-York, From the Ratification of the Federal Constitution to December 1840 Vol. II., Albany: C. Van Benthuysen 1842. ↑
8. NOTE: In his 1971 The Birth of Mass Political Parties: Michigan, 1827-1861 historian Ronald P. Formisano concisely summarized modern historical analysis on the causes of the Anti-Masonic Party to include “class resentments, status anxiety, country-city antagonism, denominational rivalries, paranoia, hopes for a better life, and anger at misfortune and failure.” Historian Lorman Ratner suggested that causes behind anti-Masonry included “loss of traditional belief; fear that after a half century the principles for which the country was formed were dying, as the last of its original leaders died; significant economic changes up or down … collapse of established political organizations; and geographic uprooting.” Both Formisano and Ratner noted in their respective works the importance of the religious rival at the time of the anti-Masonic movement. Formisano emphasized the location of western New York as the epicenter of the Morgan Affair as especially important in this regard. According to Formisano, it was “the most preached to proselytized, revived, and reformed area in all of Yankee Christendom. (Breanna Boss, “The Power of Perception: The Failure of the Morgan Trials and the Formation of the Anti-Masonic Party,” http://stagedaypublish.ou.edu/content/dam/cas/history/docs/journal/Boss%20-%20The%20Power%20of%20Perception.pdf, accessed November 2019). ↑
9. NOTE: A search of the archives of over 16,200 newspapers from the 1700s–2000s for the search title of “the Morgan Affair” returns a listing of 9,040,099 references in newspapers of the period and later (https://www.newspapers.com, accessed October 14, 2019). ↑
10. Henry W. Coil, Coil’s Encyclopedia of Masonry, Macoy, 1961. ↑
11. According to Breanna Boss, “The Power of Perception: The Failure of the Morgan Trials and the Formation of the Anti-Masonic Party,” grounds existed permitting reasonable persons to believe that Masons were systematically violating the republican norm of equality before the law and due process of justice. Masons did hold a disproportionate number of government positions in New York during 1826, and at least five of the key figures implicated Morgan’s kidnapping and disappearance were government officials, namely Sheriff William R. Thompson, Sheriff Eli Bruce, Constable Daniel H. Dana, Constable Holloway Hayward, and Constable Jesse French. With the help of some of these officials, Morgan was taken across county lines by means of a government-issued warrant and held against his will in a government-owned building in which at least one of his captors, Ezekiel Jewett, was in the payroll of the government. While the scale of Masonic corruption was much smaller than the anti-Masons insinuated and likely did not extend past the circumstances of the Morgan Affair, jury-rigging, recalcitrant and perjuring witnesses, and the outright absconding of several key witnesses and possible conspirators throughout the length of the Morgan trials gave anti-Masons legitimate reasons to fear for the state of the justice system. (Citation from Ronald P. Formisano and Kathleen Smith Kutolowski, “Anti Masonry and Masonry: The Genesis of Protest, 1826-1827,” American Quarterly 29.2, 1977, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2712356,accessed November 28, 2016). ↑
12. Ibid. ↑
13. Henry Brown, A Narrative of the Anti-Masonic Excitement, in the Western Part of the State of New-York, During the Years 1826, ’7,’8, and a Part of 1829, Batavia: Adams & M’olhary, 1829. ↑
14. Talbot. ↑
15. Rob Morris, The Masonic Martyr: The Biography of Eli Bruce, Sheriff Of Niagara County, New York, Who For His Attachment To The Principles Of Masonry, And His Fidelity To His Trust, Was Imprisoned Twenty-Eight Months In The Canandaigua Jail. Louisville: Morris & Monsarrat, 1861. ↑
16. Ibid. ↑
17. William L. Stone, Letters on Masonry and Anti-Masonry addressed to the Honorable John Quincy Adams, New York, G, Halstead, 1832. Stone relays to Adams the conversation led by Col. William King. One proposal about what to do with Morgan was tying him and sinking him in the Niagara River. ↑
18. John Whitney fled Batavia to Louisiana but was returned for his trail in May 1829 and convicted for his role and received a 15-month sentence. Col. William King left the area in December 1829 after being accused but he was never tried because he died suddenly in Arkansas the morning after he received word of Sheriff Eli Bruce’s testimony against John Whitney that shone an unfavorable light on him (William L. Stone). ↑
19. A February 28, 1830, published letter written by Hiram B. Hopkins, a Royal Arch Mason and deputy sheriff under Eli Bruce (Journal of Proceedings, September 11,1830). ↑
20. By 1830 several of the Freemasons indicted were convicted. Some plead guilty, but not one was “subjected to even Masonic censure.” After being publicly proven to be involved in Morgan’s abduction, some were raised to a “still higher rank in the honors of the fraternity, as in the case of Eli Bruce,” who was, at the time of the abduction, Sheriff of Niagara County. He was removed from office by the governor following his conviction and was sentenced to two years and four months. ↑
21. Boss. ↑
22. Michael A. Davis, “Life Death and Masonry: The Body of William Morgan,” Thanatos Journal, Vol. 2, 2013, www.thanatos-journal.com/2013/06/30/thanatos, accessed 1 October 2016. ↑
23. NOTE: See Part III, Conflicting Confessions, of this essay. ↑