NAUVOO LODGE

Freemasonry and Mormonism
          By Michael S. Thomas

          *Introduction*

          For years, in fact for as long as I can remember I've heard that
          the LDS (Mormon) Church "discouraged" its members from
          joining the Masonic Fraternity.  This was often a source of
          wonderment for me since it  was well documented that Joseph
          Smith Jr., the founder and first leader of  the LDS Church, had
          been made a Master Mason while in  Nauvoo, Illinois.
          Additionally, many of the prominent men of  the early LDS
          Church were avid Mason's, men such as Brigham Young -
          Joseph Smith's successor, Hyrum Smith - Joseph's brother,
          Wilford Woodruff, and George Albert Smith, successive leaders
          of the Church, to name a few.

          Equally  puzzling to me, was the masonic prohibition some of
          the Fraternities Grand Lodges, had against LDS church
          members joining the fraternity.

          As to the first point, I've satisfied myself that there has never
          been a general statement by the Church specifically discouraging
          its members from joining the Masonic Fraternity.  There may be
          some local church leaders who discourage it for whatever
          reasons, but those local leaders speak only to their own
          congregations, and not to the general membership of the church.
          Even then it is usually to individual circumstances and not in
          broad generalities.

          On the second point, concerning the Masonic prohibition, it is
          indeed a fact that the Fraternity excluded members of the
          "Mormon" Church, from joining.  This prohibition, although
          unmasonic because it was based upon a religious preference,
          may have had some justification based upon history and the
          Masonic experience.  This situation has since been corrected, at
          least in the Utah Lodges.

          Unfortunately, there's still much misunderstanding from
          members of both organizations towards the other.  Why do
          these misunderstanding persist?  The answer may be found by
          examining the persecutions which were experienced by  both
          organizations around the 1830's and 1840's.   I've concluded
          that individual  members, not incompatible dogma instigated and
          perpetuated the schism that has existed.

          I hope to explain from the points of view as both a Mason and a
          Mormon, some of the events which created the schism between
          these two organizations.  This is not meant to be an examination
          of belief and practices of the Church or Fraternity, although
          certain aspects may need to be touched upon as background.

          In my research to present a factual history, I've found that most
          of the literature dealing with this subject is out-dated.  Most of
          the publications dealing with the subject written by Masons,
          point out the various reasons why that particular author thinks
          the Mormons are incompatible with the fraternity, and attempt
          to show why the fraternity was justified in denying membership
          to LDS members.  Others are extremely critical of  the Utah
          Lodges for not allowing LDS members the privileges of
          membership in the Fraternity based upon their religious beliefs.
          The resources which I've found for either position, fail to reflect
          the current practice of the Fraternity  of admitting all honorable
          men regardless of their creed, so long as they have an unfeigned
          belief in Deity.  Similarly, there are many misunderstandings as
          to the purposes of the Masonic Fraternity among LDS
          members, who attach an  erroneous "Secret Society" definition
          to it.

          I believe it is uninformed individuals, not organizational
          teachings, that perpetuate these erroneous misunderstandings
          and the blind acceptance of false information.  For example
          according to The Salt  Lake Tribune:

          "...There is no specific Mormon prohibition of Masonry, but
          church spokesman Don LeFever said the church discourages it
          members from joining it or similar groups.  'The church strongly
          advises its  members not to affiliate with organizations that are
          secret, Oath- bound, or would cause them to lose interest in
          church activities.'"(1)

          Taken literally, this would seem to indicate that holding any
          public office which requires an oath would be discouraged. Yet
          the real facts are that members are encouraged to be politically
          and civically active. Or  that joining the Boy Scouts, which has
          the Scout Oath  would also be discouraged, yet the LDS Church
          is an ardent supporter of that organization.

          The oaths administered in the Masonic  Ceremonies bind one to
          be honorable, honest, to obey civil law, and  to keep
          confidences. Encouragement is also given to search out and live
          the teachings of Holy Scripture, specifically the Holy Biblein the
          United States.  All of this is compatible with LDS teachings and
          beliefs.

          In fact, one of the statements of  belief taught by Joseph Smith
          to the church was:

          "...If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or
          praiseworthy, we seek after  these things."(2)

          From my  experience and knowledge of the Freemasons, this is
          certainly a praiseworthy organization.

          Since the Fraternity openly publishes its membership list, states
          its purposes, gives public tours of its buildings, openly
          contributes civically to the community, and donates books
          containing much of this information to public libraries, It can't
          truthfully be called a secret society.  When a Mason promises to
          keep secrets, what he is promising, is to keep all confidences
          "sacred and  inviolable".  A laudable trait in any moral
          organization or society!

          A statement made by a member of the First Presidency of the
          Church in 1934, also clearly shows that there is not a Mormon
          prohibition against Masonry:
 

          "The Mormon Church has no quarrel with Freemasonry or any
          other organization which is formed for a righteous purpose ... A
          Mason who may become a member to the Mormon Church is in
          no way restrained from affiliation with his lodge..."(3)

          This statement has never been refuted, or retracted.

          Most of the LDS authors who write on this subject, seem to
          focus on why its members shouldn't be denied Masonic
          membership, based upon their adherence to the tenets of the
          LDS Church.  However, most of these works were written prior
          to 1984, during a time when there was a Masonic prohibition
          against Mormon membership in the Utah lodges.  Nowhere did I
          find an LDS author suggesting that and LDS member shouldn't
          join.

          Early Utah Freemason sentiment was  expressed by Grand
          Master J.M. Orr in 1878:

          "We say to the priest of the Latter-day Church, you cannot enter
          our lodge rooms...Stand      aside, we want none of you. Such a
          wound as you gave Masonry in Nauvoo is not easily healed, and
          no Latter-day Saint is, or can become a member in our
          jurisdiction."(4)

          This statement is important and revealing because I think it will
          give us a basis for understanding the feelings that existed on
          both sides of the issue.  I believe that this "wound" refers to a
          series of events which will  be treated in more detail later, but
          generally refers to young LDS Lodges violating some of the
          fraternities ancient landmarks and a general belief and
          accusations by Mormon's at the time, that it was the Masonic
          Fraternity who was responsible for the murder of Joseph Smith,
          or at least for the failure of the killers to be brought to justice.

          *Interpretive Approach Used in This Paper*

          In researching this subject, it has been my experience that the
          interpretation of events and the cause and effect relationship,
          differs depending upon the experiences and background of the
          person examining those events.  I might use the analogy of
          three blind men describing an elephant through their sense of
          touch for the first time. The one on the side describes it as a
          wall, the one at the trunk, as a snake, and the one at the tail, as a
          rope.  Of course each was right in relating his own experience,
          yet each was wrong because they were limited in their total
          experience.

          In interpreting several cause and effect incidents, I have always
          tried to take the most charitable of possible interpretations
          towards the organization being considered. Kind of "The benefit
          of the doubt" type approach.
 
 

          *Early Mormon History*

          To understand some of the feelings which exist today, it will be
          necessary  to present some history of the period in which the
          conflicts began.  Although persecution of the church started in
          earnest in Missouri,  the schism between the Masons and the
          Mormons seems to have had its beginnings in Illinois.

          The early LDS Church suffered numerous persecutions and
          hatred in  Missouri, which became increasingly bitter as the
          church grew. The Church was anti-slavery in a slave state, and
          as it grew, so did its political clout.  While it's true that the
          hierarchy didn't dictate to the members how they should vote on
          any particular issue,  those that were joining the church found
          themselves to be like minded  people, and in-spite of the absence
          of direct guidance from church leaders on political matters, the
          indirect influence was certainly there, and having a common
          belief system they  tended to vote as a group.  Also the
          encouragement of foreign converts to emigrate and join with the
          church in Missouri, resulted in a steady growth of its political
          power base.

          This, combined with some of the unique doctrines of the church
          led  to an intense public resentment.  This resentment and the
          resulting persecution grew more severe as time went on,
          eventually culminating in the Governor of Missouri, Lilburn W.
          Boggs declaring in 1838 that all Mormons were to either be
          driven from the State or exterminated.  He apparently felt that
          the only way to end the feuds and near civil war conditions
          between the Mormons and Non-Mormons, would be to
          eliminate one of the sides in the dispute, even if it was by
          genocide.

          It was under these conditions that the church members fled from
          Missouri to Quincy, Illinois where they were welcomed with
          opened  arms and immediately taken in with a great deal of
          hospitality. Ironically, this warm reception was largely for the
          same reasons which had caused them to be driven from
          Missouri, that is their  political influence.

          Many leading candidates for public office felt that if the
          Mormons could be swayed to their agendas, they would have a
          great advantage over their opponents.  But whatever the reason,
          it was a welcome change from what had been left behind in
          Missouri.

          In May 1839, the Church began purchasing land in Commerce,
          Illinois a farm or two at a time at first, until very large tracts of
          land were owned.  This soon became the central gathering place
          for the Church and eventually the name was changed to
          Nauvoo.  A liberal Charter was obtained from the State
          Legislature, granting it official recognition as a city.  The
          Charter also granted broad authority to pass laws, establish
          district courts,  police departments, city councils, a standing
          militia  (giving official and lawful sanction to the Nauvoo
          Legion), etc.

          With the privileges granted in the Charter by the State
          Legislature, and with the majority of the residents being
          Mormon, the  constitutional separation of church and state
          relationship was unintentionally, but predictably violated.

          The principle leaders of  the church were also elected to the
          most important city positions,  giving them almost exclusive
          political as well as ecclesiastical authority over the church and
          community.  As might be predicted, many civil laws were
          enacted which reflected the religious beliefs and  values of the
          majority, often to the displeasure of the minority of  non-LDS
          residents of the city. Nauvoo grew so rapidly that by the  time
          the church started it's western exodus it is reported to have  been
          three times the size of the then current Chicago.
 

          Again, the resentment of local citizens grew as a result of the
          political clout the church was gaining, still tending to vote as a
          group but inconsistently for any one party at any particular time.

                  "Leaders of the opposition considered Mormonism much more
          than religion as that term was generally understood.
          Mormonism meant a rapidly expanding close-knit economic and
          political group which, if not checked, might possibly gain
          complete control of the state.  As the largest single organization
          occupying the state's most populous city, the Mormons had
          gained the balance of political power in Hancock County by
          1843.  It was this threat of economic-political control more than
          any specific religious doctrine that unified the anti-Mormons
          into vigorous militant groups.  Before 1844, church leaders
          denied any ambition of a political nature, but outsiders noted
          that Mormons tended to vote more or less solidly although not
          consistently for the same party."(5)

          *Anti-Masonism*

          The Masons had experienced some of the same public
          resentment and  suffered many of the same persecutions, but for
          different reasons than the Mormons.  The Masons had received
          a lot of attention and criticism for what the public called "blood
          oaths". By way of explanation, the oaths which are administered
          during the initiation rituals describe certain penalties for violation
          of a Masons promises not to make public the Fraternities modes
          of recognition, ritual,  etc.  These penalties, however are only
          symbolic and date back to  situations that existed in the middle
          ages when the violation of  these promises could have put many
          lives in jeopardy.  The most severe punishment which could be
          inflicted by a lodge in the 1800's, and today, would be expulsion
          from membership.  The public however, had no understanding
          of the symbolic nature of these penalties, nor even what they
          were, except that they included the taking of life.  Most  people
          mistook them to be very literal.  It was during these
          circumstances, that events known today as the "Morgan Affair",
          ignited the anti-Masonic feelings of the period.

          In about 1825, William Morgan, a Freemason in New York,
          announced  that he would publish an expose' on Freemasonry,
          revealing its rites, rituals, modes of recognition, etc.  Shortly
          after he made this  announcement, Mr. Morgan mysteriously
          disappeared, never to be heard  from again.  With nothing but
          rumor and speculation to go on, the Masonic Fraternity was
          accused of his kidnapping and murder for violating his oaths to
          the Fraternity.  As tension built anti-Masonic political parties
          began to spring up, and met with so much success among an
          outraged and misinformed population, that a national
          "Anti-Masonic Party" was officially organized.  On two
          occasions they  even had legitimate candidates for the office of
          United States  President.  The persecution became so severe that
          many lodges folded  and went out of existence for lack of
          membership.  But by 1835 the storm had passed and the
          Fraternity began the process of healing and  recovery.
 
 

          *Salt in Open Wounds*

          The indignities these two organizations suffered would naturally
          make them suspicious of outsiders, no matter who the outsiders
          were.  While the Masons had been thus persecuted, and
          understandably sensitive to public opinion, hearing all kinds of
          false accusations about their Fraternity being a secret society,
          administering blood oaths, and protecting its members from
          prosecution for crimes they committed,  the LDS Church
          published its Book of Mormon.  A passage from that book was
          taken by many to be speaking about the Masonic Order.

          "But behold, Satan did stir up the hearts of the more part of the
          Nephites, insomuch that they did unite with those bands of
          robbers, and did enter into their covenants and their oaths, that
          they would protect and preserve one another in whatsoever
          difficult circumstances they should be placed, that they should
          not suffer for their murders, and their plunderings, and their
          stealings. And it came to pass that they did have their signs, and
          their secret words; and this that they might distinguish a brother
          who had entered into the covenant, that whatsoever wickedness
          his brother should do he should not be injured by his brother,
          nor by those who did belong to his band, who had taken this
          covenant. And thus they might murder, and plunder and steal,
          and commit whoredoms and all manner of wickedness, contrary
          to the laws of their country and also the laws of their God."(6)

          Except for the recent persecutions and a similarity to the publics
          accusations of the time, Masons probably would never have
          thought  that this had been written about them, since anyone
          even  superficially familiar with the Masons, know that the
          Fraternity  would itself condemn any such behavior by its
          members, and they  would immediately be expelled from the
          Lodge and turned over to Legal authorities for lawful
          disposition.

          The acts described in this passage would be as loathsome to any
          Mason, Mormon, or any other God fearing citizen.  But since
          these things had been so widely spoken against the Fraternity by
          ignorant people, to see them in print again by a sect who was
          claiming it to be scripture, would  naturally incite a great deal of
          resentment.

          It can easily be seen why it would create fears of renewed
          persecution, and why it would be interpreted as a statement of
          the Church against Freemasonry.  However, had this actually
          been the case Joseph Smith and most of the early church leaders
          would never have joined the Fraternity, most of whom joined
          after the Book of Mormon was published.

          It was during this rebuilding period for Freemasonry, the
          persecution  of the LDS Church, and this era of political clout in
          the Church, that all these circumstances combined into a series
          of events that would end in a schism between the Masons and
          Mormons, leaving a feeling of bitterness and misunderstanding
          between the two organizations for over a century and a half.

          *Mormon Interest In Freemasonry*

          Let's now examine the interest Joseph Smith had in the Masonic
          Fraternity and why he joined.  As previously stated, he and his
          new church had suffered numerous persecutions and had many
          atrocities committed against them.  Early in his ministry, as the
          church was being organized, Joseph lamented:

          "I continued to pursue my common vocations in life... all the
          time suffering severe persecution at the hands of all classes of
          men, both religious and irreligious... and persecuted by those
          who ought to have been my friends and to have treated me
          kindly,  and if they supposed me to have been deluded to have
          endeavored in a proper and affectionate manner to have
          reclaimed me..."(7)

          These persecutions continued to build and become more violent
          in  intensity.  Joseph fervently wanted them to end, for both
          himself and the Church.  Several of his associates, including his
          brother Hyrum,  were Masons and familiar with the Fraternities
          teachings of a belief in God and the brotherhood of man.  They
          convinced Joseph that the fellowship they would find within its
          Lodges would give them solace and respite from the
          persecutions and prejudices, as well as a degree of protection
          from the violence.

          "If ever a man was in need of sympathy and the friendship of
          good men, that man was Joseph Smith.  It was under these
          circumstances that Joseph Smith became a member of the
          Masonic Fraternity.  He hoped to find there the friendship and
          protection which he so much craved, but which had been denied
          him outside of his few devoted adherents."(8)

          *Masonic Interest In Mormonism*

          If the foregoing establishes any valid reasons for the Mormon
          interest in Freemasonry, we should now examine why the
          Masons allowed the  Mormons to establish Lodges under the
          authority of the Grand Lodge of  Illinois.  To discover this, we
          must look towards the Grand Master at  the time, one Abraham
          Jonas.  A "Master Politician" , Abraham Jonas  became the
          Grand Master of  the Illinois Grand Lodge through a series of
          unlikely events, as described by one noted Masonic Author,
          Mervin  B. Hogan, concerning Illinois Grand Lodge elections.

          "As a result of evident dissension among the ... lodges, the six
          lodges represented were      unable to elect anyone present to the
          principal office. Rather obvious speculation suggest that as a
          desperate last move an absent dark horse was introduced into
          the picture. This       personage was Abraham Jonas. ...
          Since Jonas was not present, Adams adjourned the Grand
          Lodge until Tuesday, April 28, 1840 as the announced date for
          the regular installation of the newly elected and appointed
          officers. At this later date, Jonas again was not present so
          Adams... installed Jonas by proxy.... It appears to be virtually
          certain that Abraham Jonas was totally without interest, concern,
          or the slightest aspiration relating to the Illinois Grand
          Mastership. ... (Adams) attended to the Organization of the
          Grand Lodge, and persuasively enlisted Jonas to their common
          cause of individual political preferment."(9)

          Mr. Jonas had a political agenda in running for various public
          offices, and had been convinced by Adams that by courting
          Mormon favor, he could more effectively promote his own civic
          aspirations.  Additionally,  as Grand Master involved in the post
          "Morgan Affair", he undoubtedly  hoped to stimulate the growth
          of the Fraternity after its precipitous decline during the
          anti-Masonic era.  The Mormon Lodges would greatly  increase
          the size of the Illinois Grand Lodge.

          Unfortunately, many of the older, established Lodges in the
          State felt that the Dispensations granted to the Mormon lodges
          had not been done according to Masonic regulations.  That,
          combined with the hard-feelings which existed among Masons
          because WGM Jonas had made Joseph Smith a "Mason at
          Sight", cost the Mormon lodges much of the needed support
          from their closest sister Lodges.

          *Attempts To Expand*

          Initially the young church embraced the Fraternity, and
          enthusiastically set about to establish Lodges in their
          communities.  So many new lodges were being created that the
          distances, modes of transportation, and means of
          communication, made  it difficult for a new lodge to be properly
          supervised in its work.  Additionally, the closer non-Mormon
          lodges felt no desire to assist the Mormon Lodges, feeling they
          were "inadequately familiar with them".

          In their zeal to grow and prosper, many mistakes were made and
          many Landmarks violated.  While the Nauvoo Lodge was under
          Dispensation,  from March 15, 1842 to August 11, 1842, the
          Lodge Initiated 286 candidates, and Passed and Raised nearly as
          many. Additionally, the Mormon Lodges, balloted on several
          candidates at one time, which was  a serious violation of
          Masonic protocol.  Other violations included  using the Masonic
          Lodge for city offices, a church warehouse, and as  a meeting
          place for the newly organized Mormon Women's Relief
          Society.

          Many of the violations were not uncommon among new lodges
          of the period, Mormon and non-Mormon alike.  However, the
          seriousness of  these errors in judgement were amplified by the
          nature and general  perception of the church as an organization.
          The church seemed a radical organization.  They didn't feel an
          obligation to follow the established conventions of the time, but
          boldly established many new doctrines, practices, and rituals.
          The counsel and correction which was offered by Masonic
          authority to correct some of these irregularities, undoubtedly
          was seen by the Mormons as interference and as jealousy from
          their sister Lodges, as well as additional persecution.  This
          attitude culminated in the Mormon Lodges being declared
          "Clandestine" and they were no longer recognized by the Illinois
          Lodges.  Even this was seen as harassment and largely ignored
          by Mormon Lodges who continued to Initiate, Pass, and Raise
          candidates.  Their determination and  inflexibility was
          considered by many as hardheadedness and arrogance.

          It's hard to say with certainty that Masonic jealousy didn't play
          some small role in the revocation of the Mormon Charters.  The
          persecutions of previous years, the zeal with which the Masonic
          Fraternity guards its ancient land marks, combined with the tide
          of public opinion against the Church, and seeing the rapid
          growth of the lodges in LDS communities, the  neighboring
          Lodges feared that the Grand Lodge would eventually be
          controlled by Mormon Masons, possibly destroying the
          Fraternity as an  ancient institution with new innovations,
          thereby destroying its usefulness, and reducing it to the mere
          status of a local men's club.

          The lodge membership figures for the year 1842 in Illinois is
          telling, and in hindsight makes the rising tide of ill will somewhat
          predictable.  Mormon Lodge membership in two of the lodges
          were:  Nauvoo, 285 and the Rising Sun Lodge at Montrose,
          Iowa Territory, 45.

          Comparatively, non-LDS Lodge Membership at this same time
          by Lodge,  Bodely No. 1, 25; Harmony No. 3, 23; Springfield
          No. 4, 43; Columbus  No. 6, 16; Macomb No. 8, 22, Juliet No.
          10, 25; Rushville, UD, 10;  Warren, UD, 8. (10)

          This gave the growing Mormon Lodges 330 members while the
          older established non-Mormon Lodges had only 172.

          *The Schism Completed*

          With the events of this period as a back drop, let's examine the
          alleged involvement of the Masonic Lodges in the martyr of
          Joseph and Hyrum Smith.

          During this period of anti-Mormon sentiment,  Thomas C.
          Sharp from the City of Warsaw, assumed leadership of the
          anti-Mormon movement.  Mr. Sharp edited the influential
          Warsaw Signal, a prominent newspaper of the time.

          "To counter Mormon political power Sharp organized an
          anti-Mormon political Party  in 1841, urging Whigs and
          Democrats to come to his support. Searching for issues upon
          which to challenge Mormon power, Sharp criticized the
          establishment of the Nauvoo Legion, the city charter, the
          prophets expansive land transactions, and the solid Mormon
          vote.(11)
          Thomas Sharp was so key in agitating the public against the
          Mormons, I will here include several of his quotations, which he
          published by the Warsaw Signal in 1844.

          May 29th: "We have seen enough to convince us that Joe Smith
          is not safe out of Nauvoo, and we should not be surprised to
          hear of his death by violent means in a short time."

          June 5th: "If one portion of the community sets the law at
          defiance, are we bound to respect the laws in our reaction to
          it?..."

          June 12th: "War and extermination is evitable! CITIZENS
          ARISE, ONE AND ALL!!! Can you stand by and suffer such
          INFERNAL DEVILS!... We have no time for comment! Every
          man will make his own. LET IT BE WITH POWDER AND
          BALL!"
          JUNE 19th: "STRIKE THEM! for the time has fully come.  We
          hold ourselves at all times in readiness to cooperate with our
          fellow citizens... to exterminate, utterly  exterminate, the wicked
          and abominable Mormon leaders."

          The above editorial comments will serve to show that Thomas
          Sharp was  bitterly anti-Mormon, and the reader may surmise
          how the Mormons felt  towards him.

          There was enough evidence after the murder of Joseph and
          Hyrum Smith to be convinced that Mr. Sharp had played a key
          role in inciting the actions which led to the murders.  Several
          witnesses testified that Thomas Sharp had been among the party
          that traveled to Carthage and committed the murder.

          Sharp was arrested for the murders with others of note, Jacob
          Davis  and Levi Williams. However, none of these men were
          ever convicted.  Not  because  of a lack of evidence, but
          because of legal wrangling.  (Which wrangling did not involve
          the Masons, so far as I know.) It  was during the pre-trial
          preparations that the Masonic Fraternity  became entangled in
          the controversy which brought Mormon accusations  of a
          cover-up.

          In an apparent effort to garner public support, the defendants
          attempted to find refuge in the Warsaw lodge while  awaiting
          trial. To the Fraternities credit, the Grand Lodge of  Illinois
          called the Warsaw lodge to an accounting for its actions.  The
          following describes the circumstances.

          "In the meantime, the defendants were apparently trying to
          strengthen their position by new allegiances within the influential
          Masonic order.  Mark Aldrich was a member of Warsaw Lodge
          No. 21, founded in January 1843.  With an immediacy and
          urgency that cannot have been coincidental, Jacob Davis,
          Thomas Sharp, and Levi Williams were all initiated into the
          small Warsaw Lodge in October and December 1844.  Before
          spring all three had been passed to the second degree, and Davis
          and Williams had been raised to Master Masons.  How much
          advantage the defendants expected to derive from this
          association is unclear, though it is a fact that many of the most
          influential men in the County and State at this time were
          Masons.  The list includes Justice Richard M. Young of the
          Illinois Supreme Court, who was to be the judge at the trial;
          James H. Ralston, former states attorney; Judge Stephen A.
          Douglas; former circuit judge O.C. Skinner, who was to be
          among the defense counsel at the trial; George W. Thatcher, the
          anti-Mormon clerk of the county commissioners court; and
          various members of the Warsaw Militia, such as Charles Hay,
          Henry Stephens, and several of the Chittenden family.

          "Whatever uncertainties may exist in the benefits the defendants
          expected to derive from their Masonic affiliation, there is no
          doubt that the state officers in the Masonic order identified an
          impropriety in this maneuver and took decisive disciplinary
          action.  In its annual meeting in 1845 the Grand Lodge of
          Illinois appointed a select committee to investigate reports that
          the Warsaw lodge had violated Masonic regulations by
          conferring degrees upon persons who were under indictment.
          In response to this investigation, officials of the Warsaw Lodge
          admitted that the degrees had been conferred on Davis,
          Williams, and Sharp, but pleaded that the men in question were
          'worthy members of society, and respected by their fellow
          citizens.'  Their standing in the community 'had not been at all
          impaired by the indictment, but, on the contrary, they were
          regarded with greater consideration than before, from the fact
          that they had been particularly  selected as the victims of
          Mormon vengeance.' The Grand Lodge was apparently
          unimpressed with the defense.  A year after this report was
          submitted, the Warsaw Lodge surrendered its Charter, ostensibly
          because 'the members of Warsaw Lodge No. 21 have no
          suitable room to work in...' This voluntary relinquishment of a
          Charter because of supposed housing shortage in Warsaw was
          undoubtedly a face-saving disposition in lieu of involuntary
          suspension for violation of regulations of the order."(12)

          *Mormon Exodus  - Nauvoo to Utah*

          The death of the Mormon leader, Joseph Smith Jr. did nothing
          to stop the persecution experienced by the members of the faith.
          In fact rumor, and the expectation that non-Mormons would be
          made the targets of Mormon vengeance, further incited the non-
          Mormon population and the persecution continued to mount,
          rather than subsiding in any degree.  What was seen by some as
          arrogance by the remaining Mormon leader's, could also have
          been defensiveness in an effort to protect the members of the
          newly established Church.

          With increasing mob action and public misinformation against
          the Mormons, it soon became apparent that it would again be
          necessary to leave their homes behind.  Brigham Young, the
          new leader of the sect, turned his eye's to the Salt Lake Valley.
          It was probably the hope that such a place would never be
          chosen by travelers as a desirable place to be settled by others,
          and that such a place would offer isolation and protection from
          the rest of the world.  It appeared to be a barren wasteland.  Jim
          Bridger, a scout and explorer once declared that he would give,
          a thousand dollars for every ear of corn that could be grown in
          the Salt Lake Valley.

          In spite of its barren appearance, it was a place of tremendous
          resources.  The only thing lacking was water to cultivate its rich
     &nb