with the disappearance of Morgan and Monroe, assuming that both had been drowned in Lake Ontario, calculated to complicate the questions of identity. The body was found at Oak Orchard creek, a full year after Morgan's disappearance; of course it could not have been drifting about that length of time. It was known, however, that Morgan was weighted heavily when thrown into the lake; and, two months before that body was found, the mouth of the river and that part of the lake where Morgan was supposed to have been thrown overboard had been thoroughly raked. In this way it was supposed that the body had been released from its weight, risen to the surface and drifted to Oak Orchard creek. Monroe was drowned on the 25th or 27th of September. The body at Oak Orchard creek was found on the 8th day of October, leaving but eleven or twelve days to drift a distance of forty miles, where it was found. It is understood that drowned persons remain several days under water. It was ascertained by meteorological records that, during the interval between Monroe' death and the finding of the body at Oak Orchard creek, the wind blew most of the time up the lake. Now as there is no current in Lake Ontario, and as objects float with, rather than against the wind, it seemed improbable that the body found should be that of Monroe; while, on the other hand, it seemed equally improbable that a man drowned in the latter part of September, 1826, could have been found in a tolerable state of preservation on October, 1827. So that there were irreconcilable facts and circumstances connected with this strange history.

Mrs. Morgan and the intimate friends of Morgan described marks upon his person before seeing that body, which left no doubt in the minds of all present that it was the remains of her husband. Strangely enough, however, she repudiated every article of clothing found upon the body. And yet Mrs Monroe, who came from Canada, readily described every article, garment by garment, with minute and startling accuracy. While, therefore, up to the time that Mrs. Monroe appeared there was no just grounds for discrediting the correctness of the second inquest, yet after the third inquest had been held at Batavia there was a strong reaction in public opinion. Although the gentlemen associated with me in the investigation were still strongly of the opinion that the body was that of William Morgan, my own previously clear and strong convictions were a good deal disturbed. Nor can I now, after nearly fifty years' anxious inquiry and reflection, say that I am satisfied that it was or was not the body of William Morgan.

The discrepancies about the hair and beard between Mrs. Morgan and Mrs. Monroe, after the conclusion of the third, or Batavia inquest, induced those who claimed that to be the body of Timothy Monroe, to say that the hair was pulled out and the whiskers shaven off to make it resemble Morgan. That could only have been done in the presence of between sixty and seventy persons, some of whom were Democrats and others Freemasons, and yet all must have seen and consented to the fraud. The last inquest was held only a few days before the election. No other question entered into the canvass. The excitement was greater than I had previously or since witnessed.

A few evenings before the election I went into a billiard saloon to see my friend, Gustavus Clark. A number of gentlemen were present, and among them Ebenezer Griffin, who, as council for several persons indicted for the abduction of Morgan, had conducted the inquest at Batavia. As I was leaving the room Mr. Griffin said, "Well, Weed, what are you going to do for a Morgan now ?" I replied as I was closing the door, "That is a good enough Morgan until you bring back the one you

have carried away." This remark was reproduced in the Rochester Daily Advertiser, with an apparently slight, but most important variation. Instead of what I did in fact say, I was represented as saying, "That is a good enough Morgan until after the election." What I did say in reply to Mr. Griffin's question was a proper and harmless response, while that I was erroneously accused of saying was highly discreditable, and has subjected me, at home and abroad, for nearly fifty years, to reproach and obloquy. Mr. Dawson, senior editor of the Albany Evening Journal, who resided at Rochester during the Morgan excitement, recently wrote an article on the subject, in which he said:

The phrase had its origin something in this wise: In 1827, a few months after William Morgan disappeared, the body of a drowned man was found in Lake Ontario, near the outlet of Oak Orchard creek. It was believed by many who saw it to be the body of the kidnapped and murdered Morgan, while others alleged it to be the body of another missing man-one Timothy Monroe. The latter met with this difficulty, however. Monroe had whiskers; this body had not. But to overcome this important fact the then editor of the Rochester Advertiser charged that Mr. Weed had shaved off Monroe's whiskers, and by doing so had made a "good enough Morgan until after the election," then pending. The slander was industriously used at the time, and has been a thorn in the side of Mr. Weed from that day to this. Of course its repetition is less irritating now than it was forty-eight years ago, but its use even as a joke has always chafed Mr. Weed, and his most intimate friends were careful never to allude to it in his presence.

Mr. Dawson's article brought a correspondent of the Albany Argus "to the front," who not only reiterates the charge against me, but furnishes what purports to be an affidavit of a person who saw me commit the offense. The Argus correspondent says.

William Morgan was a man of medium size, very bald and shaved his whiskers off even to the top of his ears; and the body which was found and called Timothy Monroe, was six inches longer than the height of William Morgan. Besides, the face of the body found was covered with whiskers; and it was said that to make the body found appear more like Morgan some of the committee who were sent to Oak Orchard creek to an immense mass meeting of anti-Masons, among whom were Thurlow Weed and his right hand man Friday, named Jack Marchant, had pulled out the whiskers and shaved the face of Monroe. Some time after this, in the fall of 1827, when anti-Masonry had become rife in politics, Mr. Weed, who was younger then than he is now and quite poor, and desirous of making himself somebody, became the leader of the anti-Masonic party, and entertained much hatred and contempt for all who did not vote the anti-Masonic ticket, especially for those Democrats who were not Masons, to whom he gave the name of "Masons' Jacks." And Mason, as I then understood it, was rallying Thurlow about his false Morgan, when he, either jocosely or in earnest, replied, "It is a good enough Morgan till after the election," Such has always been the understanding until the Journal contradicted it, as above stated. As prima facie evidence that he did so, I will relate a fact to show the animus of Thurlow Weed then. In the fall of 1828 General Jackson was the Democratic candidate for President, Martin Van Buren for Governor, and Enos F. Throop for Lieutenant-Governor. The polls were open three days in different places in the town. Your correspondent was then a resident of Rochester, and was one of those offensive animals called "Jack Masons." At that election about four miles

some Jack

southwest of Rochester the polls were held, and our venerable friend, then quite young, to show his ineffable contempt for Jack Masons, led up to the polls a jackass and put a vote into its mouth, and pushed its head toward the window where, votes were taken, whereupon your correspondent read in quite a loud voice the printed copy of an affidavit, which was in these words:

Monroe County, ss-Zephania Green, of the town of Henrietta, in said county, doth depose and say that he saw Thurlow Weed pull out the whiskers of Timothy Monroe, and Jack Marchant he did shave the same. And further deponent saith not.

Sworn to before me, September, 1822.

ZEPHANIA GREEN.

The Argus correspondent, it will be seen, claims to have had personal knowledge of the matter about which he writes, and is evidently one of those who believed, and still believes, the accusation against me to be true. Relying, as he evidently does, on his memory, I will not hold him severely responsible for utterly mis-stating every material fact in his article. The election to which he refers was not held in 1828, but in 1827, when neither General Jackson nor Martin Van Buren nor Enos F. Throop were candidates. The affidavit which, he says, he read aloud at the polls at the election, is a mere skeleton perversion of an affidavit which was published in handbills and freely circulated, not only at the polls referred to, but throughout the county. I preserved, and still retain in my possession one of those handbills, of which the following is a literal and exact copy:

William C. Green being duly sworn, deposeth and says that he, the said Green, with others, did attend the poll of election held at Howard's, in the town of Gates, in the county of Monroe, and that there Mr. Thurlow Weed did say that he, the said Thurlow, did pull the whiskers from the face of the body found at Oak Orchard creek, and that John Marchant did shave the same, he, the said Thurlow, being one of the Morgan committee. WILLIAM GREEN.

Subscribed and sworn, this 6th day of November, 1827, before me,

66

SAMUEL MILLER, J. P.

This affidavit appeared in the Rochester Daily Advertiser, November 7, 1827, and was circulated in handbill form at the polls the same day. I preserved one of the handbills, from which the above is a literal copy. The affidavit is signed by William C. instead of Zephania Green. Mr. W. C. Green swears that he "heard me say that I did pull the whiskers from the face of the body found at Oak Orchard creek." The Argus affidavit-maker, Zephania Green," swears that he "saw me pull out the whiskers," etc. Now, the fact is, no such affidavit appeared or was read at the polls of the election referred to; nor, as far as I know, was there any such man in or about Rochester as Zephania Green. But I did know William C. Green, a Democratic electioneerer, by whom it was arranged I should be followed and importuned with questions about Timothy Monroe's hair and whiskers. The object was to keep me so surrounded and occupied as to withdraw my attention from the electors as they came to vote. Discovering its object, I determined to put an end to the by-play, and when asked by Green if I pulled out Monroe's whiskers I answered affirmatively, and to the question, "Who shaved the body ?" I replied, "John Marchant." This turned the laugh against my opponent. Nobody, however, was misled by it, for all received it as it was intended. Green's occupation was spoiled for that day. On the following morning, however, his affidavit appeared in the Daily Advertiser, and was circulated freely at the polls. Green swore to the truth, but in a manner to make truth a false

hood. All who heard me, including Green himself, knew that it was a joke. Judge Miller, the then young justice of the peace, before whom the affidavit was made, is now a venerable citizen of New Haven, Conn. I had no reason to complain, and did not complain of the use made of my jocose admission.

The other accusations, however, namely, of boasting that the body found at Oak Orchard creek was "a good enough Morgan till after the election," though an utter perversion, proved serious and enduring. My action in reference to the body in question was influenced by a sincere and earnest desire for truth. I realized in every step taken the high responsibility of the investigation. I knew that a mistake upon a question of such exciting and absorbing interest would react powerfully. Thus impressed, I exerted myself personally to induce all who knew Morgan, whether Masons or anti-Masons, Democrats or Whigs, to be present at the second inquest.

In looking back upon an event which occurred nearly half a century ago, with the asperities and impressions which it occasioned allayed and corrected, and in view of the embittered feeling existing between the editor and the proprietor of the Rochester Daily Advertiser and myself, I am free to admit that they had provocations which, from their standpoint, excused the use of such political weapons as they found available. It was a sort of hand-to-hand conflict, in which I remember to have been unsparing. The term "Mason Jacks," freely applied to all who acted politically against us, was a peculiarly offensive one, and most especially so to the editor and publisher of the Advertiser, neither of whom were Masons. Even now it is evident that the correspondent of the Argus has not forgotten or forgiven that offense. In conclusion I affirm, in the strongest language, and in the broadest sense, that I acted in perfect good faith throughout the investigation touching the body found at Oak Orchard creek, and that I have truthfully repeated a playful and innocent reply to a question, out of which grew the unfounded charge of boasting that it was a "good enough Morgan till after the election," under the odium of which I have rested for fortyeight years.

It may not be out of time and place to add that in this case it is not too late to "vindicate the truth of history."

The then editor of the Rochester Daily Advertiser is now a resident of this city. He was as actively and warmly opposed as I was devoted to the cause of anti-Masonry. He was familiar with the question from the beginning to the end.

I have never conversed with him upon the subject, nor do I know what his impressions are, but if he is in possession of evidence either that I mutilated the body in question, or boasted that it was a "good enough Morgan till after the election," he will doubtless regard this as a fitting occasion to produce it.

HONESTY.-There is no man, but for his own interest, hath an obligation to be honest. There may be sometimes temptations to be otherwise; but, all things considered, he shall find it the greatest ease, the highest profit, the best pleasure, the most safety, and the noblest fame, to be honest.

VALUE OF TIME.-As nothing truly valuable can be obtained without industry, so there can be no persevering industry without a deep sense of the value of time.

We have often noticed, in our daily walk and conversation, newly fledged Brethren whose sole ambition seems to be on the surface rather than in the soul. Bedecked with gew-gaws, Masonic insignia, and tawdy trappings, they mark their consequence among the Craft by what may be justly termed a garish display of " 'fuss and feathers." This is certainly anything else than a proper and discreet appreciation of their admission into our noble Order, and gives but poor promise of future usefulness.

In this connection we have, with approving pleasure, received a communication from that ripe scholar and distinguished Craftsman, Ill. John M. Miller, 32°, of Baltimore, and which is so apropos that we extract largely from it, as follows:

"Is it possible for any person or persons skilled in human lore, or sufficiently well acquainted with the vagaries and eccentricities of that creature commonly designated 'man,' to dispense some of his knowledge in ventilating the subject of Masonic knickknacks as continuously and so ostentatiously shown off by so great a number of people, who are either Masons, or else have a most intense desire to make others believe them to be such?

"The very manufacturer of these ornamental badges, many of them