CORNISH TO EVANS 
 
 An Open Letter to R. C. Evans 
 
 By J. J. CORNISH 
 
 Printed by 
 * THE HERALD PUBLISHING HOUSE, 
 LAMONI, IOWA 
 
 10 for 25 cents; 100 for $2. 
 
Cornish to Evans 
 
 New Westminster, British Columbia. 
 
 Mr. R. C. Evans, 
 
 Toronto, Ontario. 
 
 Dear Brother: Your letter and papers came to this place 
 about three months ago. I was many miles away at the 
 time of their arrival. The letter was forwarded, but the 
 papers remained here until I returned a few days ago. 
 
 In your letter you say, "There is no man living that I 
 would sooner see come out of the Mormon delusion than 
 Johnnie Cornish." You also say, "I have had my eyes opened 
 to the fact that Joseph Smith was an adulterer, liar, polyg- 
 amist, false prophet, etc." Now, Richard, you and I have 
 had to meet such assertions for many years, and we met 
 them successfully, and all agreed that if Joseph Smith, who 
 had been an instrument in the hands of the Almighty in 
 restoring the everlasting gospel, had fallen, it would not 
 prove that the gospel was not true, but that he had proven 
 false to the gospel and God. 
 
 In your letter of February 26, 1919, you say, "Johnnie, I 
 have not left a single principle of the gospel that you taught 
 me." Why, Richard, I taught you that the Scriptures said 
 the gospel as formerly taught was lost and had been re- 
 stored, with all its gifts and blessings, by the hand of an 
 angel; that the record containing a history of the aborigines 
 of this country, also the gospel as taught in the Bible, had 
 been restored and translated by the gift and power of God, 
 through Joseph Smith, the latter-day prophet. You now 
 tell me that "the gospel will save without the Book of Mor- 
 mon." The gospel will save without the Bible, Book of 
 Mormon, or any other book. Holy men of God in ancient 
 time? who never had the Bible or Book of Mormon, "spake 
 
I III . IWJ,-. '\\i ) ■ 
 
 as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," and were saved 
 through obedience to the principles, although they never saw 
 a Bible or Book of Mormon. But now these books are given 
 that the gospel might be preached in all the world by the 
 power of the Holy Spirit, to convince both the Jew and the 
 Gentile that Jesus is the Christ. This you have taught for 
 nearly forty years, and now you deny the Book of Mormon, 
 the Doctrine and Covenants, and all inspiration revealed as 
 in former ages. Is this not going back on the principles I 
 taught you? In this, are you not inconsistent? Faith, re- 
 pentance, and baptism are only the initiatory principles into 
 the church. 
 
 Your assertions regarding Joseph Smith are not proof of 
 what you say. If he was as bad as you say, and as many 
 as you mention knew of it and left the church because of 
 his wickedness, and became his bitter enemies, why did they 
 not have him arrested, brought before the authorities of his 
 country, bring forth those witnesses who claimed to know 
 so much, and have him tried before a lawful tribunal? This 
 they could have done either before the courts of the church 
 or the country. Would they not have done so if they had 
 had the proof? See how many witnesses were brought be- 
 fore Judge Philips to testify in the Temple Lot Case, and 
 they brought forth the best they had, and sopie when exam- 
 ined were clearly proven to have borne false testimony. 
 Richard, if Joseph Smith could not be proven an adulterer, 
 liar, polygamist, false prophet, etc., while he was living, it 
 is useless for you to attempt to prove it now seventy-five 
 years after he is dead. 
 
 It was safe for you to challenge President Frederick M. 
 Smith to debate on polygamy when you knew he would not 
 lower the dignity of the church by debating on ^^question 
 already settled by Judge Philips in the United States Cir- 
 cuit Court. Debating and quibbling could never alter that 
 decision, which reads as follows: "Certainly nt [polygamy — 
 J. J. C] was never promulgated, taught^ nor recognized, as 
 a doctrine of the church prior to the assumption of Brigham 
 Young." (Temple Lot Case, pp. 20-26.) 
 
 As collateral with the decision of Judge Philips I wish 
 
to add the statement made by a bishop (?) residing in To- 
 ronto, Ontario, thus: "There is not a single word in all the 
 sermons, lectures, editorials, books, or other literature pub- 
 lished during the lifetime of Joseph Smith wherein he, by 
 a single word endorsed the doctrine of polygamy." (Evans 
 versus McKenzie, p. 9.) 
 
 In your letter to me of the year before you say: "All we 
 can say is, God revealed to us the truthfulness of the gospel 
 and has confirmed it to us in a thousand ways," all of which 
 knowledge you obtained many years after the prophet's 
 death. Now all at once when your official actions are called 
 in question by the authorities of the church, whose duty it is 
 to regulate and set in order, your thousand evidences re- 
 garding the divinity of the gospel suddenly become false. 
 
 You call me your father in the gospel because I preached 
 to you and baptized you over forty years ago. Will you 
 tell me then, my son, how it is that you with joy received 
 the teaching, with gladness obeyed it, and being called and 
 ordained from one office to another in which you defended 
 the prophet and the message the angel brought to" him, and 
 his successors in office, right up until May of last year, 1918, 
 and did not get your eyes open until June, 1918, when an 
 investigation of aifairs in Toronto was taking place? This 
 work being true, according to your own attestation — both 
 verbal and written, in public and in private for forty years — 
 can you tell me how it could become false all at once in 
 June of last year? 
 
 My son Richard, you say, "I was wrapped in glory" and 
 saw those men "in vision" — those men whom you now slan- 
 der — dead men who cannot now answer for themselves. You 
 give the names of "Joseph the Seer" as well as "Hyrum 
 Smith, his brother." Will you explain how that prophet and 
 patriarch could be in such a "most gorgeous park or garden 
 with majestic trees, pretty flowers, verdant slopes, and mur- 
 muring waters," if they were such wicked men as you now 
 represent them to be? You also say that with those two 
 men were "our Joseph, Alexander, and David.*' Those men 
 all lived and died in our time. They were known to be good, 
 honorable men all their lives and died honored and respected 
 
 4 
 
by all who knew them. Also in that vision you say you saw 
 Jesus "in their company." Will all of those men "be known 
 by the company they keep," too, or will Jesus be judged (in 
 your estimation) by the company he keeps? Perhaps you 
 can tell me now you have "your eyes opened." 
 
 You say, "I know that in London, and at different times 
 since, your faith has been rudely shaken in many things, and 
 were it not for the power of God that attended your gospel 
 administrations, you would have denied Mormonism long ago." 
 Oh yes! I remember well when Mr. Stephen Post, about the 
 only elder left of the Rigdonite faction when it broke up, 
 claimed that when Joseph and Hyrum were killed Sid- 
 ney Rigdon was the only one left alive of the presidency 
 and he should have been acknowledged as the head of the 
 church until young Joseph came to the proper age to take his 
 father's place as prophet, seer, and revelator. This looked 
 good to me and it caused me to think. When I explained to 
 him the wonderful manifestations I had received and asked 
 how those blessings came if this was not the right church, 
 Mr. Post talked kindly to me and reasoned to the effect that 
 God would bless me in the manner in which he did, to keep 
 me in the faith until such time as in the mind of God he 
 would send some one to get me in the true church. But, dear 
 brother, do not forget that at that time I was young, unedu- 
 cated, and had no experience with men or their way of work- 
 ing. I looked to men who had years of experience to know 
 more than I who had had no experience. But I did not leave 
 the church; I worked away and continued to receive blessings 
 from the Lord, and I labored with all the faith I had. 
 
 Again my faith was tried when Wingfield Watson pre- 
 sented the claims of J. J. Strang, viz., "The very day and 
 hour and minute that Joseph Smith was shot, the angel laid 
 hands on J. J. Strang and ordained him prophet, seer, and 
 revelator," but I did not leave the church. 
 
 When William Carleton Irish came through London, On- 
 tario, which you no doubt very well remember, my faith was 
 also tried. This man was ordained by Brother Joseph and H. 
 A. Stebbins to the office of priest, at Piano, Illinois. Brother 
 Irish would have us believe that the resurrection was coinc 
 
on all the time; that every now and then God would raise 
 one of the old prophets, etc., until manj^ of us believed he 
 was a great man. Some said they felt sure he was one of 
 the old prophets raised from the dead, he wore long hair as 
 they did. 
 
 There were many things said by him that we believed, and 
 there were other things said that caused us to w^onder. But 
 there were six points of difference between us, which I, be- 
 ing president of the branch, refused to allow him to preach 
 as the doctrine of the church, until we heard from the presi- 
 dent of the church. The majority, in opposition, voted that 
 he be allowed to. go on. These six points of difference were 
 written. Brother Irish placing his name favoring each point 
 and I signing my name as opposed to those teachings. When 
 word came back from Brethren Joseph Smith and W. W. 
 Blair, saying I was right. Brother Irish ceased to preach 
 and left the city. 
 
 Richard, while these trials were going on, I tried to 
 know the facts and stand by them, as Brother Blair at that 
 time said, "Brother John, be sure you are right, then stick 
 to it if the heavens fall." I did not leave the church and 
 start one of my own. I at that time said many hard things 
 against the church (see Joseph Luff's autobiography), but I 
 fasted and prayed to God to lead and direct me and give me 
 good assurance. I obtained it and kept the faith. 
 
 This, 'dear Brother Evans, should have been your attitude, 
 and when the time of the investigation of your work in Tor- 
 onto came, you should have stood by the truth and in humil- 
 ity acknowledged whatever you might have done that was ir- 
 regular or out of order, and have moved along in harmony 
 with the authority God has placed in the church for the di- 
 recting and regulating of the affairs of the same, instead of 
 turning around and denying the truth of the angel's mes- 
 sage. But when things did not come your way, you state in 
 your letter to me, "the church shall tremble." O my son, how 
 cruel! You, who for nearly forty years was a preacher of 
 that gospel — the truthfulness of which had been "revealed to 
 you in a thousand ways" — could not humble yourself enough 
 to say before that committee (who were working for your 
 
 6 
 
good and that of the church) three little words, '7 was 
 wrong." But because you did not agree with the investigat- 
 ing committee you not only pour out a tirade of abuse and 
 slander against them, but against the honorable dead, even 
 him whom you called "our Joseph," "Joseph the Just" — whom 
 you say never went to bed with you a night in England, Ire- 
 land, Scotland, Canada, Wales, or the United States that he 
 did not kiss you good-night — and against the church in 
 general. 
 
 You then left the church, drew all you could with you and 
 had the audacity to ask me to leave this beautiful restored 
 gospel, which I love so much and know to be true, to join one 
 Df your making. When Satan left heaven he drew about one 
 third part of the angels with him. When you left, how many 
 Saints did you draw away after you? Those angels kept not 
 their "first estate." I am sorry that you and those who fol- 
 lowed you could not have kept your second estate. My boy, if 
 you had only remembered your boyhood days and the game 
 of ball, that "over the fence is out," you would have been 
 more careful how you struck that ball. 
 
 Over a hundred thousand people, in and out of the church, 
 wonder why such a change should come, and just at a time 
 when your official acts were being investigated. Let Jesus 
 answer it: "And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be 
 abased." If I ever saw the spirit of exaltation in any man 
 in my life, I saw it in you when you. attended our conference 
 in South Boardman, Michigan. You boasted of what a 
 great man you were, and of what you were doing and then 
 displayed a long railway ticket, entitling you to go through 
 Michigan, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Colum- 
 bia, then in United States, Washington, through Utah, etc., 
 and back to Toronto (this and more as I remember it). 
 
 Then repeatedly in your letters written to many, you told 
 how you were ordained to this office and then to that, up to 
 the First Presidency; how many countries you had preached 
 in; how you had dared and defied the world to meet you to 
 prove this is not the work of God. What can they now 
 conclude but that if you are telling the truth now, you were 
 not telling the truth before the public for the last forty 
 
years. But the gospel being the truth for forty years (you 
 cannot now prove it false), if you continue in your present 
 work against that forty years' work of truth, you will, no 
 doubt, using your own words, be accused of "perambulating 
 around the suburbs of veracity and economizing the truth." 
 
 In your letters to me a spirit of exaltation has been con- 
 stantly manifest. Jesus' words are true: '"'And whosoever 
 shall exalt himself shall be abased." 
 
 There is a sin for which, if men commit and repent not, 
 "they will deny the faith." My son, where hast thou been? 
 What have you done? How art thou fallen ! 'Had you lived 
 up to the requirements of the gospel brought by the angel, 
 being "humble and full of love," you would have been in 
 the church yet. There is no cause for men or women to fall 
 and deny the faith when they are willing to keep the cove- 
 nants and commandments with an eye single to the glory of 
 God. He will make a way for their escape. 
 
 The changes you speak of in the Book of Mormon are all 
 published in the Herald with full explanations. Everything 
 was done in good faith, open and aboveboard, by the au- 
 thority of the body. The corrections made were only of such 
 words as and, the, which, who, etc. This you very well know. 
 
 You are unfair, Richard, in your manner of criticism. 
 You bring up things done by apostates like yourself-^un- 
 reliable evidences — compiling and publishing them against 
 an innocent people, to carry out your wicked designs. 
 
 Why boast of what you have done and how high you had 
 gone in authority, and of the honors which had been placed 
 upon you, using your own words of March, 1917: "This 
 honor has never been conferred upon another and it hurts 
 some of them." Had you gone on in faithfulness, being 
 humble and full of love, those honors would have remained. 
 When your actions were called in question and you had full 
 opportunity to explain and defend yourself, you were not 
 able to do so, and could not bring one thing against the 
 president of the church, who had conferred such honors 
 upon you. You then turn around and abuse him and the 
 church, both the living and the dead. What an eye. opener! 
 Then, after speaking so disrespectfully of him, both in pub- 
 
 8 
 
lie and private and. by correspondence all over the country, 
 you send him by telegraph, that ^'Christmas Greeting," De- 
 cember 24, 1917. O consistency! It is said "thou art a jewel," 
 but thy name is not R. C. Evans. 
 
 Say, Richard, I wish you would tell me at about what time 
 you got your eyes opened. Was it when the president was 
 conferring such honor upon you, or when you were slandering 
 him so; or did it occur the morning you sent him that 
 Christmas greeting; or was it a few months later when 
 your official actions were called in question? Please answer. 
 
 Sidney Rigdon claimed to be a prophet and leader, but his 
 work went down. J. J. Strang claimed that he saw angels 
 and the "very day and hour and minute that Joseph was 
 shot," the angel laid hands on him and ordained him 
 "prophet, seer, and revelator." But it all fell to the ground. 
 David Whitmer said, "Brethren, if you believe me when I 
 tell you I saw the angel and heard the voice of the Lord 
 commanding me to bear testimony," etc., "believe me when 
 I tell you I heard the voice of God telling me to come out 
 from among the Latter Day Saints," and that he was "called 
 to hold the priesthood," but he went down to the grave with- 
 out conferring it on any one else. (I quote from memory.) 
 Jojin Zahnd also claims that he had visions, etc., but it will 
 likewise go down. Your institution cannot stand now nor 
 in the day of accounts. 
 
 That the wonderful truths you taught for nearly forty 
 years, how that God did "scatter the people," from the time 
 of the building of the city and tower, "upon the face of all 
 the earth" when some came upon this continent, must now 
 become a falsehood the minute you "got your eyes opened," 
 is wonderful! Then the other colonies who came over later 
 and who inhabited this continent 600 years before Christ, 
 which you were successful in proving hundreds of times, up 
 until the last of May, all at once, in June of the same year, 
 becomes a fable. What an eye opener! The "other sheep" 
 that Jesus had over here that did not belong to that fold at 
 Jerusalem and "they shall hear my voice," and whom he did 
 visit and preach to, and amongst whom he established his 
 church, was a fact from 32 A. D. until the last of May,. 1918, 
 
 9 
 
when it suddenly becomes a delusion. These four brothers 
 who came over from the old world, of whom history as w-ell 
 as the Book of Mormon says the younger became the leader, 
 is "rot.'' All of those roads, caves, mounds, and cities uiiich 
 have been unearthed and which confirm the truthfulness of 
 the Book of Mormon do not now exist because R, C. got "his 
 eyes open." Can this be? No! They still exist. The Book 
 of Mormon proven by the Bible and archaeology, and R. C. 
 and thousands of others for many years cannot now be false. 
 Moses and other prophets, including David, Isaiah, Ezekiel, 
 etc., who declared the book must come and before "Lebanon" 
 should become a "fruitful field" and "our land" (Jerusalem) 
 shall "yield her increase," must not be considered untrue 
 because the "Bishop" (?) R. C. has got his "eyes opened." 
 When Adam and Eve transgressed they got their "eyes 
 opened," too. They saw their shame. Can you see yours? 
 
 Do not be angry, Richard. I am just giving you a little 
 medicine of your own mixing. You are mistaken in your 
 idea that by your manner of procedure "the church shall 
 tremble.' It is you who are trembling. That other fellow 
 who was the "accuser of the brethren," trembled, too. 
 
 Now, after all this you say, "Help me in this great work." 
 Did you think that I was one altogether as thou, Richard? 
 I have a great work to do and I cannot come down. Again 
 you say, "Help me.'' Please go back with me to our early 
 days in the church. Shortly after you came into it you were 
 acting with a theatrical company on the stage, and when 
 the officials of the London Branch w^ere urging me to ap- 
 point a court to try your case I hung back, thinking that 
 at that tim.e if a court were held you would likely be ex- 
 pelled. When you were in our conference at South Board- 
 man, you told them that I was your father in the gospel 
 and had saved you to the church, for if they had attempted 
 to try you at that time you would have said to them, "Go 
 to hell." I would like to save you now, but I fear that 
 it is too late. 
 
 You will likewise remember that I advised the brethren to 
 give time and God would bring you back, and that you 
 w^ould yet "stand in the Quorum of Twelve, and perhaps in 
 
 10 
 
the Presidency." You have repeatedly said that while upon 
 the stage the hand of power was placed upon your shoulders 
 and God called you back. 
 
 Before you went into the Quorum of Twelve, I told you 
 that it was revealed to me that you were going there and 
 at the time of your call, you,, in your statement of acceptance, 
 referred to me as giving proof of your calling. Your state- 
 ment was published in the Herald at the time. 
 
 You and I roomed together in Detroit, Michigan, while 
 I was laboring there and I told you that you would soon be 
 put in the First Presidency. Then said I, "Look out! I 
 fear your fall, and if you fall you will fall heavily." This 
 has all come to pass. 
 
 After you got Brother George Mottashed out of the church, 
 he revealed to me the vision God gave him of you about 
 thirty-five years ago. It was that you would go into the 
 Quorum of Twelve, then in the First Presidency, and that 
 you would fall from it, and he said, "John, I will not live 
 to see it, but you will." It came to pass. 
 
 My son Richard, if what we have preached all of our 
 lives was a delusion, how did it happen that in answer to 
 prayer, God revealed to me that this was his work, and that 
 he would and did heal my affliction? That manifestation is 
 still with me. I cannot doubt it. How can you condemn that 
 which has been revealed to you in "a thousand ways"? What 
 kind of a manifestation have you had, anyway? Will you 
 take that one as superior to the "thousand" and it directly 
 opposite? Has your light entirely gone out? 
 
 Can you look back to the time when we were baptizing in 
 London, in December of 1876, when that light, with a sound 
 like a rushing, mighty wind, came down from heaven and 
 encircled about thirty people, members and nonmembers, also 
 taking in the portion of the river where we were baptizing? 
 A voice spoke to Brother Clow telling him, "These are my 
 people. You must not laugh at them." When standing in 
 that brightest and most brilliant light I ever saw, and rais- 
 ing my hand to perform that ceremony, to me came the 
 words (not audibly), "Yes, you have been commissioned." 
 Oh, Richard, my son! Never shall I forget it! That Spirit 
 
 11 
 
thrills my body as I write to you. Those . words, "These 
 are my people, you must not laugh at them," are true and 
 never can be false. The church acknowledged of God then 
 is his church now though thousands fall. Tempt me not to 
 leave it, dear brother. I never can. 
 
 Can you or I discard the power that healed that Mr. Ray 
 (not a member), who fell backward into the kettle of boil- 
 ing glue, which burned him so that part of his intestines 
 came out, and pieces of skin and flesh came off? By the 
 administration of Brethren 'Harrington, Mottashed, Luff, 
 and myself, God healed him. New skin and flesh grew on 
 and he became strong and able to work as before. You 
 knew of it. 
 
 Then Brother Harvey who had two fingers cut off — the 
 blood stopped and he was healed by administration, which 
 is according to the pattern of the gospel of Christ and as 
 restored in these last days, to Joseph Smith the prophet, and 
 "his seed and his seed's seed, forever," as saith the Prophet 
 Isaiah. Richard, think of scores of cases under our ad- 
 ministration, there and elsewhere. It is just the same to- 
 day, and the power of God, as we live nearer to him, will 
 be greater by and by. 
 
 You say, "Write to me," and "as you profess to love me." 
 I did love you and do yet, but I am sorry, that you have 
 fallen so low and now try to slander the men God sent, and 
 who were instruments in his hands in restoring the gospel 
 and making it possible for salvation to come to us. 
 
 In your "Epitome of the faith and doctrines of the Church 
 of Jesus Christ," you have nothing we did not have, and we 
 have all the balance God sent in restoration which you can- 
 not have. If you can be saved by that part (without the 
 authority to administer it), I will not be "damned" by keep- 
 ing all. 
 
 My son, Richard C. Evans, and (once) brother in Christ, 
 (now fallen), I do not know that you saw an angel because 
 you say so, but I know no angel sent from God would tell 
 you to leave the church of his planting and start one of 
 your own. (I do not know how much the Devil had to do in 
 that matter.) If there w^as anything between you and the 
 
 12 
 
officers of the church, God would assist you to get it right, 
 and if they were so far wrong that he would need to take 
 a hand in rectifying and had to send an angel to do it, that 
 angel would have told you to stay in the church, go before 
 the proper quorums or the General Conference and assist in 
 correcting the error. God will never reject over 80,000 
 Saints because you refuse to have your official acts corrected. 
 
 J. J. Cornish. 
 
 New Westminster, British Columbia, July 3, 1919. 
 
 Mr. R. C. Evans, 
 
 Toronto, Ontario. 
 
 Dear Brother: Your letter of June 20, 1919, is at hand 
 and its contents are fully noted. The first thing I read was 
 the printed heading, "Church of Jesus Christ," then in the 
 corner at the end of the word Christ, the impression of a 
 seal, "The Church of the Christian Brotherhood." As you 
 gave me no explanation as to how your church could be the 
 "Church of Jesus Christ" and at the same time "The Church 
 of the Christian Brotherhood," I was left to ponder. Then 
 reading your statement in your spiritual manifestation where 
 you say "your messenger" said, "And now I am commissioned 
 to command you to organize the Church of Jesus Christ" — 
 caused me to wonder greatly. 
 
 It seems when you could not get the church incorporated 
 by the name your messenger commanded ("The Church of 
 Jesus Christ") , you deliberately broke the command of 
 God(?) given by that commissioned messenger (?) and chris- 
 tened it by another name ("The Church of The Christian 
 Brotherhood") without either God or Jesus Christ in at all. 
 R. C, do not boast about getting your eyes opened. 
 
 That you were for over forty years a member of a church 
 organized according to the pattern given" by Christ and his 
 apostles, and lived without openly breaking any special com- 
 mands, and then start a church of your own and within a 
 few months break the first command your messenger gave 
 you, is beyond my comprehension. Richard, what is th^ 
 name of your church, anyway? Is it "The Church of Jesus 
 
 13 
 
Christ," "Church of Jesus Christ," or is it "The Church of 
 the Christian Brotherhood," or do you know? If it is the 
 latter then it is not either of the other two. 
 
 You seem to be much disturbed in your imagination that 
 my letter to you was the "work of other minds." You say, 
 "I am sorry that much of your letter is the work of other ' 
 minds, .why resort to such, Johnnie, is it fair?" and, "So 
 much for the silly arguments made by the real author of 
 the letter before me." Also, "The point you try to make, 
 or your master does for you." Your letter is filled with 
 twice as much more of the same kind. Richard, I framed it 
 all. No man or woman ever knew that I was writing such 
 a letter until I arranged to haf-e it typewritten. 
 
 Again you say, "Johnnie, you must not try to make me 
 believe that you wrote all those insulting statements." Noth- 
 ing insulting, Richard; I was just treating on facts. The 
 Devil drew away one third and I asked you how many you 
 drew away. You did not tell me but said, "Johnnie, do not 
 play the echo on that again." 
 
 Just look at some of your contradictory statements fol- 
 lowing: "Johnnie, wake up"; "but, John, take the wool off 
 vour eyes and look." Then the following: "Your heart has 
 rebelled and your eyes have been opened," also, "Johnnie, if 
 you wish to stand by Mormonism do so, but your eyes are 
 opened." Then you turn right around and say, "The thick 
 darkness of Mormonism is still upon you"; "you are still 
 under the cloud." R. C, you are of course the "real author." 
 The above statements are not "the work of other minds," 
 are they? You wrote them. 
 
 I refuse to answer your slanderous statements about mur- 
 der, Danites, polygamy, liar?. Book of Mormon, Doctrine and 
 Covenants, also "those manuscripts," etc., which have been 
 answered and settled long ago by judges and ministers, the 
 latter including yourself. I will, however, make reply to the 
 following: "Your framer makes it appear that the vision 
 showed Joseph Smith and the rest wath Christ in paradise 
 now. That is a lie free and full." Now, just read that part 
 of my letter over again. I did not say so. I simply quoted 
 your own statement and never mentioned paradise. It looks 
 
 14 
 
to me that in this you are willful, making up that false 
 statement and then saying I lied. 
 
 You explain then, "The facts are that vision showed me 
 what would be in eternity, not now in paradise, but in the 
 future." Ah, yes, I see! That man who lived and died 
 before you were born, whom you represented for forty years 
 as a pure, prayerful prophet of God, and who all at once in 
 June, 1918, became a murderer, liar, polygamist, adulterer, 
 etc., for which they that do such things could not inherit the 
 kingdom of heaven or of God at all (Matthew 5: 20; 7: 21; 
 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10; Galatians 5: 21; Ephesians 5: 5, etc.), 
 is now seen in your vision to be in such a good place "in 
 eternity, not now in paradise, but in the future." Yes! how 
 singular! Is that the gospel I taught you forty years ago? 
 
 You make one statement very positive. You say, "John, 
 I am sorry that you have added to the story of your knowing 
 th^t I was going into the Twelve and Presidency. You 
 did bear testimony to that, but the part about my falling I 
 never heard till I r^ad it in your letter." I am glad you did 
 not deny my whole statement. Now, my son, I cannot be 
 mean to you, neither do I wish to add one thing that is not 
 true. Our Father in heaven knows that there is enough 
 against you already. If I did not make that statement I 
 am very sorry that I should have so written. We were in 
 Detroit, Michigan, rooming together that night, and I very 
 well remember that at the time you cried and said, "I have 
 enough on my shoulders now, and if more is put upon me 
 I do not see how I can stand up under it." (Words to that 
 effect.) But if those words which you deny were not ut- 
 tered by me I am very much mistaken. Let it pass. I will 
 give you the benefit of the doubt. 
 
 You say, "Your statement about Mottashed is both false 
 and silly." I reaffirm Brother Mottashed did tell it to me, 
 and he told it to many others and several have asked me if 
 I ever heard of it. No doubt many who are yet living 
 know of it. You admit my statement that you were going 
 into the Twelve and then the Presidency, all of which came 
 to pass. 
 
 Jesus had an apostle in his day who turned traitor. "He 
 
 15 
 
was a ,devil," and yet we do not read of him turning around 
 and trying to drag others down with him, as you have tried 
 to do. He "went and hanged himself." Peter, another 
 apostle, "denied him," but repented, "went out -and wept 
 bitterly." (Your weeping time will come.) Also, "all the 
 disciples forsook him and fled." It was their hour of trial, 
 but they did not slander and abuse, and charge all manner 
 of crimes against the church as you have done and are 
 doing against over eighty thousand people, and boast that 
 "When I speak the church shall tremble and the world shall 
 feel the power." Oh, how cruel! How inhuman to try to 
 make a church of over eighty thousand innocent people 
 "tremble" just because you did not agree with two or th^ee 
 of its leading members. 
 
 I say unto you as Peter said to his son in the gospel: 
 "Repent therefore of this wickedness and pray God, if per- 
 haps the thought of thy hciart may be forgiven thee." (Acts 
 8: 22.) 
 
 Oh, Richard, I have prayed that God would help you and 
 have mercy, but then the words com.e back to me, "Mercy 
 cannot rob justice." 
 
 You have my best wishes. 
 
 J. J. Cornish. 
 16