My eBay 
Haydn Welch Jewellers 
We have now retired 


1961 Elder James Moss 
Elder James R Moss opened Taunton as junior companion with Elder Romney. He was made a senior companion in March 1962 and moved to open Bridgwater with Elder Sherman Hoskins. 
Jim Moss became a prominent educator in Utah, in fact he was serving as Utah State Superintendent of Public 
Jim graduated from the University of Utah in 1965 where he was student body president. Went to Stanford for a law degree and then to Brigham Young University where he received a degree in religious education. 
Sadly, Jim died in April 1990 in a tragic auto accident. He was truly the best and the brightest. 
A web search under 'James R Moss’ will return an article from the church magazine Ensign abou t the history of the church in England, written by Jim and his wife LaVelle. 
Source: Elder M Adamson 

ENSIGN Sept 1977 

In A.D. 30, the last chief judge of the once-great Nephite nation was assassinated by a secret combination of judges, lawyers, and apostate high priests. That murder ended the sole republic of the Nephite record and continued a process of social disintegration halted only by the coming of the resurrected Christ. In that process, the unrighteous Nephites destroyed what remained of governmental regulation and divided their society into tribal units. One large band selected “one of the chiefest who had given his voice against the prophets who testified of Jesus” to be their king. (3 Ne. 7:10.) The reign of the judges had lasted only 120 years. 
It may initially seem difficult for us, nearly 2,000 years later, to become interested in the men who served as chief judge of the Nephites. The resurrected Savior, powerful prophets like Nephi, the elder Alma, and the brother of Jared, or impressive missionaries like the sons of Mosiah naturally draw the attention of Book of Mormon readers. The great captain Moroni, his namesake chronicler, and many other prominent spiritual and military leaders are magnetically attractive and seem to push such names as Nephihah, Pahoran, and Lachoneus down into the footnotes of our scriptural memory. But woven through the rich tapestry of Nephite history are golden threads of spiritual strength and active righteousness—lessons for our day from the lives of these Nephite judges. 
A brief review of the scriptural record from Alma to 3 Nephi identifies twelve men who served as chief judge. (There may have been others during a period of anarchy from about 26 B.C. to about A.D. 1.) The longest term of office lasted twenty-nine years, the shortest for less than a year. Their average tenure was about eight years (counting only the judges and tenures we have record of). Of the twelve, six were killed in office; and little more than their names and violent deaths remain in the record. Three others also died in office, but of natural causes; two resigned in times of unrighteousness to pursue urgent missionary callings. One (Lachoneus I) most likely also died in office, but the record does not say. It is to these last six men that we can look for models of personal and political Christianity in action. It is only these six men we will consider here, and references to “the judges” herein will be to them. Who were they? What was their function in the Nephite society? Against what problems did they struggle in discharging their responsibilities? What qualities and characteristics did they exemplify? What impact did they have on their own time—and what impact can they have on ours? 
To answer these questions, it is necessary to begin with the last Nephite king, Mosiah, and his message to his people in Mosiah 29. Each of the aged king’s four sons refused to accept the heirship to inherit Mosiah’s crown, preferring instead to fulfill their divinely approved mission to the Lamanites. Mosiah used this opportunity to evaluate the monarchy itself; and he launched a powerful political and spiritual campaign to abolish it and replace it with a republic governed by judges. The people responded positively and in 91 B.C. selected the younger Alma as their first chief judge. 
Mosiah’s reasons for advancing the cause of democracy also provide a charter under which the chief judges functioned. Understanding the charter is crucial to understanding the judges and their lessons for us today. After reviewing the undesirable characteristics of an absolute monarchy, Mosiah charged his people: 
“Therefore, choose you by the voice of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord. 
“Now, it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. 
“And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.” (Mosiah 29:25–27.) 
Four great governmental principles that guided the reign of the judges are identified in this charter: (1) The concept that law, not force, authority, or personality, rules in society; (2) the procedure that law will be determined by the voice of the people, supporting and preserving their free agency; (3) the recognition that correct principles of law are given to man by God through the prophets; and (4) a commitment to the necessity for a spiritual foundation of that law in society. 
The judges’ devotion to the rule of law in society shows in the decisive action they took in cases of deliberate rebellion. When Nehor practiced priestcraft and then murdered the old warrior Gideon, he was tried and executed quickly, for as Alma said in pronouncing the death sentence, “This people must abide by the law.” (Alma 1:14.) When Pahoran was appointed to fill the vacancy in the judgment seat created by the death of his father Nephihah in 67 B.C., the “oath and sacred ordinance” he took upon himself included the charge “to bring the wicked to justice according to their crime.” (Alma 50:39.) He had that oath tested by kingmen desiring to reestablish a monarchy among the Nephites. Alma had faced the same challenge from Amlici in his first years as chief judge; twice in his fifteen-year reign Pahoran imposed legal sanctions against monarchists. (Alma 2:1–13; Alma 51:1–7; Alma 62:7–11.) And when the Gadianton chief Giddianhi tried to win Lachoneus over to another form of monarchy with subtle bribery, threats, and a web of half-truths, that great judge rallied his people swiftly to preserve the rule of law in their democracy. (See 3 Ne. 3:1–17.) 
But criminals and revolutionaries were not the only Nephites to feel the judges’ commitment to this principle. The judges’ judicial actions were characterized by the strictest adherence to principles of equity and justice. The record says of Nephihah, who served as chief judge for sixteen years, that he died “having filled the judgment-seat with perfect uprightness before God.” (Alma 50:37.) And the scriptural eulogies of Helaman II, his son Nephi, and Lachoneus all stress “justice and equity” as the dominant themes of their righteous administrations. (Hel. 3:20, 37; 3 Ne. 6:4.) In stark contrast to the infamous lawless lawyers who scourged the Nephites with their litigious greed and professorial priestcraft (Alma 10:14–15; 3 Ne. 6:19–30), the judges believed in the law, lived by the law, and wielded it as a powerful weapon to preserve social righteousness and civic morality in their society. (See 3 Ne. 6.) 
The Nephite judges with equal loyalty supported the second principle in the charter: that of free agency in political life, preserving the right of the people to determine their own laws. Despite great pressure during national emergencies, with monarchists and secret combinations within and hostile Lamanite armies without, they resisted and rejected a double temptation: to become tyrants themselves and to abdicate their stewardships to ensure their personal security. But the risk involved did not prevent the judges from serving: the judgeship cost the six judges mentioned earlier their lives; a seventh was saved only because Helaman II’s loyal servant thwarted Kishkumen’s assassination attempt. (Hel. 2:2–9.) 
Probably the greatest and most agonizing test for the chief judges came when they had to let the people decide issues where their own free agency was at stake. When Amlici campaigned to become king, Alma let the matter come to a vote; the voice of the people rejected Amlici, and it was only for his refusal to abide by that decision that he was punished. (Alma 2:5–7, 31.) Pahoran likewise allowed the monarchists their day in the court of public opinion; only when the king-men began a rebellion against the people’s will did he move against them. (See Alma 51.) 
This confidence in the ability of the people to govern themselves reveals a refreshing governmental humility in the Nephite judges. They trusted the people, and realized that their own stewardship was that of a servant and not of a master. They recognized the limits of their own rights and responsibilities as well as those of the people they governed. We see this quality in Nephihah’s humble refusal to accept the guardianship of the sacred records when Alma offered them to him. (Alma 50:38.) It is even more apparent in the relationship between Nephihah’s son Pahoran and the charismatic captain Moroni. Who today can fail to be aroused by Moroni’s stinging rebuke to Pahoran in Alma 60, and at the same time not marvel at the prudent patience with which the chief judge replied in Alma 61? 
When Pahoran wrote Moroni as his “beloved brother,” rejoicing in his “greatness of … heart,” and speaking of his joy in receiving the captain’s letter, he not only set for us a glowing standard in refusing to be offended by an associate, but also emphasized in unmistakable terms the principle of shared governmental power in a republic. Well could the chief judge say without boasting, “I, Pahoran, do not seek for power, save only to retain my judgment-seat that I may preserve the rights and the liberty of my people. My soul standeth fast in that liberty in the which God hath made us free.” (Alma 61:9.) 
In implementing the third principle of Mosiah’s charter, that of divine direction for their laws, the Nephite judges moved beyond the artificial confines traditionally separating religion and politics in our own day. To the judges, there was no dividing line between the spiritual and the temporal. They seemed to accept prophetic direction as readily in legal matters as they did in the ecclesiastical. In fact, four of the judges were themselves prophets, while a fifth was an elder. (The term elder may have had different connotations in the Nephite church, of course.) And although the record is silent regarding any priesthood office held by the remaining judge, it consistently witnesses that gospel priorities and prophetic guidance upheld the law throughout most of the reign of the judges. Thus Pahoran relied upon the inspiration of captain Moroni in the justice of opposing the king-men with force. (Alma 61:19–20.) Lachoneus caused his people to “cry unto the Lord” in a time of governmental crisis. (3 Ne. 3:12.) And no more vivid example of harmony between religious and judicial functions can be found than in the oath of Pahoran to “judge righteously, and to keep the peace and the freedom of the people, and to grant unto them their sacred privileges to worship the Lord their God, yea, to support and maintain the cause of God all his days.” (Alma 50:39.) 
By sometimes installing their prophet as judicial leader, the Nephites followed the patriarchal pattern of government first instituted by Adam and imitated with varying degrees of success by later generations. (Abr. 1:26.) Although resignations and assassinations broke the patriarchal chain of judges five times, no less than seven of the judges were descendants of their judicial predecessors. 
But the fourth principle of Mosiah’s charter is the most important one. Beyond the judges’ adherence to the rule of law, their defense of free agency, and their use of gospel principles in directing the law, their recognizing the need for a spiritual foundation for law and their efforts to develop a social commitment to it stand out as a warning testament to our own time. They doubtless remembered Mosiah’s stern warning that if the people ceased to be righteous the law would work against civic happiness. To keep public standards of morality high, the judges did two things: (1) They began with themselves by striving to conform their personal and professional lives to gospel standards. (2) When necessary, they resigned the judgment seat to devote their full energies to preaching repentance and, consequently, to strengthening the spiritual foundation of the law. 
The scriptures are clear that these were righteous men. Nephihah’s “perfect uprightness,” Pahoran’s sacred oath of office, and Lachoneus’ encouraging example among his people all demonstrate their personal spirituality. (Alma 50:37, 39; 3 Ne. 3:12, 15–16, 25.) Helaman II “did do that which was right in the sight of God continually,” and his son Nephi “began to grow up unto the Lord” in his youth, and “did keep the commandments of God” as an adult. (Hel. 3:20, 21, 37.) 
That seven of the judges descended from other judges also indicates they did not neglect their family responsibilities, but taught their children the ways of the Lord by precept as well as example. It was no mere coincidence or the result of haphazard teaching that Nephi was able to recall in detail a sermon his father, Helaman II, had taught him over nine years before—recall so well that he was able to share it with the Nephite nation when he resigned from the judgment seat in A.D. 30. (Hel. 5:5–12.) The record dramatically shows the impact of a strong father-son relationship, for “these were the words which Helaman taught to his sons: yea, he did teach them many things which are not written, and also many things which are written. And they did remember his words; and therefore they went forth, keeping the commandments of God.” (Hel. 5:13–14.) 
Not only were these judges exemplary fathers, but they were fine sons as well. As Helaman “did walk after the ways of his father;” so Nephi “did walk in the ways of his father.” (Hel. 3:20, 37.) Both realized the responsibility they shared as student-son and teacher-father in the learning process. Neither abdicated his stewardship within the family for personal or professional responsibilities elsewhere. 
When personal righteousness and example were not sufficient to stem the tide of moral deterioration, two judges, both also prophets, resigned the judgment seat and spent the remainder of their lives preaching the gospel. Both did so under conditions of great spiritual apostasy and economic and political breakdown, when personal pride and spiritual corruption had combined to lead the people to choose iniquity. (Alma 4; Hel. 5.) 
Alma delivered up the judgment seat to righteous Nephihah after only eight years, “that he himself might go forth among his people, … to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, … and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.” (Alma 4:19.) Alma concentrated on spiritual reform as the basis for social reform because “the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just—yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them.” (Alma 31:5.) 
Fifty-three years after Alma, Nephi also resigned the judgment seat, for he saw that the Nephites “had altered and trampled under their feet the laws of Mosiah, or that which the Lord commanded him to give unto the people; and they saw that their laws had become corrupted, and that they had become a wicked people.” (Hel. 4:22.) Social conditions then graphically fulfilled Mosiah’s prophecy of sixty years before (see Mosiah 29): 
“For as their laws and their governments were established by the voice of the people, and they who chose evil were more numerous than they who chose good, therefore they were ripening for destruction, for the laws had become corrupted. 
“Yea, and this was not all; they were a stiffnecked people, insomuch that they could not be governed by the law nor justice, save it were to their destruction. 
“And it came to pass that Nephi had become weary because of their iniquity; and he yielded up the judgment-seat, and took it upon himself to preach the word of God all the remainder of his days.” (Hel. 5:2–4.) 
With both Alma and Nephi, the reformation resulting from their preaching provided the spiritual foundation necessary for the rule of law to once again function in Nephite society. Economic equality replaced class persecution, political freedom replaced oppression, chastity replaced immorality, and peace and joy abounded in the land. Such was the legacy of two great prophet-judges who well understood the attributes essential in a free people under law. 
And so we have the exemplary Nephite judges. Obviously, but little can be told of them from the abridged record Mormon has given to us. But surely he made his selection for a reason. As Moroni completed his father’s compilation, he addressed himself to us when he said, “Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing.” (Morm. 8:35.) The Book of Mormon is a message for our day. Both Mormon and Moroni saw it clearly, and wrote accordingly. What, then, would they have us learn from the Nephite judges? 
There are personal lessons, of course. As individuals, the judges were whole men, balanced in their mortal activities, capable of constructive contribution in a variety of social concerns, and actively engaged in the pursuit of personal progress. As fathers, they honored their patriarchal stewardships. As citizens, they influenced for good the lives of those around them by example, by precept, and by action. They are worthy of emulation for these qualities alone. 
But the greatest lesson the judges have left for us is their example of how we can preserve and protect our personal and political free agency in an age of increasing social and governmental uncertainty. It is a lesson of vital importance to all mankind. 
The Nephite republic lasted only 120 years. The history of its life and death is an inspired guide to judging the progress of our own civilization. Understanding why it lived and why it died is imperative if we today are to retain our own freedom. It lived because four dedicated missionaries were willing to sacrifice fourteen years of their lives and their right to royalty to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to their bitterest enemies. It died through temporal greed and the loss of brotherly love and concern. It lived because a wise monarch envisioned the sacred foundations of proper government and wrote an inspired charter of liberty for his nation. It died through the accumulated unrighteousness of internal secret combinations and monarchial conspiracies, drained by the wounds of its own political divisiveness. It lived because men such as Helaman and Lachoneus were so committed to principles of the law and the gospel that they served their fellowmen at great risk and personal danger. It died through those who, rather than face social ostracism and threatened violence, chose the false security of subservience by giving up the proper procedures and practices of this government. 
It lived because men such as Nephihah and Pahoran were resolute in their defense of freedom under law, and remained humble in the possession of great governmental power. It died in official arrogance and political tyranny. It lived because of Alma and Nephi, “men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (1 Chr. 12:32), and who were actively in but “not of the world” (John 17:14). It died when good men did too little, when a confused and troubled nation failed to turn to the light of the gospel and chose instead to walk in the darkness of its own worldly learning and criminal conceit. 
There is a critical time in the lives of men and nations when they must make an ultimate decision: to exercise their free agency righteously, or set in motion a spiraling sequence of spiritual suicide. For 120 years under the Nephite judges, national allegiance wavered between the bright hope of prophetic progress and the stagnation of compounded apostasy. In the end, the Nephites chose the “other gospel” (Gal. 1:8) and reaped the judgments Mosiah had prophesied. 
And what of the judges? They went down with the ship of state, but they never stopped bailing. When the tides of national adversity were running the highest, they met them head on, “idealists without illusions” who counted the costs and were content with the contest. The lesson is clear. The choice is ours. 
* We do not know for sure that Helaman II was a prophet. We do know, however, that he was the keeper of the sacred records (see Alma 63:11–13), which almost invariably were in the hands of the prophet, that the book of Helaman was named after him, and that he was a righteous and godly man (see Hel. 3:20). Given his background, character, and responsibility, it is probably safe for us to assume that he was indeed a prophet. 
[illustration] Answer of Lachoneus. When robber chieftain Giddianhi gave an ultimatum to the Nephites, their righteous and resourceful chief judge, Lachoneus, led the people with all their flocks and herds “and all their substance, save it were their land, unto one place” (3 Ne. 3:13), where they could defend themselves. (Painting by Minerva Teichert.) 
[illustration] Ships of Hagoth. The reign of the judges was a time of growth and expansion for the Nephite people, during which Hagoth, the shipbuilder, launched a colonization venture to the land northward. (See Alma 63:5–10; painting by Minerva Teichert.) 
James R. Moss, assistant professor of Church history and doctrine at Brigham Young University, serves as president of the BYU Thirty-first Branch, BYU Third Stake. 

DESERET NEWS article Dec 1990 

James R. Moss, former superintendent of public instruction, died in a one-car accident on I-15 Friday morning, according to the state medical examiner's office. 
Highway Patrol officials said the accident occurred at 8:57 a.m. near the Point of the Mountain. The car left the freeway and struck a power pole near 10208 South. Moss was traveling north.Moss, 48, was the father of six boys and one girl and was married to LaVelle Ridd Moss. He was the oldest son in his family. 
Moss served as superintendent for four years, resigning on July 1, 1990. He was an attorney, having earned a law degree from Stanford University. He was the former associate director of general education at BYU. 
Moss was a state legislator, former professor at Brigham Young University and, most recently, executive director of the Utah Partnership for Education and Economic Development. 
A resident of Orem, Moss was elected to the state Legislature in 1982 and served two terms. 
Members of the Utah State Board of Education expressed shock when their monthly meeting was interrupted Friday morning by the announcement of Moss' death. "Jim Moss was an intelligent, responsible individual who did fine things to move education forward in Utah," said State Superintendent Jay D. Taggart. 
Taggart said many of the things he now is pursuing were started by Moss. 
Gov. Norm Bangerter expressed sadness, calling Moss a true friend. "Jim Moss was a man of superior talent, energy and commitment. He was generally well-ahead in his knowledge and understanding of what needed to be done, always having a solid program to accomplish it. 
Wm. Rolfe Kerr, Utah commissioner of higher education, said: "I'm personally shattered. It's not only a personal loss, but the state has suffered a loss. Jim had much to give and he had the potential for major contribution through the Utah Partnership for Educational and Economic Development that was yet to be achieved, but was under way." 
Moss assumed his position as state superintendent of public instruction on Nov. 1, 1986. Colleagues on Capitol Hill hailed his appointment as a plus for both education and the Legislature, and they heralded his ability to ease friction between the Utah State Board of Education and the Legislature. 
At the time it was announced he would become superintendent, Moss was running unopposed for a third term in the state Legislature, District 59. A representative from Orem, Moss was serving as chairman of the House Rules Committee and a member of the Community and Economic Development, Appropriations and State and Local Affairs committees. He was first elected in 1982 and ran unopposed in 1984. 
He assumed the superintendent's post as the state board was trying to deal with an ever-growing number of students entering public education and limited state funding in the face of declining federal support. His ability to calm various factions of education, government and business won him kudos from many in the public arena but eventually divided school board members. He left his post on July 1, 1990, to become executive director of the Utah Partnership for Educational and Economic Development. 
He served as an associate professor of church history and doctrine at BYU and taught at the J. Reuben Clark Law School. 
Moss' penchant for politics and policymaking surfaced early. In 1965, he was elected student body president of the University of Utah. He received a bachelor's degree in political science from the U. in 1966 and later earned a law degree from Stanford University. 
An attorney, Moss served on the Utah Judicial Conduct Commission and on the executive committee of the Governor's Commission on Law and Citizenship. 
Brigham Young University Provost Bruce Hafen said, "We in the BYU community are greatly saddened by the news of Jim Moss' death. Prior to his service as superintendent of public instruction, Jim was a strong and effective member of the BYU faculty. He combined his understanding of the scholarly world with his understanding of the practical world in a relentless desire to help solve society's problems. He displayed an admirable sense of public service that leaves an example for all education people to use their training in the interest of society rather than serving self interest first." 
ol Funk: "We are deep grieved at the news of his death. We considered him to be an able and charismatic leader. He was committed to the cause of education. We extend our sympathy and condolences to his wife and family." 
robert garff: 521-6111 
known ji for 30 years. first met at u of u. married wife's closest friend. trace career through law school, england, back to legislature, worke hand in glove together on numbweous pieces of legis., includng may ed bills. parliamentarian when i was remember he was one of best infomred, highly articulate legislators we had. called to be parliamentatian after only two years because of his knwoledge. great source of strength to my administration in the house. had a doctorate in law, understood legal ramificaitons as few do. an educator as well. combination was indeed a marvelous contribution to the state. he came to me during hte last part of that tenure knowing that hte state supers' job coming up, talked aobut it. pros and cons, knew it was a very high profile public job that meant would have to take tought stands on difficult issues. predetermined his future. knew it was somewhat risky politcally speaking and for other careers. willing to stand up and be accounted for, williung to lay personal life, repute on line. came through in the past few months. home from mission, comined again with utah partnership. finance com. chairman. soliited hlep to hlp him. more than willing to help him. he'd helped me. forging a new look to education. eti, partnership is whole scenario is high profile issue in ed today. winthin it, alll of major issues of ed. being articulated. discussing future in ref to governance, funding, tracking of students, technology, advance planning, classroom size, etc. project is really in middle of all those issues. jim in sea of controversy. only public ed can bring those things out in people. no major spokesman in pulkic ed. different constituencies, hard ot get a handle. could have left, gone to private business, offers in past few months, chose to tay with public forum as a matter of princpal. felt we could make a difference. forward thinker. killed in the line 
great los to state 
9654518 uhp 
nolan karras, a britht articulate guy. someone with a large yougn family. considered myself a close personal friend. as supporter. controversial at times, because he was doing his job. supported him under fire. 
no specific peice of legislation, but he was an articulate conservative. carry the water on a difficult conservative piece of legislation. kind of guy that could handle himself very well. extremely good debater. well though-out. when he got up to debate something, felt it was a legitimate issue. didn't associate with frivolous issues. would have vied for speaker if contiued. 
Elder Pinnock: 
"He is so young and had such a marvellous future. He was one of the most clear-thinking men that I've ever known. He was dedicated to public service. After he graduated from Stanford Law School, he went to work in the LDS Church Education System, never looking for financial rewards but just wanting to bless people's lives." 
"He was a very effective state legislator. He would often call me, so often with the intent of helping other people and blessing their lives. He would be concerned about a group of children that were not be properly educated. He would want to make sure they were given educational opportunities. He was one of the most clear-thinking men I've ever known. I would sometimes call him wanting to know about a particular item or issue. He could do better reserach in a shorter period of time than almost anyeone I've known." 
"He was absolutely, explicitly, definably honest. He leaves a young family. The son who bears his name just returned from serving a wonderful mission in Vancover, Canada. His wife, LaVell, is a wonderful woman, very artistic. It's a close family." 
"Jim would often clip little articles out of magazines and newspapers and send them to people if he thought they would be of interest to them. He was always thinking of others. He probably had several hundred people in mind at any given time. Just constantly doing those things." 
"I first knew him when he was 7 or 8 years old. I was his sunday school teacher when he was just a little boy and later on, he became my hometeaching companion. I've never known him to do a dishonorable thing - ever." 
"He always wanted to do what was right. Because he was verbal in that area, i think there were a few who didn't appreciate his personality. He was one of the finest people that I know - and I really knew him. We had talked so long and so often." 
"He loved his family with all his heart. He would always talk about them. He never wanted to do anything that would embarrass them." 
he and his wife: "It was a beautiful relationship and a strong example for other people." 
"I'll really miss him." (broke down crying.) 
Jim Moss has long been a wise and articulate champion of bringing computers and other high-tech instruments into the classrooms to give students expertise in that realm. He is also been a believer and a mover in striving for a mutally beneficial parternership of business and education. I had long discussions with him about those worthly aims just this week. I'm sure Jim's wish would be for those objectives to go forward. We share the sorrow of Jim's family and extend our deepest sympathy." Lowell Baum, executive director, UEA. 
Designed and created by it'seeze
Our site uses cookies. For more information, see our cookie policy. Accept cookies and close
Reject cookies Manage settings