THE BUILDER MAGAZINE
December 1918
volume 4 - number 12
THE ANTI-MASONIC MOVEMENT
BY BRO. EMERY B. GIBBS, P. D. G. M., MASSACHUSETTS
THE institution of Masonry was introduced into the Colonies
at an early stage of their existence. The growth was slow at first, but after
the Revolution it spread more rapidly. From 1790 to 1820 the growth was very
marked. It had the sanction of many of the most distinguished men of the
country. Nothing had occurred up to 1826 to mar its progress. Men prominent in
Masonry spoke publicly of the many positions of trust and importance held by men
belonging to the Masonic Fraternity. Some were indiscreet enough to announce
that Masonry was exercising its influence in the pulpit, in the legislatures,
and in the courts. To this but little attention was paid until the Morgan
episode in 1826.
William Morgan was a native of Virginia, born in Culpepper
county in 1775 or 1776. Little is known of his early history. Among the
assertions regarding it is one story that he was a Captain in General Jackson's
army at the battle of New Orleans, and another that he belonged to a band of
pirates and was sentenced to be hanged, but pardoned on condition that he enter
the army. But little credit should be given to either of these reports.
In October, 1819, at the age of forty-three or forty four,
he married Lucinda Pendleton of Richmond, Virginia, then in her sixteenth year.
In 1821 Morgan and his wife moved to Canada, where he undertook the business of
a brewer near York in the Upper Province. The loss of his brewery by fire
reduced him to poverty and he then moved to Rochester, New York, where he worked
and occasionally received assistance from the Masonic Fraternity. From Rochester
he went to Batavia, in the county of Genesee, and worked at his trade, which was
that of a mason, until his disappearance in 1826.
During his residence at Batavia he was intemperate,
frequently neglecting his family. With but little education, it is said he had a
fair knowledge of writing and arithmetic, kept reasonably good accounts, was a
man of common sense, pleasing manner, and when not under the influence of strong
drink was a pleasant, social companion among his fellows.
No one has been able to ascertain where he was made a
Mason. He met with the lodge at Batavia. In 1825 or 1826 a petition to the Grand
Chapter of the state was drawn up to obtain a charter for a chapter of Royal
Arch Masons in Batavia. This petition Morgan signed. Before it was presented to
the Grand Chapter, others who had signed it and knew his habits and character
were unwilling to have him become a member. A new petition was prepared and
signed and presented without Morgan's name. On this petition a charter was
obtained. When Morgan learned that he was not a charter member and knew that he
could be admitted only by a unanimous vote, he was surprised and offended at
being excluded from the Chapter, and from that time became an active and very
ardent foe of Masonry.
A few years previously one David C. Miller had established
himself in Batavia and was publishing a local newspaper. Miller's undertaking as
an editor and printer was unprofitable. He was a man of cunning and of a certain
ability; reputation not very good, and of objectionable habits. At some time
prior to his living in Batavia, he had been initiated as an Entered Apprentice
at Albany, New York. Objection being made to his further advancement on the
ground of his character, he never received the second and third degrees.
Morgan and Miller, having a common grievance against the
Masonic Fraternity, planned together how they might create something of a
sensation and acquire a substantial, if not great fortune, out of the venture to
disclose the secrets of Freemasonry. Their threats and suggestions were regarded
at first as of no significance. The Masons at Batavia paid little attention to
the rumors until it was evident that Morgan and Miller were bound to carry out
their threats and publish in Miller's paper a complete revelation of so-called
Masonic secrets. There was a strong feeling on the part of a few who were quite
as much opposed to Morgan and Miller personally as they were zealous in the
cause of Masonry that this publication should be prevented. Soon the matter
became the topic of street conversation and one night an effort was made to sack
Miller's office and some forty or fifty persons assembled for the purpose of
breaking in and securing the manuscript. Nothing was accomplished at this time,
but two nights later an attempt was made to set fire to the office. Whether this
attempt to burn the place was made by persons who were opposed to Morgan and
Miller, or made by Miller himself, was an open question and never satisfactorily
settled. Masons offered a reward of one hundred dollars for the discovery of the
incendiary. A man by the name of Howard, suspected as an accomplice, fled, no
one knows where, after a warrant had been issued against him.
The details of Morgan's arrest for petty larceny, his
acquittal, his arrest again for debt, and his discharge after the debt had been
paid, his ride in a carriage to Rochester with several other men, and from there
to Fort Niagara, are all familiar. One writer on this event, himself not a
Mason, traces Morgan to Fort Niagara and concludes by saying that there is no
reliable evidence of what happened to or became of Morgan after he was taken to
Fort Niagara.
To the question, what became of Morgan? no definite answer
has been, and so far as we can learn, ever can be given.
The American Quarterly Review for March, 1830, published an
article on the Anti-Masonic excitement, by Henry Brown, an attorney-at-law of
Batavia, New York. This article was reviewed and commented on by Masons and by
those who were not Masons, as being a carefully prepared and well-presented
statement of what occurred.
Brown, in narrating the events which followed the
disappearance of Morgan and the efforts made to discover his body, particularly
the searching of the Niagara River and a part of Lake Ontario, all without
success, and when a good deal of the public excitement in that locality had
abated, states that a body was discovered on the 7th of October, 1827, in the
town of Carlton about forty miles from Fort Niagara. It was lying at the water's
edge. An inquest was held, witnesses who were personally acquainted with Morgan
were examined, and the jury pronounced it the body of some person to them
unknown who had perished by drowning. The body was in a decomposed and offensive
state at the time, and was quietly buried.
This inquest was published in the newspapers and suspicion
was at once excited that this was the body of Morgan. Several men from Batavia
and Rochester had the body disinterred, and then discovered, or pretended that
they discovered, points of resemblance between this body and Morgan. They had
the body watched over night to prevent the Masons from carrying it away. Mrs.
Morgan was visited and went to Carleton and inspected the body.
"On arriving at Carleton on the 15th of October the body
was slightly and imperfectly examined. It was bloated and entirely black, putrid
on its surface and offensive (beyond anything conceivable) to sight or smell.
Its dress did not correspond with anything which they had seen before, and the
religious tracts in the pocket staggered some of the most credulous. There was
not in fact a single circumstance in the dress, size, shape, color or appearance
of the body which pointed it out as Morgan."
The men active in fomenting the excitement were unwilling
to lose the advantage of so valuable an asset. A second inquest was held over
this body which, if it had been that of Morgan, must have been thirteen months
in the water.
Mrs. Morgan testified she believed it to be the body of her
husband, though the clothes were entirely different from those he wore at the
time of his disappearance, and there were found in the pocket a number of
religious tracts of a description not known in the neighborhood of Batavia.
One witness recognized the shape of his head; another the
outline of his features; a third the color of his hair; a fourth of the
whiskers; a fifth the teeth, and a sixth the hair inside of the ears. On these
grounds the jury decided that this was the body of William Morgan and that he
came to his death by drowning.
The body was removed with great parade of solemnity to
Batavia and there interred in the presence of a vast crowd, and a funeral
oration pronounced by one Cochran, who, Brown says,
"Sometimes when sober and sometimes when otherwise,
preached in the vicinity and was then assistant editor to Col. Miller."
(Miller was associated with Morgan in the publication of
the so-called Masonic secrets.)
These events inflamed the indignation of the people to the
highest pitch and Freemasonry was detested more bitterly than ever. It was on
the eve of an election.
"The cry of vengeance was wafted on every breeze and
mingled with every echo of the lake where Morgan's ghost, it was said, performed
its nightly rounds."
About this time a notice appeared in the Canadian
newspapers that one Timothy Monro, of Clark, in the District of New Castle in
Upper Canada, left that place for Newark in September, 1827, in a small boat,
and was drowned in the Niagara river while attempting to return. A description
of the body found in Carleton, together with the clothing and religious tracts
found in the pocket, being published in the newspaper soon after the first
inquest and coming to the knowledge of Monro's friends, induced the belief that
the body found in Carleton was his. Mrs. Sarah Monro, widow, accompanied by her
son and one John Cron, her friend, after hearing of this body, went at once to
examine it. In consequence of their testimony, the body was a second time
disinterred and a jury of inquest a third time summoned.
After hearing all the evidence, this jury decided that it
was the body of Timothy Monro, who was drowned in Lake Ontario, September 26,
1827. Mr. Brown in his article gives the testimony of the witnesses at length,
which is entirely conclusive as to the propriety of this last verdict, in which
it was proved that the body pronounced to be that of Morgan was at least five
feet nine inches long, whereas the height of Morgan when alive was less than
five feet six inches. It also appeared in evidence that the hair of his body had
been so disposed by art as to make it appear like that of Morgan.
The Morgan excitement was rapidly waning and the political
situation of the Anti-Masonic party was becoming sadly in need of some new
stimulant, when it was furnished by the confession of one Hill, who declared
himself one of the murderers of William Morgan. He was arrested and committed to
jail in Buffalo, where he signed a confession. He was then removed to Lockport
for trial, but refused to go before the Grand Jury to testify to the truth of
his confession. The Grand Jury, believing him insane, refused to find a bill and
he was discharged. No clew to his conduct has ever been discovered. It may be an
injustice to the politicians to suggest that this man, carefully coached, played
his part, knowing that no serious harm would come to him, and so contributed to
the excitement and bitterness of feeling against the Masons. In any event, his
part was well played and the effect far-reaching.
More than forty trials took place of persons suspected of
being concerned in Morgan's disappearance. The greater number resulted in
acquittals. Several, however, were convicted and served substantial sentences.
M.W. Brother Gallagher stated in an address that Maj.
Benjamin Perley Poore, for many years Washington correspondent of the Boston
Journal, while in Smyrna, Turkey, in 1839, knew that Morgan was then alive and
identified by men who had known him in New York.
I have referred to these different reports as to what
became of Morgan, but I leave it as I began, with uncertainty and inability to
determine his fate.
Prior to the Morgan incident there may have been some
excuse for accusing Masons of political activity and using the organizations for
political purposes.
In 1816, John Brooks, a Mason, and Samuel Dexter, not a
Mason, were opposing candidates for the office of Governor of Massachusetts. In
1798, Mr. Dexter had written a letter to Grand Master Bartlett strongly
condemning and ridiculing Freemasonry.
In 1816, Benjamin Russell was editor of the "Poston
Centinel" and also Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and an
ardent supporter of General Brooks as against Mr. Dexter. In the "Boston
Centinel" of March 30, 1816, appeared the following paragraph:
"TO THE MASONIC FRATERNITY.
Brethren:--It need not be repeated that the internal
regulations of your benevolent order exclude all discussions of political
dogmas. But every Master Mason knows that his public obligation obligates him to
discharge the duties he owes to the state with diligence and fidelity.
When two candidates, therefore, present themselves for his
suffrage, he is not bound to inquire to what party the one or the other belongs;
but whether he is "a good man and true," and faithful to the Constitution which
he may be called upon to administer. And all other things being favorable, he is
bound by every Masonic obligation to give his vote for the one who is a Free and
Accepted Brother in preference to one who is not.
Brother John Brooks shall receive the vote of A MASTER
MASON."
Square and Compass
In New York, in the year 1824, De Witt Clinton was
candidate for Governor against a candidate who was not a Mason. At that time Mr.
Clinton was Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of New York, General Grand High
Priest of the General Grand Royal Arch Chapter of the United States, Grand
Master of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar for the United States,
Sovereign Grand Commander of the Grand Consistory of the United States. He also
held other Masonic offices. All these Masonic titles, from the highest to the
lowest grade, were centered in Mr. Clinton at about the same time. A paper
called the "National Union" was published in New York solely to aid his election
as Governor. Samuel H. Jenks, of Nantucket was the editor. Mr. Jenks was the
Deputy Grand Master in Massachusetts in 1825. The following was published in
that paper October 30, 1824:
"Brethren:--Your former Grand Master is now a candidate for
the support of the 'free and accepted.' De Witt Clinton, if there be any virtue
in the cardinal principles of your faith, will receive your undivided suffrage
for Governor. It is in periods of trial, like the present, that the wisdom of
Freemasonry has been exercised, its strength tested, and its beauty displayed.
Amidst the dark ages of past time, the great lights of our Order, though often
obscured, have never been extinguished. Shall they now be eclipsed by the
'introduction of strangers among the workmen?' Will you suffer the political
edifice to be 'daubed with untempered mortar?' No, surely! The architect of your
internal prosperity is before you. Enter warmly into the cause of your
Brother--pass onward to the ballot boxes, with the tokens of your zeal and
fidelity--and by your united votes contribute to raise the State to that exalted
rank to which she is so justly entitled.
(Signed) THE WIDOW'S SON."
Mr. Clinton's election was accomplished by a very great
majority. This was in 1824. Mr. Clinton was Governor of New York in 1826, when
Morgan disappeared.
The political situation then suddenly changed. In the
spring of 1827 Masons were proscribed simply because they were Masons in Genesee
and Monroe countries. In the Fall of 1827 the Anti-Masonic party announced its
object as the destruction of Freemasonry through the instrumentality of the
ballot box.
George A. S. Crooker was nominated for Senator the eighth
district. Although he was defeated, the Anti-Masonic party carried Genesee,
Monroe, Livingston and Niagara counties in the face of both the Democratic, or
Jacksonian party, and the National Republican or Adams party.
In 1828 Solomon Southwick of Albany, was nominated for
Governor of New York. His total vote was 33,345, and, while defeated, in the
more radical counties he received a very large vote.
In the State election of 1829 the eighth district elected
Albert H. Tracy senator by a majority of 8000 votes, and the same year they
carried fifteen counties, with a total vote in the state of over 67,000.
In 1830, Francis Granger was nominated for Governor at a
convention held at Utica in which forty eight counties were represented by one
hundred and four delegates. He received a vote of 120,361, but was defeated.
Granger was nominated again in 1832 and again defeated,
although his vote was 156,672.
To show the rapid growth of the Anti-Masonic party in New
York, the following votes are given:
1828 33,345 1829 68,613 1830 106,081 1831 98,847
1832 156,672
In 1833 the estimated strength of the Anti-Masonic party in
the United States was 340,800. Its most rapid growth was in the State of New
York.
In Maine the Anti-Masonic vote in 1831 was 869; 832, 2384;
in 1833, 1670. That was the end of the party in Maine.
In Vermont the feeling was so intense that in 1832 she cast
her vote in favor of the Anti-Masonic candidate for President, and had the
distinction of being the only state in the Union to be carried by the
Anti-Masonic party.
In Pennsylvania the feeling was so intense that at a
convention of Anti-Masonic delegates held in Philadelphia, September 11, 1830,
the report of a committee was adopted which recited that "Morgan was foully
murdered," rehearsed the several obligations of Freemasonry, and demanded the
suppression of the institution. Among the reasons given for this drastic action
may be cited the following:
"To this government Freemasonry is wholly opposed. It
requires unresisting submission to its own authority, in contempt of public
opinion, the claims of conscience, and the rights of private judgment."
"The means of overthrowing Freemasonry cannot be found in
any, or in all, of our executive authorities. They cannot be found in our
judicial establishments."
"The only adequate corrective of Freemasonry--that prolific
source of the worst abuses--is to he found in the right of election, and to this
we must resort."
"~Freemasonry ought to be abolished. It should certainly be
so abolished as to prevent its restoration. No means of doing this can be
conceived so competent as those furnished by the ballot boxes."
In 1836 the Anti-Masonic party held its last national
convention at Philadelphia and its influence as a factor in politics practically
ended at this time.
In reading accounts of the campaign carried on during these
Anti-Masonic days, one is impressed with the bitterness, fierceness and
intensity of the Anti-Masonic spirit. One writer describes it in the following
language:
"That fearful excitement which spread over our land like a
moral pestilence, which confounded the innocent with the guilty, which entered
even the temple of God, which distracted and divided churches, which scattered
the closest ties of social life, which set father against son and son against
father, arraigned the wife against her own husband, and in short wherever its
baleful influences were most felt, deprived men of all those comforts and
enjoyments which render life to us a blessing."
Resolutions were adopted in the different legislatures
calling for investigations, demanding the surrender of the charters of the Grand
Lodges, and looking towards every possible way of terminating the Masonic
institution.
In Rhode Island a committee of five was appointed by the
legislature, no one of them Masons. This committee held eighteen sessions in the
principal cities of Rhode Island, hearing all the evidence offered, whether
hearsay evidence or evidence in the proper form as admitted in courts, and then
made a very complete report in which it declared that all the charges presented
to it against the Masonic order were baseless and slanderous.
In Massachusetts our Grand Lodge surrendered its act of
incorporation to the legislature and turned its property over to trustees to be
held by them, rather than engage in any controversy on the subject with the
legislature. It is interesting, however, to know that a committee of the
legislature appointed in 1834, after long investigation and hearings, made an
elaborate report, from which the following is taken:
AN INVESTIGATION INTO FREEMASONRY BY A JOINT COMMITTEE OF
THE LEGISLATURE OF MASSACHUSETTS, MARCH, 1824.
The Joint Committee of the Central Court to whom were
referred the memorials of Otis Allyn and other citizens of the Commonwealth,
praying for a full investigation into the nature, language, ceremonies, and form
of rehearsing extra-judicial oaths in Masonic bodies, and, if found to be such
as the Memorialists described them, that law may be passed, prohibiting the
future administration of Masonic, and such other extra-judicial oaths as tend to
weaken the sanction of civil oaths in Courts of Justice; and praying also for a
repeal of the charter granted by this Commonwealth to the Grand Lodge of
Massachusetts, have attended the duty assigned them, and ask leave to
REPORT
The committee are fully impressed with the sacred character
of the right which the people of this Commonwealth, in their Bill of Rights,
have retained to themselves, of petitioning their Legislature for the redress of
grievances. The right has been exercised in the present instance by more than
eight thousand citizens, in one hundred and twenty Memorials referred to the
Committee, complaining of the institution of Freemasonry as a grievance.
The report then goes on to recite different reasons and
motives for these Memorials and the method of conducting their investigations;
that they had invited the officers of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and all
other Masons to attend; that neither the Grand Master nor any other member of
the Grand Lodge, nor any adhering Mason appeared before them, and that the
committee had failed in its efforts to have anyone appear before it who should
fairly represent the Masonic Fraternity; that at the request of counsel for the
petitioners invitations were sent to the following adhering Masons:
Rev. Paul Dean, Rev. Samuel Barrett, Rev. Asa Eaton, Rev.
Sebastian Streeter, Rev. William Cogswell, Benjamin Russell, Esq., Robert G.
Shaw, Esq., Samuel Howe, Esq., Hon. Charles Jackson, Hon. Josiah J. Fiske.
Two of these respectfully declined attendance in writing;
the others neither replied nor attended. At the request of the committee, the
House gave them power to send for persons and papers, but the Senate refused to
concur in the action of the House.
Upon such information as the committee could obtain from
the petitioners, among whom were many seceding Masons, they submitted the
following conclusions:
"First. That Freemasonry is a moral evil; inasmuch as it
holds its proceedings shrouded by cautious and almost impenetrable secrecy, and
at an hour of darkness, which withdraws its members unseasonably, from that
family circle, which ought to be the first care and the first solace of every
good citizen; as it offers temptations in the form of 'refreshments,' to a
departure from that sobriety and temperance, which should mark the character of
an intelligent and moral community; as it familiarizes the mind, theoretically
at least, to the contemplation of scenes of violence and blood; and especially
as some of its rites and ceremonies are offensively sacrilegious, profaning what
the community generally religiously respect; thus undermining those sentiments
of piety, which are acknowledged to be the very basis and safeguard of morality.
"Second. That Freemasonry is a pecuniary evil; inasmuch as
it collects from the community, under the false pretenses of extensive charity
and peculiar science, large amounts of money, which are afterwards chiefly
expended in unprofitable entertainments, parades, and trinkets, which, in the
language of an eminent departed statesman, 'a well-informed savage would blush
to wear.'
"Third. That Freemasonry is a political evil; inasmuch as
it is a government claiming existence independent of civil governments, and
administering oaths, which, from their number and frequency, tend to impair the
binding force of civil oaths-- threaten penalties, severe even to barbarity, and
calculating to have an appalling and controlling effect on weak and uninformed
minds--and in their tenor conflict with the civil obligations of the citizen,
calling on him either to violate the latter in obedience to his Masonic oaths,
or to violate his Masonic oaths in obedience to his civil obligations."
The report continues to set forth the reason for its
conclusion and the following is taken from part of the report relating to the
second finding:
"The By-Laws of the Grand Lodge appropriate one fourth part
of the annual fees and one-third part of all initiation fees paid by subordinate
lodges, to the charity fund; that is, two dollars for every lodge, and one
dollar for every initiation in the State. Thus one hundred one lodges would pay
$808, and if nine hundred Masons were made annually, as was the increase in
1826, they would pay $2700 more, of which $1206 would go to support the
'dignity' of the Grand Lodge, and $502 be added to the charity fund, the
interest alone of which can be applied to charity--so that by this process, it
would require $2700 to enable this Charitable Society, the Grand Lodge, to
distribute in charity $30.12 a year!"
Lodge dues $8. Initiate dues to Grand Lodge $3.
(1/4 of $808 equals $202. 900 initiates would pay $2700.
1-3 of $2700 equals $900. $202 plus $900 equals $1102 instead of $502.
$1102 at 6 per cent interest would produce $66.12 instead
of $30.12 as so solemnly declared by this legislative committee of Anti-Masons.)
The period 1820 to 1840 was one of intense religious
activity.
On July 4, 1827, in the Seventh Presbyterian Church of the
city of Philadelphia, Ezra Stiles Ely said in a sermon:
"I propose, fellow-citizens, a new sort of Union or if you
please a Christian party in politics, which I am exceedingly desirous all good
men in our country should join, not by subscribing to a constitution, but by
adopting and avowing to act on religious principles in all civil matters."
At this time also the more orthodox members of the
Congregational church were alarmed at the different beliefs creeping into their
fold. For this purpose it was proposed by many to adopt synods like those of the
Presbyterian church in order to define their tenets exactly. A large body of the
church even desired the union of the Congregational and Presbyterian churches.
The Anti-Masonic party having so many religious men in its
ranks, and being at this time in a crusade in which the churches were
distracted, naturally entered as another element in the religious distress of
the period. In New England this was especially true, as the party there was
composed of the older religious country people, already in opposition to the
liberal spirit of the cities.
The Anti-Masonic party received the name of the "Christian
Party in Politics."
Every effort was directed against Masonic preachers and
laymen. Churches in their councils condemned the order. Before the disappearance
of Morgan, the Presbyterian church at Pittsburgh in January, 1821, condemned the
institution as "unfit for professed Christians." After the Morgan incident the
Presbyterians required their ministers to renounce Masonry and their laymen to
sever all connections with it and hold no fellowship with Masons. The
Congregationalists took practically the same attitude in New England and Eastern
New York. They attacked at one and the same time the Unitarians, the
Universalists, and the Masons. In New England Anti-Masonry was looked upon as
"nothing more than Orthodoxy in disguise."
In one of the Vermont papers opposed to the AntiMasons
appeared a letter in which the writer made the following appeal:
"Universalists, awake from thy slumbers, and show to these
Orthodox (Anti-Masons) that we are yet a majority and that we calculate to
retain the majority." March 11, 1834.
As early as 1823 the General Methodist Conference
prohibited its clergy from joining the Masons. In Pennsylvania during the
Masonic excitement it was said by the Anti-Masons that "No religious sect
throughout the United States has done more for the Anti-Masonic powers than the
Methodists." It forbade its members to join lodges or be present at any of their
processions or festivals and passed strict rules against ordaining any ministers
who belonged to the Order. The Methodist church was rent and torn by the
struggle, and many churches, fearing strife, did not allow the question to come
up, but passed non-partisan resolutions.
The Baptist church also was rent with dissensions over the
question, although not to so great an extent as the Presbyterians,
Congregationalists, and Methodists. At a convention of delegates from Baptist
churches held at LeRoy, New York, January 30, 1827, it was
"Resolved, that all such members as belong to the Baptist
church and who also belong to the society of Freemasons, be requested to
renounce publicly all communications with that order, and if the request is not
complied with in a reasonable time, to excommunicate all those who neglect or
refuse to do so."
Many of the friends of temperance, which was a growing
reform at this time, were also enemies of Masons.
Another peculiarity of Anti-Masonry is that it found its
chief support in the country and not in city. It is interesting to note that
Anti-Masonry was essentially a New England movement. There were exceptions, but
in New England and New York and throughout the path of New England emigration
the party was strongest. Most of the leaders in New York, like Weed, Granger,
Holley, Ward and Maynard, were of New England extraction. The party in
Pennsylvania was led by men of New England extraction and was called by the
Democrats "a Yankee concern from beginning to end."
The Anti-Masons accused the newspapers of being "muzzled"
by the Masons. Anti-Masonic papers were established. In 1832 there were one
hundred and forty one of these papers. New York had forty-five weeklies and one
daily, while Pennsylvania had fifty-five weekly papers.
Considering all these conditions, the Morgan incident was
but the spark that lighted the fire. The fire was fanned and controlled by some
of the shrewdest political leaders this country has ever seen. The greatest of
all of these politicians were Thurlow Weed of New York and Thaddeus Stevens of
Pennsylvania, while in New England, Hallett of Rhode Island was active, and
Phelps and Thatcher of Massachusetts may be mentioned among the most prominent,
although there were many very active in New England.
In 1826 there was a general practice, which had prevailed
for years, of giving credit for the degrees. The door of Masonry was thrown open
to a great many. It was, as we say, popular to belong to the Masonic Fraternity.
It is possible that during the period immediately preceding the Morgan episode a
good many had been accepted into the Fraternity without being carefully
investigated, or if they were, the committees and lodges were too eager and
anxious to swell their numbers to exercise that careful scrutiny of the
applicant which has been found so essential if the lodges are to maintain that
high standard of character which the institution warrants; consequently, when
the storm burst and the Fraternity was openly charged with violating the law of
the land and the murder of an innocent citizen, a good many of those who dropped
out or became seceding Masons improved the opportunity to destroy their
financial indebtedness and at the same time gain some notoriety in their several
communities.
The work of the lodges fell off very rapidly. In some
states the Grand Lodges suspended their meetings for years. The Grand Lodge of
Vermont had but seven lodges represented at its meeting in 1834. In 1836 the
Grand Master, the Grand Secretary, and the Grand Treasurer of Vermont were
empowered to meet every two years and adjourn the Grand Lodge biennially or
oftener. This was done during the years 1837, 1838, 1840, 1842 and 1844, but in
1845 these Grand Officers took counsel to resume labor. It also appears from
their records that various constituent lodges at that time resumed labor. This
would indicate that their communications had never legally ceased and their
charters had not been surrendered. Probably these lodges followed the civil law
as to associations and so maintained a consecutive legal existence from a date
prior to the Anti-Masonic period.
In Maine the Grand Lodge failed to meet for several years
and, had a nominal meeting in other years. While from 1834 to 1843 the Grand
Lodge met annually, at one meeting they were without a representative from a
single lodge, and but twice during this period of nine years did they have
representatives from more than four lodges. Nearly all the lodges in Maine
during this period or some part of it, suspended their meetings and became
dormant, even if they did not surrender their charters.
In New Jersey the Grand Lodge in 1824 and 1825 had
representatives from twenty-two to thirty-three lodges. After this period of
opposition the lodges in New Jersey were reduced to six.
In New York there were four hundred and eighty lodges in
1826 with a membership of about twenty thousand. From 1827 to 1839 the Grand
Lodge maintained its annual meetings, but only fifty to ninety different lodges
were represented in that time. In 1835 there were but seventy-five lodges in the
State of New York; twenty-five of these were in the city of New York, with a
membership of about three thousand. In 1839 there were seventy-five lodges in
the state, twenty-two were in New York City and Brooklyn and fifty-three in the
remainder of the state. Masonry was at its lowest ebb in New York about 1840.
There are many remarkable instances of loyalty and heroism
in connection with these local lodges. One or two instances will suffice. Olive
Branch Lodge No. 39, at Le Roy, in Genesee County, did not suspend its
communications, and was recorded as the "Preserver of Masonry" in Western New
York; seven of its most zealous and devoted members entered into this solemn
agreement:
"To meet once in four weeks for the purpose of opening and
closing the lodge and keeping up the work."
This agreement was literally kept, and never once during
that time, although obliged to travel a distance of more than thirty miles, did
they fail to have their meetings.
Union Lodge No. 45, at Lima, Monroe county, continued to
hold its regular meetings, although it was fiercely assailed again and again.
Batavia lodge, where the Morgan trouble began, lay dormant
for sixteen years, but was revived in 1842.
On June 17, 1825, occurred the laying of the cornerstone of
Bunker Hill Monument, by the officers of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, who
were honored by the presence of Brother LaFayette, friend and companion of
George Washington.
Eighteen hundred and twenty-five was the last prosperous
year Massachusetts Masonry was to see fol two decades. That year the number of
lodges rose to one hundred and seven. In 1844 it had sunk to fifty two and at
one Communication of the Grand Lodge only eight lodges were represented.
In 1833, the meeting of December 12th was adjourned to
December 20th, and at that meeting the only business transacted, according to
the records, was the passing of the following vote:
"Voted: That R. W. Francis J. Oliver, R. W. Augustus
Peabody, R. W. Joseph Baker, R. W. John Soley, and R. W. Charles W. Moore, be a
committee to consider the expediency of surrendering the act of incorporation of
the Grand Lodge, and report at the next meeting."
The next meeting was held December 27, 1833, and the
following action was taken:
"Voted: That the Master and Wardens of this Grand Lodge be
authorized and directed to surrender to the Legislature the act of incorporation
granted to the Master, Wardens and Members of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts,
June 16, 1817, and to present therewith the foregoing memorial signed by them."
The memorial referred to is a dignified, carefully prepared
statement of the reasons for surrendering this act of incorporation and a plain
statement of their position on all questions involving the principles of
Masonry.
At this meeting it was reported that the sale of the
Masonic Temple as authorized, had been made to Robert Shaw.
In 1843, December 27, the Grand Lodge met and held a Lodge
of Instruction, at which the three degrees were fully worked and exemplified by
the Grand Lecturers with "facility and skillfulness." More brethren from the
country were in attendance at this meeting than any previous occasion for ten
years. In the same year a new and revised edition of the Grand Constitutions was
adopted.
In 1845, December 27, two years later, a Grand Lodge of
Instruction was called at 9 a.m., at which the representatives of twenty-seven
lodges were present. The work of the three degrees was exemplified by the Grand
Lecturers and favorable comments on their efforts are recorded.
On June 17, 1843, occurred the great celebration of the
completion of the Bunker Hill Monument, at which were present the chief
magistrates and dignitaries of the nation and some of the states. In the
Proceedings of the Grand Lodge occurs this comment:
"Those who had the direction of the great jubilee did not
feel the propriety of inviting our Grand Lodge to assist in the ceremonies."
King Solomon's Lodge, of Charlestown, was especially
invited, and it seems that the members of the Grand Lodge joined with the
members of King Solomon's Lodge in the procession and so participated in the
proceedings, but with great regret that they were not permitted to participate
officially in the proceedings, in view of the illustrious Masons who
participated in the battle that this monument was to commemorate.
Twenty years after the Morgan episode, the editor of
"Letters on Freemasonry" by John Quincy Adams, stated in an introduction to
those letters as published in 1847:
"The excitement which arose in consequence of the
disclosures then made had the effect, at least for a time, if not permanently,
to check the further spread of that association. The legislative power of some
of the states was invoked, and at last actually interposed, to prevent the
administration of extra-judicial oaths, including of course all such as were
constantly taken in the Masonic Order. This was the furthest point which the
opposition ever reached. It did not succeed in procuring the dissolution of the
organization of the order, or even the repeal of the charters under which it had
recognized existence in the social system. From the moment of the adoption of a
penal law deemed strong enough to meet the most serious of the evils complained
of, the apprehension of further danger from Masonry began to subside. At this
day (1847), the subject has ceased to be talked of. The attention of men has
been gradually diverted to other things, until at last it may be said that few
persons are aware of the fact, provided it be not especially forced upon their
notice, that not only Freemasonry continues to exist, but also that other
associations partaking of its secret nature, if not of its unjustifiable
obligations, not merely live, but greatly flourish in the midst of them."
A careful reading of many articles published and
resolutions passed at about the time of the Morgan episode indicates that a few
members of the lodge at Batavia thought they were serving a good purpose by
securing Morgan's manuscript before it was published and separating Morgan from
Miller, editor of the local paper. Quite a number of Masons were knowing to the
plans.
These plans included an agreement with Morgan that he
should destroy all the manuscript and printed sheets connected with his proposed
publication; he was to quit drinking, and from the money to be paid clothe
himself decently and provide for the immediate wants of his family; refuse all
further interviews with his partners; promise that he would not disclose this
arrangement to anyone, and that within a short time he would go to a remote
locality in Canada, where he was to settle down, his family to be supplied with
money and transportation to join him, and a substantial sum paid to Morgan for
giving up the publication and the expected income from these disclosures. Morgan
was to be well treated and his family provided for until they should join him in
Canada.
In view of these arrangements, which were well known to the
Masons in the locality of Batavia, it did not occur to the men who took this
ill-advised action that anything like the excitement which followed would be
occasioned. That the plan was entirely a local arrangement, we believe is
conclusively shown by action of the Masonic Grand Bodies at that time.
The Grand Lodge of New York took no action in the matter
until 1831, when it adopted resolutions reciting the facts and the
misrepresentations and appointing a committee to ascertain and report at the
next annual communication. In 1832 a supplemental report was adopted in which
they deplored the action, characterizing it as "a violation alike of Masonic
obligation and the law of the land," and asked for further time to complete
their investigation.
The Grand Lodge of Vermont, October 7, 1829, issued an
appeal in which it held itself guiltless of the different charges brought
against the Fraternity in connection with the Morgan incident.
Other Grand Lodges took similar action. Perhaps the most
effective and complete statement issued by Masons was the declaration of the
Freemasons of Boston and vicinity, dated December 31, 1831, which was of great
service in restoring the public mind to a normal state. This declaration is well
worth consideration, and reveals not only a fine appreciation of the situation,
by our best men, but also a splendid spirit of resolution to abide the results.
It is as follows:
"While the public mind remained in the high state of
excitement to which it had been carried by the partial and inflammatory
representations of certain offences committed by a few misguided members of the
MASONIC INSTITUTION in a sister state, it seemed to the undersigned (residents
of Boston and vicinity) to be expedient to refrain from a public DECLARATION of
their principles and engagements as MASONS. But believing the time now to be
fully come when their fellow citizens will receive with candor, if not with
satisfaction, A SOLEMN AND UNEQUIVOCAL DENIAL OF THE ALLEGATIONS which, during
the last five years, in consequence of their connection with the MASONIC
FRATERNITY, have been reiterated against them, they respectfully ask permission
to invite attention to the subjoined
DECLARATION:
Whereas, it has been frequently asserted and published to
the world that in the several degrees of FREEMASONRY, as they are enforced in
the United States, the candidate, in his initiation and subsequent advancement,
binds himself by oath to sustain his Masonic brethren in acts which are at
variance with the fundamental principles of morality and incompatible with his
duty as a good and faithful citizen, in justice therefore to themselves, and
with a view to establish TRUTH and expose IMPOSITION, the undersigned, many of
us the recipients of every degree of Freemasonry known and acknowledged in this
country, do most SOLEMNLY DENY the existence of any such obligations in the
MASONIC INSTITUTION, so far as our knowledge respectively extends. And we as
SOLEMNLY AVER that no person is admitted to the Institution without first being
made acquainted with the nature of the obligations which he will be required to
incur and assume.
FREEMASONRY secures its members in the freedom of thought
and of speech, and permits each and everyone to act according to the dictates of
his own conscience in matters of religion, and of his personal preferences in
matters of politics; it neither knows, nor does it assume to inflict upon its
erring members, however wide may be their aberration from duty, any penalties or
punishments other than those of ADMONITION, SUSPENSION, and EXPULSION.
The obligations of the Institution require of its members a
strict obedience to the laws of God and man. So far from being bound by any
engagements inconsistent with the happiness and prosperity of the nation, every
citizen who becomes a Mason is doubly bound to be true to his GOD, to his
COUNTRY, and to his FELLOWMAN.
In the language of the Ancient Constitutions of the Order,
which are printed and open for public inspection, and which are used as text
books in all the lodges, he is required to keep and obey the MORAL LAW; to be a
quiet and peaceful citizen, true to his government and just to his country.
MASONRY disdains the making of proselytes; she opens the
portals of her asylum to those who seek admission with the recommendation of a
character unspotted by immorality and vice. She simply requires of the candidate
his assent to one great, fundamental, religious truth--THE EXISTENCE AND
PROVIDENCE OF GOD; and a practical acknowledgement of those infallible doctrines
for the government of life which are written by the finger of God on the heart
of man.
ENTERTAINING such sentiments, as MASONS, as CITIZENS, as
CHRISTIANS, and as MORAL MEN, and deeply impressed with the conviction that the
MASONIC INSTITUTION has been, and may continue to be, productive of great good
to their fellowmen; and having 'received the laws of the society, and its
accumulated funds, in sacred trust for charitable uses,' the undersigned can
neither renounce nor abandon it.
We most cordially unite with our Brethren of Salem and
vicinity in the declaration and hope that, 'should the people of this country
become so infatuated as to deprive Masons of their civil rights, in violation of
their written constitutions, and the wholesome spirit of just laws and free
governments, a vast majority of the Fraternity will still remain firm, confiding
in God, and the rectitude of their intentions for consolation, under the trials
to which they may be exposed."'
This declaration was written by Charles W. Moore, for many
years Grand Secretary of our Grand Lodge. It was originally intended only for
the Boston Encampment of Knights Templar. Later, at the earnest request of
prominent Masons, it was submitted to the Grand Master, and subsequently signed
by one thousand, four hundred and sixty-nine Masons from fifty four towns and
districts in Massachusetts. Four hundred thirty-seven were of Boston.
More than six thousand Masons in New England subscribed to
this declaration, which was given to the public on December 31, 1831.
M. W. Brother Gallagher, in commenting upon this
declaration in an address given by him at Camden, Maine, on June 24, 1901, said:
"It was the first heavy blow given to Anti-Masonry and with
the political defeat in the Jackson campaign sounded the death knell of its
existence. That famous declaration embodies and states concisely about all there
is in the principles of the Masonic Order. Printed and read in our lodges, it
would serve to assist in pursuing anew our journey in the paths of rectitude and
Masonic virtue."
----o----
THE APPROACHES TO THE HEART
Do you crave an inspiration straight from nature's very
heart,
Beating true to the creation of which you're a conscious
part?
Would you, somehow, in your longing, form a kinship to the
earth
That might make its elementals of a sweeter, richer worth--
That might make all things in nature to your soul a means
of grace,
Wooing with the charm forever of her omnipresent grace ?
Then unto her soulful readings, blended with Masonic Art
Open wide all the approaches to the portals of the heart.
--Bro. L. B. Mitchell, Michigan.
----o----
Liberty's in every blow!
Let us do or die.
--Burns.
----o----
But what is truth? 'Twas Pilate's question put
To Truth itself, that deign'd him no reply.
--Cowper.
----o----
THE COMACINE MASTERS -- AN APPENDIX
BY BRO. W. RAVENSCROFT, ENGLAND
SINCE writing my "Further Notes on the Comacine Masters,"
which appeared in THE BUILDER for July, August and September, 1918, I have had
opportunity for reading some additional references to them and, as they throw
fresh light on the subject, I have translated a few extracts from these
references as an appendix to what I have already written.
The translations are as follows:
L'Italia: Monumentale, Asti. Prof. A. BevilacquaLazise, p.
6.
"Of the Lombard-Carlovingian period there are preserved to
us in Asti three precious relics; the Crypt of S. Secondo (del Mercato), of S.
Giovanni and part of that of S. Anastasio.
"These show us the first tentative efforts and the
commencement of artistic progress in that nucleus of artificers who, in Lombard
territory at the beginning of the seventh century, were already developing a
reproduction of the traditional Roman construction and giving to Europe the
architecture of the following middle age.
"Crypt of S. Secondo. Erected on the spot where tradition
places the martyrdom of the patron saint of the city and hence, from the
earliest ages of Christianity, sacred, it arose probably in the first half of
the seventh century. Of that period are its capitals surmounted by a coarse
abacus something like a cushion and of a form vaguely approaching that of the
pre-Lombard cube introduced in Lombardy at the end of the seventh century. (See
illustrations.)
"Crypt of S. Giovanni. This was the ancient Episcopal
baptistry of Asti. It arose probably in the period of Liutprand (712-744). Since
we find already formed the pre-Lombard cube capitals (according to the
denomination of Rivoira), with the cube roughly shaped off, of which we
certainly have no examples before this date. One may also assign to this epoch,
indirectly confirmed by documents, the transfer of the Episcopal seat which,
until the seventh century, was placed without the walls near the church of S.
Secondo and thereby made a little more secure. One remarks in this crypt the
capitals of the Theodorican' reconstruction of Asti and the figure capital, one
of two only, dating from the pre-Lombard artistic period with human figures.
"Crypt of S. Anastasio. It arose not much before 792-793,
the year of the document in which it is mentioned. The Comacini in its
construction were assisted by Ravennese, at any rate in the decorative portions
as is evidenced by the capitals of the two schools when compared with some
others of the Theodorican time. It is noteworthy that one of the Ravennese
capitals shows a remarkable affinity with one co-eval of S. Vincenzo in Prato,
Milanese (eighth century) and one Comacine which preludes an art more complete
and evolved."
Referring to the church of S. Anastasio (recently
destroyed), Prof. Bevilacqua-Lazise says (p. 10):
"The church taken altogether permits the affirmation that
it was the work of Comacine Masters nor is there in its ornamentation any trace
of trans-Alpine influence."
Merzario: "I. Maestri Comacini," vol. I, p. 113, writing
about S. Marks, Venice, says:
"The basilical iconography and its system of masonry; the
crypt, which is a medieval in use before 900; certain rude and discordant
sculpture in the taste of that of Altino; some forms of columns, of vaults and
of arcades; several symbolic figures, griffins, flowers, birds and
hieroglyphics, and the other emblems which are seen in the atrium and in the
narthex of S. Ambrose of Milan are almost exclusively the property of the
Comacines, and added to this their continual dependance on the Patriarchate of
Aquileja attested of their presence in S. Marks."
L'Italia: Monumentale, Venice (S. Mark), L. Marongoni, p.
6.
"In the year 829 under the Doge Giovanni Partecipazio,
brother of Guistiniano, was initiated the construction of the first edifice
which was of more restricted proportions than the existing church, its
architecture being that of a Latin basilica."
L' Italia: Monumentale, Como. D. Santo Monti, pp. 6 and 7.
"Seventy-five years after the descent of the Lombards into
Italy, in 643, appeared a code of Rotari and after about another 100 years an
edict of King Liutprand, both referring to a Society of 'Magistri Comacini' and
of their 'Colleganti.' It will not be unreasonable to suppose that thisl Society
or association, college or fraternity, whichever you will, existed some time
before the coming of the Lombards into Italy and thrived under the Goths and
under Greek influence; that it was probably a derivation of an ancient college
or association of arts and business existing from Roman times and under their
laws, the cradle, so to speak, of Mustio the architect of Pliny, and not
altogether lost from amongst us, surviving unimpaired the darkness of the age of
barbarian domination."
L'Italia: Monumentale, Trieste. A. Berlam, p. 10.
"In the first times of Christianity about the fourth
century arose the little church of S. Silvestro in honour of the Pope Silvester
I who baptized Constantine. According to tradition, on the site of the church
stood the house of the Triestine martyrs Eufemia and Tecla (2) whose sarcophagus
was preserved until 1700 as we read in the writings of the historian Ireneo
della Croce.
"* * * And still we come to this church, dear to the heart
of all Triestmes both as a symbol of Latinity and as a souvenir of the
fourteenth century free commune, to this S. Cicisto toward which flies the
Italian homage of Carducci.
L'Italia: Monumentale, I Monumenti del Lago di Como. Cigo
Monneret de Villard.
"The Lake in the Antonine Itinerary is called Comacina--its
ancient name"--p. 6.-
"Not only the three 'Pievi' but also the Island of Comacina
set up itself as an independent republic." p. 9.
"In this epoch of quarrels and massacres the architecture
of Como flourished a school special and distinct from the Romanic ('Romanica')
architecture of Italy--that which one sees always so falsely called by the
generic name of Lombard.
"The lombard architecture is itself a school specially
distinct from the great Romanic trunk which, contrary to pre-supposition, has
tendencies, methods and oblets peculiar to itself, differing from those of the
Comacine school. If this confusion has been possible and it was believed that
one was simply a local form of the other and one saw but little difference in
them, it is due to the carelessness and the want of goodwill of students who,
attracted and fascinated by the grand monuments of the Milanese, found it too
fatiguing and too little interesting to explore the Como district to study the
monuments which have there been erected from the commencement of the eleventh to
the end of the thirteenth centuries.
"In these short pages it is not possible to treat deeply
the questions, but we may perhaps indicate the limits at sufficent length.
"Comacine architecture in the Romanci epoch has
sufficiently well- defined boundary; it includes the high valleys of the Ticino
and the Adda, the Canton Ticino which is found in our days, the Valtellina, all
the territory of the ancient diocese of Como, the northern part of the ancient
countship of Seprio, the northern Brianza, the Valassina and the Valsassina, the
eastern bank of Lario (Lake Como) which depended from the diocese of Milan;
approaching that which constituted the district under the administrative rule of
the province of Como and that of Sondrio and the canton Ticino and the frontiers
of the bordering regions. The heart of it is certainly Como and the Lake: here
it is that we find the greatest number and most important of the monuments. The
materials of which use was made are naturally those which the soil produced;
thus we see why the architecture Milanese or Lombard, whichever we wish to call
it, is based on terra-cotta--the Comacine uses stone; the quarries of Moltrasio
and those of analogous material furnished the fundamental elements while the
marbles of Olcio and of Musso less spread (more limited?) served for the works
more refined. The great river fiints are not disdained for works of less
importance.
"From the constructive point of view the problem of the
vault is fundamental in Lombard architecture as in all such schools of Romanic
architecture it is of great architectural importance; in Comacine architecture
it is, on the contrary, secondary only.
"As in France the Norman school and that of the Isle of
France, as in Italy the architectural Romanic school of the center and south of
the peninsula, so in the northern part Comacine architecture, rather than
prosecute the efforts of the Carlovingian epoch of adapting the vault to the
basilican plan, or to the central form of plan, contented itself with resuits
already achieved by the Latin school with the basilica covered by a wooden roof.
"The only vaulted part in the Comacine churches is the
apse, except certain cupolas in transepts as at Vertemate at S. Giacomo and at
S. Fedele of Como, or adopted to the polygonal plan as at S. Giovanni in Atrio
di Como and a few transepts covered at the crossing in front of the apses, an
example of which can be seen in S. Giacomo of Bellagio.
"The problem of the vault has drawn in its following
special forms of pillars grouped in isolated support and of the pilasters and
counter forts to external walls. There is nothing of all this in Comacine
architecture of which the supports are always simple (it being the conservative
ahd traditional school) having generally the form of columns. In reality they
were round pillars composed of many dressed stones, as for example at S. Abondio
di Como and at S. Giacomo di Bellagio, pillars which are also to be found at
Gravedona at Vertemate and in the Episcopal palace of Como. The walls are always
simple and if they have pilastels they are such as are purely decorative and not
constructional.
"The roofs are covered with wood, some open timbered,
others inclosed with ceilings as at S. Nicolao di Piona or at S. Maria di
Martinico above Dongo.
"It is only in the monuments of Como that the influence of
the Lombard school is felt which we find in 'Tiburium' over the crossing. This
is systematically wanting in all other cases. The arrangement of plan as a rule
in the Comacine school is that of the basilicia with one nave (3) only and with
semicircular apse, toward the end of the twelfth century the rectangular apse
was substituted for this.
"Basilicas with two naves as at S. Agata di Montrasio are
very rare--generallly the second nave came as an enlargement of the church. Rare
also are basilicas with three naves as at S. Benedetto della Perlana, S. Giacomo
di Bellagio, S. Marta Sopra Carate and the demolished church of S. Vincenzo in
Gravedona. Still more rare are the churches with central form of plan, of which
on the Lake we may instance the baptistry of Lenno, S. Maria del Tigilo at
Gravedona and the square demolished baptistry of Menaggio. Interesting crypts we
have at Lenno and at Gravedona; rarely one finds cloisters of which the sole
remaining one on the Lake is that of Piona.
"The campinili are during the eleventh and twelfth
centuries always of one same type--square towers with pilasters at the angles
divided in the several stages by rows of little arches surmounted sometimes by
rows of stones placed dentil-wise.
"To the several stories loopholes open of single lights, of
two lights, and sometimes in the belfry of three lights.
"In the thirteenth century was substituted a simpler type
of tower, square and terminating with four piers which carried the roof as at S.
Martino di Cal eno and at S. Pietro in Vincoli at Bignanico, campanili similar
to the tower of Broletto of Como.
"The octagonal campanile of Gravedona and that like it, now
demolished, of Piona are exceptions derived from ultra-montane influence.
"The position of the campanili also is little varied. In
general flanking the nave near the apse but at other times placed in the front
occupying only a part of the facade as at Bellagio, or masked completely as at
S. Nazaro e Celso di Scaria, and sometimes arising from the interior of the
church placed on two walls of the nave of which one is the front wall, as at
S.'Andrea di Lenno.
"The entrances are generally formed with lunettes
surmounting friezes, the windows always round-headed. In the facades are usually
cruciform lights, and towards the end of the twelfth century appeared the round
windows, as at S. Maria di Martinico.
"Examples of external arcades flanking the naves and apses
we have not except in the case of S. Giacomo and S. Fedele at Como where there
are evidences of Lombard-Milanese or Rhenish influence. The facades, when the
basilicas are of three naves, are divided, the central portion raised, and
demonstrating clearly the structure behind, S. Carpoforo of Como being alone the
exception. In this particular the Comacine school clearly is distinguished from
the Lombard-Milanese which always treats the three naves as one front.
"Comacine decoration is both simple and interesting.
Generally under the eaves of the edifice runs a cornice of small arches
surmounted sometimes by a dentilled frieze. In the apses besides such arches we
get also vertical pilasters enriched sometimes with semi-columns and these small
arches run on the facades, following the sailing courses of the pediments. This
is in fact the customary treatment of Lombard Milanese architecture.
"The churches were nearly always covered with frescoes,
conspicuous amongst which is the gigantic figule of S. Christopher, the
protector of travelers.
"It is in sculpture that Comacine architecture reveals its
proper characteristics--the capitals have rarely the simple cubic Lombard form
but they present in great variety forms recalling in some respects ancient
design.
"The decoration, contrary to that of the Lombard Milanese
school which made much use of interlaced ribbons, presents true characteristics
of sculpture with figures of animals such as dogs following each other in the
capitals of Cernobbio heads, and eagles, as at Piona, and sometimes with truly
animated scenes, as in the magnificent capital conserved in the museum of Como.
"The Comacine school is meanwhile that which was most
affected by external influence---that of the Rhenish school explaining itself
easily by the frequent and important relations which the Ghibelline city (Milan
?) had with the empire, the Lake and its valleys being the natural road for
descent from Germany into Italy, and that of Burgundy by the introduction of the
Monastic orders of the Benedictines--the reformed Benedictines and the Cluniacs,
who from the center of the Island of Comacini spread themselves over all the
region' of Como. The Rhenish influence imposed itself chiefly on architectural
form and alone can explain the positions of the frontal towel s of S. Giacomo di
Como, while the Burgundian, which is powerfully revealed in S. Maria del Tiglio
at Gravedona, dom'inates the decorative sculpture.
"A development so rich of Romanic art ought not to leave a
large place for Gothic architecture--in effect all the countries, being already
provided with churches when this new form of architecture appeared, did not feel
the need of erecting others. Besides which the Comacine school, liking not
vaults as coverings, would not allow itself to be attracted by the new school,
which in the solution of this problem had its base, its object, and its raison
d' etre.
"For this reason there does not exist a Comacine Gothic
architecture strictly characteristic.
"In the greater number of cases the architects wele content
to apply to a Romanic structure decorative forms nearly always only substituting
lancet for semicircular arches where they are small and decorative." (p. 10 et
seq.)
In the foregoing extracts there is considerable unanimity
of opinion, if perhaps one or two of the statements of Sig. Monneret de Villard,
to which I propose to make a few allusions, are excepted.
Sig. de Villard, it will be noticed, takes a limited view
of the territory and scope of the Comacine Masters. Merzario takes an extremely
wide one. The former comes to his conclusions by differentiating the Comacine
from the Lombard school to an extent one is not prepared to follow altogether.
He refers to the latter as a branch of architecture distinct from the Roman
trunk depending for development largely on the use of brick and the effort to
deal with the vault, which latter in Comacine work, he says, finds no important
place. But he admits the influence of each school on the other, and gives
examples of such.
Now it must not be forgotten that for a considerable time
the Comacines were ffrst in the ffeld working extensively in the Lombard plain,
the Lombards for a long time having no school of architecture. The natural
inference therefore is that the Lombard school was developed from the Comacine
and largely influenced by the use of brick and the vault--both of which were to
some extent used by the Comacines.
Moreover the differences between the two schools --if they
are to be in any great sense regarded as distinct--are not nearly so strongly
marked as, for instance, those between the Norman and early English styles of
architecture where, in early English work all the leading features, in their
full development, are the very opposite of those in Norman work, and yet we
know, subject of course to a good deal of external influence, the one grew out
of the other and there was for a short time a transition stage between the two.
All the same it would be going too far to speak of Comacine
and Lombard work, especially as time advanced, as one and the same.
Sig. de Villard's contentions as regards a few details, one
would submit, are not altogether borne out.
For instance, he makes the cushion capitals of columns the
property of the Lombard school, and speaks of their rare occurrence in Comacine
work. Yet without looking specially for them, one has seen them in S. ALbondio
Como, S. Giacomo Como, at Bellagio on Comacina, at Gravedona, and in the crypt
of S. Marks, Venice--all Comacine work and mostly in the Comacine district. (4)
So with the interlaced ornament. There is abundance of it
at S. Abondio Como and beautiful specimens at Gravedona and elsewhere in this
same district, as well as all over Italy--all probably having oriental or
origin.
One would submit further that in several instances
especially in campanili the use of brick does not, as Sig. de Villard suggests,
denote the work as Lombard, seeng that notwithstanding this material many of
these works have features which he regards as distinctly Comacine. Further he
tells us that the "three naves" plan in Comacine work is rare, and yet he says
where found therein it is always emphasized and not masked on the facade as in
Lombard work. This treatment, however, is to be found all over Italy and the
principal church on Isola Comacina was a "three nave" church.
As a matter of fact it is impossible to draw any definite
line between the two schools--one would rather say as they advanced in time they
showed increasing tendencies to separate development, the Comacine being the
more conservative in its character.
The churches at Piacenza, as well as some of those in
Milan, give good illustrations of the development in brick of Lombard work.
From the foregoing translations generally it is not
unreasonable to conclude:
1. That Eastern and trans-Alpine influences on both
Comacine and Lombard work are admitted, but with less constructive effect in the
former than in the latter.
2. That the Lombard school, insofar as it merits a separate
name, was developed from the Comacines.
3. That the cushion capitals of the Norman school were
derived from the Comacines, examples not being known before the eighth century,
when they may have been evolved in the manner described by Prof.
Bevilacqua-Lazise.
4. That the influence of trans-Alpine Gothic in Italy
generally, and particularly on the Comacine and Lombard schools was, especially
in its earlier days, largely superficial and never wholly satisIactory or
complete.
A few words may be added as to the relation between the
Comacine plans of churches and the earlier examples which remain to us in
England of the Saxon and early Norman periods.
Sig. Monneret de Villard states that the greater number of
Comacine churches were planned each with one nave only, and a semicircular apse,
which latter was substituted toward the end of the twelfth century by the
rectangular chancel. Also that the nave and aisle arrangement was not so common
in Comacine work, while crypts are to be found in several instances. And we have
already seen that repeatedly artificers were called over from the Continent to
England to build churches in the Roman manner.
It must surely, therefore, be more than a coincidence that
the plans of a large number of these early churches conform to those of the
Comacines, and, taken with other evidence already adduced, one submits the
reason for this was the Comacine influence brought to bear on them.
No attempt is here made to give a complete list of these
English churches, but the following are just such as have come under notice:
Those consisting of nave only and apse are:
Four connected with the Mission of S. Augustine to England
(sixth century).
The first Cathedral of Rochester.
The Church of S. Pancras at Canterbury.
The original priory of Christchurch, Hants, consisting of
several chapels standing apart from each other, two still remaining beneath the
transepts of the present church.
The original church of Corhampton, Hants.
Those consisting of nave only and rectangular chancel, as
in the later Comacine work are:
The Saxon church of Bradford on Avon.
The Saxon church of Escomb, Durham.
That of Monkwearmouth, Durham. (Since enarged.)
That of Jarrow, Durham. (A. D. 684.)
That of Corbridge, Northumberland.
That of Boarhunt, Hants.
That of Hambledon, Hants. (Since enlarged.)
Also many others where the original plan is much obscured
by later additions.
Those of the basilican form, i. e., with nave aisles and
apse are:
Wilfrid's Church at Hexham, having also a crypt and
arrangement of stairs thereto, all of Comacine type.
Wilfrid's Church at Ripon, similar in arrangement.
The Saxon Church at Brixwortll, Northants, built about A.
D. 680, and having a rectallgular presbytery placed between the nave and apse,
another Comacine feature.
The Church at Lydd, Kent.
The Church at Wing, Bedfordshire.
The Church at Reculvers, Kent.
The original Cathedral of Canterbury (destroyed by fire in
1067) with its apse at the west end.
The original Church at Romsey.
The crypt of Winchester Cathedral.
The Parish Church, Goring, Oxon.
To give a list of churches illustrating the basilican plan,
but with rectangular chancels with or without transepts or central towers, would
carry beyond the scope of these notes, because such would have to be drawn
chiefly from types of later date which can scarcely be claimed to have such
direct Comacine association.
(1) Theodoric the Great, A. D. 455-526.
(2) S. Eufemia (Sept. 16) was honored in Como, being patron
of the church afterwards known as S. Fedele, also of the excavated chu | 
