THE BUILDER MAGAZINE
February 1919
volume 5 - number 2
"LES FREE MASSONS" - A RARE MASONIC PLATE
BY BRO. CHARLES C. HUNT, DEPUTY GRAND SECRETARY, IOWA
THE PLATE entitled "Les Free Massons," used as the
frontispiece in this issue, is quite a rarity and has occasioned considerable
curiosity and disputation. It is made from one of the original impressions which
is preserved in the Iowa Masonic Library at Cedar Rapids. The plate was
published in 1733-35 in connection with a list of lodges of the Society "des
Massons Libres," edited by Pine, himself a Freemason, and dedicated to Weymouth,
then Grand Master of England, whose arms appear in the print.
The portrait of Sir Richard Steele in the medallion above
the tavern signs, and beneath the Weymouth arms, would seem to indicate him as a
member of the Fraternity, yet this has been denied by later writers.
Mr. Richard Steele, familiarly known as "Dick" Steele,
afterwards created Sir Richard Steele by Queen Anne, was noted as a "man about
town" and a close observer of everything transpiring in London in his day. He
was a contributor to the "Tatler" and mentions the subject of Freemasonry
incidentally by alluding to "certain coteries of idle fellows who rail at
woman-kind and have their signs and tokens like Free Masons."
Steele was an author of some repute, publishing a volume of
dramatic works, 1723, containing plays written by him as early as 1714; "Theatre
and Anti-Theatre," republished 1791; two volumes of "Epistolary Correspondence,"
reprinted in 1787; "Account of the State of the Roman Catholic Religion
throughout the World," 1715. His connection with the Fraternity has been
affirmed by some writers who mention him as a "Free Mason of the York Rite, or
Ancient Masons." It would seem somewhat evident that Sir Richard was a Mason and
a "good fellow," his portrait being so closely allied with the "Tavern Signs,"
representing the places of meeting of the Craft.
This same plate appears also in Picart's Ceremonies, of
1736-37, a very rare work published in seven large folio volumes, of which the
Grand Lodge of Iowa has a complete set.
Brother Speth, in writing of this rare plate, says:
"It represents in the foreground the Worshipful Master, his
Wardens and Brethren, all in the costume of the early part of the last century;
beyond them stretches a table in the shape of a square, and behind this table
rises a high panelled wainscoting. The panel is divided into 129 smaller
squares, on each of which appears a number, the copy of a tavern sign, and the
name of the tavern in question. . . . . The plate is valuable as showing us the
Masonic costume of the period, and curious as suggesting that Sir Richard Steele
must have been a Freemason. It is indeed our only evidence on that point as,
although many expressions in his writings might be held to confirm such a view,
we have no record in lodge minutes, or members' lists, that such was the case.
"Picart's ceremonies was published in many editions at
various times and places, and in more than one language, and I believe all of
them originally contained the plate in question, although the book is oftener
met without it, some Masonic collector having evidently taken it out. In many of
the later editions the plate is reversed, and the numbers of the lodges run from
right to left instead of from left to right."
The Transactions of the Lodge Quatuor Coronati, as well as
several rare Masonic works have referred to this plate as one of the rare
Masonic plates of the day and it has proved of much interest to the Masonic
student.
----o----
WAS WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE A FREEMASON?
BY BRO. ROBERT I. CLEGG, NEW YORK
A few pertinent paragraphs from the great Bard, bearing on
words and phrases in common use among the Craft:
"Put on two leather jerkins and aprons." -2 Henry IV., 2:
190.
"They will put on two of your jerkins and aprons." -2 Henry
IV., II, 4:18.
"Here, Robin, an I die, I give thee my apron." -2 Henry
VI., II, 3:75.
"The nobility think scorn to go in leather aprons." -2
Henry VI., II, 2:14.
"Hold up, you sluts, your aprons mountant." -Timothy of
Athens, IV, 3:135.
"A carpenter--where is thy leather apron and thy rule?" -
Julius Caesar I, 1:7.
"Mechanic slaves with greasy aprons, rules and hammers." -
Antony and Cleopatra, V, 2:210.
"He will line your apron with gold." -Pericles, IV, 6:64.
"You have made good work, you and your apron." -
Coriolanus, IV, 6:96.
"Being then appointed Master of this design." -Tempest, I,
2:163.
"The singing Masons, building roofs of gold." -Henry V., I,
2:98.
"What is he that builds stronger than either Mason?" -
Henry V., I, 47.
"Who builds stronger than the Mason?" -Henry V., I, 57.
"Creaking my shoes on plain Masonry." -All's Well That Ends
Well, II, 1:31.
"You shall see him in the triple pillar of the world." -Antony
and Cleopatra, I, 1:12.
"And set it down with gold on lasting pillars." -Tempest,
V, 1 :208.
"And call them pillars that will stand to us." - 3 Henry
VI., II, 3:87.
"He is not our Craft's Master." -2 Henry IV., III, 2 :297.
"Wooing poor craftsmen." -Richard II., I, 4:28.
THE ABOVE very interesting compilation appeared in the
March, 1918, issue of the Rob Morris Bulletin, the bright publication of Rob
Morris Lodge, Denver, Colorado, and is of course the production of its able
editor, Henry F. Evans. One cannot but wish that our excellent brother had had
the space and time to elaborate his article at such length and skill as his
sound Masonic knowledge and literary capacity fully warranted. Then indeed we
should have the more nearly arrived at a solution of the really knotty question
behind the references he has patiently assembled and which but whet our
curiosity to a keener edge. There is no present intention to offer a complete
answer to the query. At the best we can but carry forward the inquiry a short
stage or two but we shall feel quite content if we attract attention to the
problem.
We are also denied the satisfaction of going thoroughly and
definitely into explanations. This cannot be done in print. The reader must read
between the lines. He must make his own references. If his remembrance of ritual
is hazy and incomplete there is but one remedy, get the co-operation of some
well-informed Mason, or better still, take the article over to the lodge and
read it to the brethren. Their reaction will help. There is wisdom in the
counsel of many.
Neither shall we on the present occasion delve into the
peculiarities, political or otherwise, of the Elizabethan era. We have pointed
out on another opportunity the Craft relation of the gilds and their pageantry
and we shall curb our temptation to go deeply into Shakespeare's acquaintance
with the trades and their customs. To take but the single instance, William
Blades has put on record so many allusions to the one trade, printing, that
Shakespeare might from the testimony of his literary output be set down not
unfairly as an exponent of that calling.
How much did he know of Freemasonry ? We may perhaps meet
the inquiry by submitting such evidence as shows what he knew of things and of
practices that especially concern Freemasons. Obviously these can be but
fragmentary and merely suggestive.
Clarence tells us of King Edward's mysticism in these
terms:
"Hearkens after prophecies and dreams;
And from the cross-row plucks the letter G."
- Richard III, I, 1.
One might infer that the allusion is to some means of
divination, forecasting the future, as the term "cross-row" is to be found
explained as meaning the alphabet. Sometimes the alphabet was accompanied with a
cross in the old primers or was arranged in the form of a cross as a token of
good luck. But the choice of the letter "G" is significant.
Falstaff's death gives in a word by Mistress Quickly,
"chrisom child," "Henry V.," II, 3, a striking comparison. Knowing the fullness
of the reference the Freemason can with Shakespeare see the larger vision. For
the child when christened was given a white garment and annointed with oil, the
while was said the following prayer, "Receive this white, pure and holy
vestment, which thou shalt wear before the tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that thou mayest inherit eternal life. Amen." After the member of the Craft has
thought over the Apron lectures of Brothers Strobo and Shaver, and also conned
over the color allusion by Stowe, "Chronicles of London," to the gifts of the
godfathers of "christening shirts with little bands and cuffs, wrought either
with silk or blue thread," he will see no doubt what Shakespeare saw, the dying
of an old man like unto an innocent child, as one wearing and deserving the
purity badge of an Entered Apprentice, "went away an it had been any chrisom
child."
Praise to excess is often spoken of as if it were laid on
with a trowel. So does Shakespeare speak of it with reference to that very
working tool of the Craft, see "As You Like It," I, 2.
Our friend and brother, the great Pythagoras, was by no
means unknown to Shakespeare who mentions him by name and alludes familiarly to
the theories associated with his school of philosophy. For example:
"To hold opinion with Pythagoras
That souls of animals infuse themselves
Into the trunks of men."
- Merchant of Venice, IV, 1.
Another instance is in "Twelfth Night," IV, 2:
"What is the opinion of Pythagoras concerning wild fowl?"
"That the soul of our grandam might haply inhabit a bird."
Transmigration of souls is elsewhere mentioned by
Shakespeare, as in the "Tempest," IV, 1, and in "Hamlet," IV, 5. That beautiful
if fanciful -certainly not unscientific-idea, "the music of the spheres," was
also Pythagorian and well-known to Shakespeare. Thus it is said in the "Merchant
of Venice," V, 1,
"There's not the smallest orb which thou beholdest,
But in his motion like an angel sings."
Does Shakespeare allude to the North? Yes, he deems it the
place of darkness and of evil. He mentions a devil assigned to the north. The
spirits, "I Henry VI.," V, 3, are sought "Under the lordly monarch of the
north." See also "I Henry IV.," II, 4, and the "Merry Wives of Windsor," II, 2.
There is a noteworthy passage in "King John," IV, 2:
"And when they talk of him they shake their heads
And whisper one another in the ear;
And he that speaks doth gripe the hearer's wrist,
Whilst he that hears makes fearful action,
With wrinkled brows, with nods, with rolling eyes."
The sight of the open hand, as in the outstretched hand
when extending it to clasp that of a presumed friendly acquaintance or raising
the hand when taking an oath in a court of law or elsewhere or when elevating
the hand in giving a military salute or answering one, all these and similar
acts had a wider meaning in the days of Shakespeare than is even now known to
many of the profane. Then it was not uncommon to brand criminals or otherwise
maim or mutilate them. The word "stigma" means such an effect as if burned
deeply by fire. Just as the mutilated criminal showed that those in authority
had branded him noticeably to the end that the beholders could never mistake him
for one unrestrained and unrestricted, free of birth and will, so the person
born deformed or accidently so was deemed thus crippled or defaced by the will
of God to designate his evil nature. Accordingly in "Richard III.," I, 8, the
hunchbacked Duke is called:
"Thou elfish-marked, abortive, rooting hog!
Thou that was sealed in thy nativity,
The slave of nature, and the son of hell."
Bacon, about the same period, and by the way we will not
here venture into a discussion of the true authorship of the plays of
Shakespeare, but Bacon refers to the deformity of the body accompanying a
perversion of the mind. Thus, agrees Shakespeare,
"A fellow by the hand of nature mark'd,
Quoted, and signed, to do a deed of shame."
- King John, n, 2.
"And the blots of nature's hand
Shall not in their issue stand;
Never mole, hare-lip, nor scar,
Nor mark prodigious, such as are
Despised in infancy."
- Midsummer Night's Dream, V, 1.
"But thou art neither like thy sire nor dam;
But like a foul misshapen stigmatic
Mark'd by the destinies to be avoided
As venom toads, or lizards' dreadful stings."
- 3 Henry VI., II, 2.
Probably an allusion to the branding by a heated crown is
indicated by the words in "Richard III.," IV, 1. Assuredly there is some ground
for the belief that some regicides, notably the Earl of Athol executed for the
murder of James I. of Scotland, were tortured with a circlet of hot iron around
the head. Note the passage:
"O, would to God that the inclusive verge
Of golden metal, that must round my brow,
Were red-hot steel, to sear me to the brain."
There is a classic story of the tree that revealed to
Aeneas the murder of Polydorus in discovering the grave of the one so patiently
sought. The account is to be found in Virgil or Dryden's translation of that
author, III, 22. Shakespeare seems quite familiar with it. Thus in "Macbeth,"
III, 4, referring lo the fact that murder will out, we are told,
"It will have blood; they say, blood will have blood;
Stones have been known to move, and trees to speak;
Augurs and understood relations have
By magot-pies and choughs and rocks brought forth
The secret'st man of blood."
The symbolism of the glove is all but lost among
Freemasons, not so in the days of Shakespeare. There was a time when the giving
of a pair of gloves to the newly-made Mason was as significant as was the
bestowal of anything else. Not infrequently a second pair of gloves was given
the new member to be in turn transmitted to the one he loved best of the
opposite sex. Today the Freemason is mainly accustomed to the white gloves as an
appropriate emblem of mourning to be worn at a Masonic funeral or as adding a
touch of Masonic uniform or "clothing" at any other ceremonial of a public
character. Shakespeare refers to the gloves as a favor to be exchanged freely by
friends but when once acquired and worn it could only be demanded as the act of
an enemy. For instance,
"Give me any gage of thine, and I will wear it in my
bonnet; then if ever thou darest acknowledge it, I will make it my quarrel."
"Here's my glove; give me another of thine."
"There."
"This will I also wear in my cap; if ever thou come to me
and say, after tomorrow, 'This is my glove,' by this hand, I will take thee a
box on the ear."
- Henry V., IV, 1.
Appropriately enough from a Masonic point of view where the
glove has equal weight with the apron in symbolism, Shakespeare calls it
"honor's pawn," and a "token of honor," as may be seen by an examination of
"Richard II.," I, 1; "Richard II.," IV, 1; "Timon of Athens," V, 4.
We are taught as Masons that the form of a lodge is oblong;
its length from east to west, in breadth from north to south, as high as heaven,
and as deep as from the surface to the center. Thus are we shown the
universality of Freemasonry and that a Mason's charity should be equally
extensive. But the expressions must sound strange to the young Freemason, much
more strange than they would would have been to the ears of Shakespeare. He uses
east to west in the same limitless fashion thus:
"O heaven, that such companions thou'ldst unfold,
And put in every honest hand a whip
To lash the rascals naked through the world
Even from the east to the west!"
- Othello, IV, 2.
And as to the center, pray consider the following,
"As true as steel, as plantage to the moon,
As sun to day, as turtle to her mate,
As iron to adamant, as earth to the center."
- Troilus and Cressida, III, 2.
There is also the claim of the self-confident Polonius who
says,
"I will find
Where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed
Within the center."
- Hamlet, II, 2.
While dealing to some extent with the points of the compass
we must not overlook the location of graves upon which there is an interesting
note in Tylor's "Primitive Culture," vol. 2, page 423. He says,
"It is not to late and isolated fancy, but to the carrying
on of ancient and widespread solar ideas, that we trace the well known legend
that the body of Christ was laid with the head toward the west, thus looking
eastward, and the Christian usage of digging graves east and west, which
prevailed through medieval times, and is not yet forgotten."
He also quotes an old work to the effect that the the
laying of the head to the west was for the purpose that the dead should rise
looking toward the east. Did Shakespeare know of this centuries-old belief ? He
did, as may be seen from the following, relative to the burial of the dead,
'Nay, Cadwal, we must lay his head to the east;
My father has a reason for't."
- Cymbeline, IV, 2.
On many occasions we have called attention to the
punishment by drowning, the tying of the culprit to a stake at low water and
then leaving the body there for at least the period of a couple of tides. Around
this old English treatment of criminals grew up certain expressions and
superstitions of the liveliest interest to we Freemasons. They are duly noted by
Shakespeare. Thus of a rascal in the "Tempest," I, 1, it is said,
"Would thou might'st lie drowning
The washing of ten tides."
And in the "Midsummer Night's Dream," III, 2, we find,
"Damned spirits all,
That in cross-ways and floods have burial."
Falstaff's death is said to have been
"Even at the turning o' the tide."
- Henry V., II, 3.
and in the passing of the king in "2 Henry IV.," 4, is thus
recorded by Shakespeare,
"The river hath thrice flow'd, no ebb between;
And the old folk, times doting chronicles,
Say it did so a little time before
That our great grandsire, Edward sick'd and died."
Of symbolism we have a wealth of references, too many for
easy selection. In mere allusion to numbers there is too large a choice as the
mention of significant numerals is extensive. Threes, sevens and nines are noted
as of special importance by Shakespeare, as truly they are to all Freemasons. In
fact he has put into the mouth of Falstaff, "Merry Wives of Windsor," V, 1, an
explanation with which we may conclude this compilation,
"They say there is divinity in odd numbers,
Either in nativity, chance or death."
Of the symbolism of numbers much is taught in Freemasonry.
Three, five, seven, nine, and their multiples are frequently met. All have a
pertinent significance for the persevering student of the message shown and
conveyed by symbolism. Among the manifold references it is well to reread in
this connection the information to be found in the Mackey-Hughan Encyclopedia,
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible (the article on "Number"), and Morals and
Dogma (pages 548 et seq).
Was Shakespeare aware of the peculiar associations that
these particular numbers have for many if indeed not all of us ? It is very
likely that he was so informed. The obvious fact that these numbers are uneven
was not unnoticed by him. Nay, he goes further and speaks of odd numbers in a
way indicating his acquaintance with the beliefs that had grown around them
through the ages of mankind's infancy and mental growth. Thus,
"They say there is a divinity in odd numbers, either in
nativity,-chance, or death."
- Merry Wives of Windsor, V, 1.
So magical was the impression of odd numbers that
Shakespeare to the better suggest the uncanny he puts into the mouth of a witch
the two words "one" and "three" where four is meant.
"Thrice and once the hedge-pig whined."
- Macbeth, IV, 1.
In this he had classic authority for his guide. But there
is another example of very considerable interest from our point of view. This is
in the promise made by Cade to Dick, the butcher of Ashford. Butchers in the
reign of Elizabeth were forbidden to sell during Lent unless by dispensation.
Cade therefore makes a double promise, to lengthen Lent and also grant a very
unusual permission to kill. The number in the promise could have obviously been
one thing as another were it not for the deeper meaning associated with the odd
number.
"Therefore, thus will I reward thee - the Lent shall be as
long again as it is; and thou shalt have a license to kill for a hundred lacking
ane."
- 2 Henry VI, IV, 3.
There are instances where the uses of the expression has
indeed become so fixed a custom and habit in our conversation that the symbolism
and strength of lore is no longer noted by us. Yet even here it is well worth
the notice that Shakespeare prefers to employ an odd number where with equal
ease he might have used something else. As,
"Threescore and ten I can remember well:
Within the volume of which time I have seen
Hours dreadful and things strange: but this sore night
Hath trifled former knowings."
- Macbeth, II, 3.
Shakespeare has also reproduced an old charm or spell that
may have been employed as an agency against attacks of nightmare. Here it is as
will be seen the mention of a number is in both cases to an odd one.
"Saint Withold footed thrice the old wold;
He met the night-mare, and her nine-fold;
Bid her alight
And troth her plight,
And, aroint thee, witch, aroint thee!"
- King Lear, III, 4.
----o----
"FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA PRIOR TO 1750"
BY BRO. A.G. PITTS, SECRETARY PALESTINE LODGE, MICHIGAN
FREEMASONRY in America prior to 1750" by Brother Melvin M.
Johnson, Past Grand Master of Massachusetts, is a book of the kind that used to
characterize Masonry. The author, to maintain his thesis, relies especially upon
the easy device of ascribing to former generations the ideas of the present.
Such a device is not only easy but especially likely to be successful in
Masonry. The average Mason is only too ready to believe that the laws and
customs of Masonry were the same in 1730 as they are today.
The especial duty of the National Masonic Research Society
is to study the changes in these laws and customs, to emphasize the fact that
they have changed, and to prevent Masonic literature from falling back into the
condition it was when Hallam wrote:
"The curious subject of Freemasonry has unfortunately been
treated of only by panegryists and caluminators, both equally mendacious."
This was said in 1856. Soon after arose the new school
including the Quatuor Coronati group--Hughan, Gould, Chetwode-Crawley, Speth and
the rest, who adopted and steadfastly pursued the rigorous methods of modern
historians. The most striking illustration of the effect of this reform upon the
profane world and of the new respect for the Craft which the latter thereupon
acquired is found in a comparison of the articles under the heading
"Freemasonry" in the ninth and in the eleventh (latest) edition of the
Encyclopedia Britannica. The contemptuous tone of the ninth edition is well
known and has been often referred to. The eleventh edition gives space to an
article of extraordinary merit and of extraordinary length.
Past Grand Master Johnson's thesis is that Massachusetts
has every kind of priority in the history of "Freemasonry in America Prior to
1750." The first lodge in Boston was of 1733. But there was a lodge at
Philadelphia as early as 1730 and even a Grand Lodge. How is he to secure
priority for Boston in respect to these matters ?
He does it by heaping injurious epithets upon the
Philadelphia brethren. Witness the following sample:
"1721 June 24. On this day the Mother Grand Lodge of the
Masonic world, that at London, adopted a regulation quoted under '1700' supra.
This has ever since been the law forbidding the formation of a lodge without a
Grand Master's Warrant.
"This Mother Grand Lodge then had jurisdiction over the new
world and every regular and duly constituted lodge which existed in America
during the period with which we are dealing derived its authority directly or
indirectly therefrom. At least from the public promulgation of this rule (1723)
every lodge which met in the colonies without the required authority (and there
were doubtless a number of them) was irregular and not entitled to Masonic
recognition. All such came under the second paragraph of said Regulation VIII.
Clandestine and irregularly made Masons were no more entitled to Masonic
recognition in the eighteenth century than they are now in the twentieth
century. The so-called lodges in the colonies, therefore meeting without warrant
in those early days are no part of legitimate Masonic history until they
'humbled themselves' as did the Masons of Pennsylvania when in 1734 they applied
for and received recognition from Provincial Grand Master Price 1734-6. Until
then, under the law quoted they were 'rebels.' And never in any phase of the
life of the world have rebels obtained the right of legitimacy unless the
rebellion was successful. In dealing with questions of precedence, primacy is to
be accorded to regularity, and obedience to law is to be preferred to violation
thereof."
Section VIII upon which so much is based, was adopted by
the first Grand Lodge not later than 1723 since it is found in the constitutions
printed in that year. The statement is there made that the regulations then
first printed were adopted June 24; 1721. Maybe there were, but we have no
authority for the claim but the statement of Rev. James Anderson and we have
learned not to accept any statement of his unless verified.
Here is Section VIII:
"VIII. No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or
separate themselves from the lodge in which they were made brethren or were
afterward admitted members, unless the lodge becomes too numerous; nor even
then, without a dispensation from the Grand Master or his deputy: and when they
are thus separated, they must immediately join themselves to such other lodge as
they shall like best, with the unanimous consent of that other lodge to which
they go (as above regulated) or else they must obtain the Grand Master's warrant
to join in forming a new lodge.
"If any set or number of Masons shall take upon themselves
to form a lodge without the Grand Master's warrant the regular lodges are not to
countenance them nor own them as fair brethren and duly formed, nor approve of
their action and deeds; but must treat them as rebels, until they humble
themselves as the Grand Master shall in his prudence direct, and until he
approve of them by his warrant, which must be signified to the other lodges as
the custom is when a new lodge is to be registered in the list of lodges."
If the Grand Lodge which adopted Regulation VIII had
undertaken to legislate for Masonry everywhere we should have many questions to
ask as to where they got the authority to do so. But we are spared this inquiry
for these regulations are expressly entitled "for the use of the lodges in and
about London and Westminster."
Regulation III, printed at the same time, requires each
lodge to keep a list of all the lodges "in town." Regulation XII provides that
the Grand Lodge consists of the Masters and Wardens of all the regular
particular lodges upon record. If this be of world-wide application and lodges
not regular are irregular or clandestine then the Grand Lodge of London and
Westminster meant to so characterize the scores of lodges in Scotland, in
Ireland and in England outside the capital. We shall see if that was its
intention.
Regulation XIII provides that apprentices must be admitted
Masters and Fellow Craft only in Grand Lodge. Regulation XX that the Grand
Master shall visit all the lodges "about town" during his Mastership. Regulation
XXII that the brethren of all the lodges "in and about London and Westminster"
shall meet at an annual communication and feast. Regulation XXXIX that no new
regulation can be adopted except by vote of a majority of all the brethren
present at the annual grand feast including "Even the youngest Entered
Apprentice." All this points irresistibly to the idea of a local Grand Lodge,
not one for all the world.
There follows a "postscript" giving the manner of
constituting a new lodge which is by the Grand Master present in person. After
that an "approbation" certifying that the regulations were adopted with the
"consent of the brethren and fellows in and about the cities of London and
Westminster" and ordering that they be received in every particular lodge "under
our cognizance."
The truth is that the first Grand Lodge was formed to be a
Grand Lodge for the four lodges which formed it and with no idea of territorial
jurisdiction whatever. It is most curious to trace the growth of the idea of
exclusive territorial jurisdiction until it reaches its full stature (as it has
done in America alone) when it appears as the doctrine that there must be one
Grand Lodge for each political State and only one and that any lodge in that
State which does not hold of the established Grand Lodge of that State is ipso
facto clandestine. Nowhere in the world is there so perfect an illustration of
the dictum of Past Grand Master Simons (in his "Masonic Jurisprudence") that it
is human nature to encroach. Brother Simons also laid down in emphatic language
the duty of Freemasons to resist the never-ending, successive encroachments of
Grand Lodge. Since his time the encroachments have gone on until now what he
enjoined as a duty has become a crime and even the repetition of his injunction
to resist is a Masonic crime.
This is the significance of the present inquiry. The
question of precedency between Massachusetts and Pennsylvania is of little
consequence. What is of the utmost consequence is to put the theory of Grand
Lodge absolutism in its proper place. And a contribution can be made to this
work by a study of the origin of Grand Lodges. The Grand Lodge of 1717 was
successful beyond all expectation. Organized by and for four lodges it began
almost at once to be joined by the other lodges of London and soon by those of
Westminster. Already in 1723, as we have seen, it is powerful enough to enjoin
upon its lodges a refusal to recognize any new lodge formed from among Masons
under its authority without the authority of its Grand officers. But up to that
time the Masons under its authority were only those who were members of its
lodges.
In 1724 it takes the second step; it ordains "that no new
lodge in or near London without it be regularly constituted, be countenanced by
the Grand Lodge, nor the Master or Wardens be admitted at the Grand Lodge."
(Gould's History of Freemasonry, American Edition, Vol. III, p. 127.)
This is the first appearance of territorial jurisdiction.
It is significant that in quoting this in the second
edition of the Constitutions published in 1738 Anderson omits the words "in or
near London." This interested omission is the measure of the extent of
encroachment between 1724 and 1738.
At a later meeting in 1724, also, it was ordered that "if
any brethren shall meet irregularly and shall make Masons at any place within
ten miles of London the persons present at the making (the new brethren
excepted) shall not be admitted even as visitors into any regular lodge
whatsoever, unless they come and make such submission to the Grand Master and
(Grand Lodge as they shall think fit to impose upon them." (Gould, Vol. III, p.
129.)
As in the last preceding quotation the boldface words
indicate an omission made by Anderson in the Constitutions of 1738.
Now we are in position to understand what the Grand Lodge
of 1717 understood by its characterization of certain brothers as "rebels" in
Regulation VIII. Philadelphia was not "in or near London" and it was not "within
ten miles of London." But, allowing the Grand Lodge all the authority it
claimed, it did not even claim to control Masonry outside those territorial
limits.
It may be remarked in passing that there is evidence that,
at least as late as 1726, in the words of Brother Gould, "the 'beneficent
despotism' which arose out of the unconditional surrender of their inherent
privileges by four private lodges, was not submitted to without resistance by
the Craft at large. (Gould, Vol. III, p. 133.)
In other words, even as far as we have got in 1726, we find
that the pretensions of the Grand Lodge are treated with contempt "in and near
London" and it is again to be noted that this article leaves aside the very
large question--the enormous question--how did it come that four lodges could
make new laws which should be binding upon Masons who never belonged to any of
the four ? But having asked the question it will not delay us much to give the
answer. By assumption and encroachment only.
But up to 1734 and much later we can, for our present
purpose, admit the validity of every law that they passed leaving this question
aside. It was many years before they ever claimed jurisdiction over all England
even, and they never claimed any jurisdiction over Scotland or Ireland and they
never claimed exclusive jurisdiction over the colonies and other parts of the
world.
In 1725 the regulation allowing the making of Fellowcrafts
and Masters at Grand Lodge only was repealed. This marks the fact that the Grand
Lodge had begun to secure the adherence of lodges more than ten miles from
London. In 1727 Provincial Grand Masters were first appointed. In 1729 lodges
were constituted in Bengal and at Gibraltar and in 1729 a lodge at Madrid was
received. In 1730 a Provincial Grand Master was appointed for New York, New
Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Upon this Brother Johnson remarks:
"The issuance of this deputation, however, establishes
three facts, viz:
"1. The then jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of England
over these colonies.
"2. That regular and duly constituted lodges could exist in
the colonies only through the authority of a Provincial Grand Master appointed
by the Grand Master of England.
"3. That no one else had authority to establish lodges in
Pennsylvania, New York or New Jersey until at least after June 24, 1732, the end
of the term of the deputation.
"The establishment of lodges in Pennsylvania during the
term of Coxe's deputation and without his sanction was therefore irregular and
in direct contravention of his authority. (Gould, Vol. IV, p. 362.)"
That reference to "Gould, Vol. IV" is startling. If Gould
said anything like that we have to revise the opinion we have had of Gould for
thirty years.
But be reassured "Gould, Vol. IV," is a reference to that
pirated edition of Gould which stands for all time as a monument to American
Masonry and a new demonstration of the evil effect of extravagant pretensions.
American Masonry, since it makes an excessive parade of brotherly love, of
rectitude and the like, might be expected to steal the life work of Masonry's
most distinguished scholar, allowing him to die in poverty leaving his aged wife
unprovided for. This we did--we Americans. Fifty cents a set on the copies of
Gould's History sold in America would have made him comfortable and free from
anxiety in his old age. He did not get a cent. Every American Mason that owns or
uses the American edition of Gould's History owes Mrs. Gould a dollar.
This by the way. Perhaps an apology is due for such a
digression. All that it was necessary to say is this: Volume IV of Gould's
History, after page 300, is the American addition to the History and "Gould,
Vol. IV, p. 362," is one of the precious pages which P.G.M. Drummond
contributed.
But let us go back a little. In 1725 we find a Grand Lodge
at Dublin showing signs of having been in existence for some time. In 1726 a
Grand Lodge was organized for Munster probably by a single lodge. In 1728 this
Grand Lodge adopted regulations, the tenth of which required each lodge to
provide itself with a copy of the Constitutions printed at London in 1723. Upon
these regulations as a whole, Bro. Chetwode-Crawley remarks:
"We have the same restrictions on jurisdiction as were
current in the Grand Lodge of England. The provisions were only for constituted
lodges within easy reach. Caementaria Hibernica Fas. I."
We find a Grand Lodge at Dublin in 1729 and in 1730 it
published a book of Constitutions which is a copy of Anderson's Constitutions of
1723. Thus that famous Regulation VIII is almost precisely the same as already
quoted above. In XXII "Dublin" takes the place of "London and Westminster."
If the Grand Lodge of London by its Constitution and
regulations of 1723 was assuming jurisdiction over the whole Craft then the
Grand Lodge at Dublin was making the identical claim in publishing its identical
constitution and regulations of 1730 and these two Grand Lodges were rivals and
enemies. As a matter of fact Lord Kingston was Grand Master of both Grand Lodges
in succession--of the Grand Lodge at London in 1729, and of that at Dublin and
that at Munster (at the same time) in 1731. As a matter of fact the Grand Lodges
of Munster and of Dublin had not yet thought of being Grand Lodges for any
territory or of being other than Grand Lodges for their own lodges wherever
located, and the Grand Lodge of London was only just beginning to have such
thoughts. Lord Kingston, while Grand Master of both Munster and Dublin in 1731,
constituted a lodge at Mitchelstown (near Cork in Munster) which held under the
Grand Lodge of Dublin.
Thus Ireland narrowly escaped coming under a system like
that of Germany today where there are six Grand Lodges no one of which has or
claims any exclusive territorial jurisdiction whatsoever. Undoubtedly to that
extent the German usage represents the original form and idea of Grand Lodges.
It is amusing to reflect that some of our Western Grand Lodges have made this
adherence to the original form of Masonry ground for denying recognition of
German Grand Lodges at all.
The next Grand Lodge to be noticed is that organized at
York in 1725, of course in imitation of the one at London. Again we find them
adopting the regulations published by the Grand Lodge of London in 1723. Under
date of July 6, 1726, we find the Grand Lodge of York expelling a Wm. Scourfield
for making Masons "without the consent of the Grand Master contrary to Article
VIII." The conclusion is irresistible that the Grand Lodge at York accepted the
authority and force of the regulations of 1723, applying them to its own
locality as the Grand Lodge of London applied them to London and Westminster and
as the Grand Lodge at Philadelphia applied them to Philadelphia.
Now let this be repeated so that it will be clearly
understood.
In 1730 there were four Grand Lodges with identical
regulations. Each Grand Lodge has its Regulation VIII. Each then was forbidding
the formation of lodges without its Grand Master's warrant. Was the Grand Lodge
of York, then, forbidding the organization of new lodges at London or at Belfast
or at Cork? Of course not. Was it assuming exclusive jurisdiction over the whole
Craft? Of course not. How shallow then to claim that the Grand Lodge at London
was doing so. And how careless (?) to overlook the fact, which stares us in the
face, that these regulations are entitled regulations for the lodges of London
and Westminster.
In 1736 the Grand Lodge of Scotland was organized. Not
fewer than 100 lodges were invited to take part and thirty-three accepted the
invitation. Melrose did not join until 1891, and Kilwinning in 1744 resumed her
independency and also her status as a Grand Lodge and continued to grant
charters for seventy years thereafter.
Finally in 1723 another Grand Lodge was organized at London
which proceeded to make itself "legitimate," according to the test laid down by
Past Grand Master Johnson, by becoming "successful." As soon as it had made good
its footing it was recognized by the Grand Lodges of Ireland and of Scotland and
of York. Says Dr. Chetwode-Crawley:
"Toward the close of the century the Grand Lodge of the
Moderns (the one founded in 1717) stood isolated among English-speaking Grand
Lodges. Even in the Colonies, where it had been first to plant lodges, the more
democratic organization of the Antients, aided by the ubiquitous Military
Lodges, in which Ireland had such a preponderance, rapidly and surely won its
way to acceptance. It has been generally found more convenient to ignore this
isolation, than to accept the conclusions that must be drawn from it.
Caementaria Hibernica Fas. II."
It is notorious that the union of 1813 between the Grand
Lodge of 1717 and that of 1753 was a surrender on the part of the older sister
and to a large degree an admission that the younger had run her out of the
field.
It is extraordinary but not at all inexplicable that never
in this country has justice been done to the Grand Lodge of Antients, that never
has its history been truthfully written. It is extraordinary because it is our
real progenitor. The part of the Grand Lodge of Moderns in the establishment of
Masonry in this country is negligible. Where the latter did succeed in
establishing Masonry it was nearly always sooner or later supplanted by Masonry
which originated with the Grand Lodge of Antients or with her affiliates, the
Grand Lodges of Scotland and of Ireland.
It is not inexplicable because the history of this Grand
Lodge is most annoying to certain Masonic Grand Lodge authorities.
A Mason writing Masonic history, with no axe to grind and
no thesis to maintain, could write of the origin of the Grand Lodge of Antients
very simply and naturally. It has been hushed up and covered up and made
complicated because no one dared tell the truth and take the odium.
In 1751 the Grand Lodge of England had made much progress
toward establishing the doctrine that it owned the territory over which it had
undertaken to establish exclusive jurisdiction. Its claim was modest at its
greatest extent. It did not claim, as do American Grand Lodges, that its
exclusive jurisdiction was necessarily co-extensive with the jurisdiction of the
political state. There was no Kingdom of England in 1751, nor in 1717. The
political state was the Kingdom of Great Britain. England was no more a separate
state at either date than is the upper peninsula of Michigan (which probably
ought to have a separate Grand Lodge) today. No more a separate state than are
those counties which formerly comprised the two separate jurisdictions of
Oklahoma and Indian Territory, each of which formerly had its separate Grand
Lodge, which Grand Lodges assumed that when the political divisions were united
they also must hasten to unite.
But the first Grand Lodge did want to own England. Then
arose a rival Grand Lodge which called itself the Grand Lodge of Antients,
claiming the right to occupy the same territory and by making its claim good it
forever destroyed the doctrine that any Grand Lodge can own any territory and
forever established the opposite doctrine that a Grand Lodge, being the creature
of lodges, cannot be given by those lodges what they themselves do not possess,
that is to say, exclusive jurisdiction over any territory whatsoever. What they
do possess and what they can grant is jurisdiction over their own members only.
Now we can go to work, we Americans, those of us that do
not hold and would not accept office in any Grand Lodge, and rewrite American
Masonic history giving its proper place to the Grand Lodge of Antients in that
history. We can take down James Anderson from his pedestal and set up Lawrence
Dermott in his place. Especially we can put Masonic jurisprudence upon a
rational basis. It is miles from having one now.
Let us have no more talk about the "Mother" Grand Lodge.
What P.G.M. Johnson means by that and what we have long understood by it he
expresses when he says (by implication) that every lodge in the world derives
its authority directly or indirectly therefrom.
The three Grand Lodges in Ireland none of them derived in
any way or in any sense from the Grand Lodge of 1717. All three were organized
by lodges composed wholly or for the most part of Masons who had never owed or
paid allegiance to the premier Grand Lodge. The same is true still more
emphatically of the Grand Lodges at York. True beyond any possible question or
limitation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. And when we come to the Grand Lodge
of Antients there is no evidence that it is not true of it also. It has suited
the purpose of the authorities to represent it as founded by rebels and seceders.
The burden of proof is on them. They cannot produce any.
It is the Grand Lodge of Scotland, the Grand Lodge of
Ireland, and the Grand Lodge of Antients that spread Freemasonry over the earth
and especially over this continent. They are our mothers. We are all anxious to
read a history of "Freemasonry Prior to 1800" written from this standpoint. Let
some one write it. Not even the present writer knows how it would read.
It may be the fault of my method but only now I am ready to
go back to my latest quotation from Brother Johnson and to complete my reply to
it.
He makes the statement, it will be remembered, that no one
had authority to establish lodges in Pennsylvania, etc., except by authority of
the Grand Lodge of London.
This statement is so extraordinary that it is even doubtful
what he means by it. It has never been seriously questioned but the Grand Lodges
of England, Ireland and Scotland had concurrent jurisdiction over the colonies
and all over the world outside the British Isles. The whole history of the early
American Grand Lodges is a history of the English, Irish and Scottish lodges
uniting to organize a Grand Lodge. Massachusetts herself derives from Scotland
as much as from England, and Scotland is, of course, not derived from England.
To this day there is no question of the right of any Grand Lodge to organize
lodges in any country which has no Grand Lodge and it is understood that
Massachusetts has chartered lodges for China.
To be sure the Grand Lodge of Scotland did not exist in
1730-32. But there were two Grand Lodges in Ireland and one of them became very
active in chartering lodges in foreign parts. Whether it chartered any prior to
1732 it is not worth while to inquire for it certainly had the right to do so as
much then as at any later time. It is not likely that the Philadelphia Lodge had
any warrant or other express authority any more than did those that organized
the Grand Lodges at London, at Cork, at Dublin, at York and in Scotland. Why
they needed any, any more than did those other lodges, it is impossible for any
candid person to understand. They also had the same right to organize a Grand
Lodge that the other lodges had. No one would have questioned it in those days.
The Grand Lodge at London had got no farther than "ten miles from London." If
the Masons of Ireland could organize a Grand Lodge in 1730, and those of
Scotland could organize one in 1736 why, in the name of sense, could not the
Masons of Philadelphia organize one in 1732? As late as 1738 the Grand Lodge at
London recognizes the regularity of the Grand Lodge at York, bracketing it with
the Grand Lodges of Ireland, Scotland and Italy. See the "Constitutions" of that
date.
It is most probable that the Masonry of Philadelphia was of
Irish origin in some way. Dr. Chetwode Crawley has pointed out that the Penns
were Irish Masons as early as the days of the Grand Lodge of Munster. This is
not the evidence relied upon, however. What is relied upon is the language of
Dr. Benjamin Franklin's letter to Henry Price at Boston, dated Nov. 28, 1734, in
which he asks for a "charter."
Now at that time the only Grand Lodge that knew anything
about charters was the Grand Lodge of Ireland. From Ireland they were adopted by
the Grand Lodge of Antients in 1753 and the oldest Grand Lodge began to use them
in 1757.
What Brother Price granted to Brother Franklin we do not
know and especially we do not know and have grave reason to doubt that Franklin,
if he received anything, accepted it and acted upon it. What he asked for was a
charter for a Grand Lodge. Past Grand Master Johnson quotes with great
exultation a Philadelphia newspaper of March 20 to 27, 1735, which states that
at a Grand Lodge held at Boston, Feb. 21, Grand Master Price appointed Benjamin
Franklin Provincial Grand Master for the Province of Pennsylvania.
Now of course Brother Price was himself only a Provincial
Grand Master and had no power to appoint a Provincial Grand Master. That,
however, is only an attempt to write like Brother Johnson. What Masonic
authorities may lawfully do and what they actually undertook to do in the early
days are two very different questions. But Past Grand Master Drummond asserts
that "the record shows" that what Brother Price sent was a deputation to hold a
lodge at Philadelphia under the Provincial Grand Lodge of Boston. Is he wrong?
As a matter of fact there is no record. Referring to the newspaper item Brother
Johnson says:
"We are now for the first time, in possession of the date
of Franklin's appointment."
If the newspaper is his only authority it does not prove
much. We know that the Grand Lodge at Philadelphia continued as a Grand Lodge at
least until 1741. Also that what Brother Franklin asked for was a charter
"confirming the brethren of Pennsylvania in the privileges they at present enjoy
of holding annually their Grand Lodge, choosing their Grand Master, Wardens and
other officers who may manage all affairs relating to the brethren here with
full power and authority, according to the customs and usages of Masons, the
said Grand Master of Pennsylvania only yielding his chair when the Grand Master
of all America shall be in place." (Gould, Vol. IV, p. 236.)
This is that "humbling themselves" on the part of the
Pennsylvania "rebels" to which Brother Johnson refers in our first quotation
from him. He is easily satisfied.
As has been said the question of precedency between
Pennsylvania and Massachusetts is of little consequence. It is to be hoped that
there will be found in the present inquiry license to examine the question
whether the modern doctrine as to the absolute and unlimited power of Grand
Lodges is a doctrine necessary or useful.
It may be readily admitted that greater authority should be
given to Masonic government than it had yet acquired in 1734. The evil of the
looseness of these days appears from Brother Franklin's famous letter to Brother
Price. He fears the establishment of a rival (and cheap) Masonry in Philadelphia
which will discredit the institution and he believes that the sanction of some
authority from Great Britain will add weight to his Grand Lodge.
It is proper, perhaps, that every Grand Lodge should
enforce exclusive control over the territory it occupies if it can. This does
not alter the fact that the methods adopted in many cases in the history of
American Masonry have been most uncharitable, unfraternal and disgraceful and
such as would not have been adopted if we had known the whole truth about the
origin of Grand Lodge authority. Nor does it alter the fact that such exclusive
jurisdiction has not been found necessary in other countries. Nor the fact that
we are at liberty to consider a different organization of the Freemasonry of the
United States. One could be found which would add to instead of diminishing the
power, influence and prestige of the Craft.
There is another consideration which is important. The
glory of Freemasonry is her great men. Says Carlyle:
"I say great men are still admirable! I say there is at
bottom, nothing else admirable! No nobler feeling than this of admiration for
one higher than himself dwells in the breast of man. It is to this hour, and at
all hours, the vivifying influence in man's life."
Benjamin Franklin ought to be one of our Masonic
heroes--second in this country to Washington alone. Nevertheless if it were true
that he was an irregular or clandestine Mason, if it were true that he would act
illegally for the sake of the petty vanity of writing himself Grand Master, if
he was a "rebel" and a self-confessed rebel who made "humble submission" as
such, then let the truth be told. In writing history historical truth is above
everything. But none of these things are true.
Among the seven or eight Grand Lodges first organized none
is more regular than Benjamin Franklin's. This is the conclusion of Brothers
Hughan and Gould. Everyone should read what they have to say about it,
especially Brother Gould. See the American Edition of his great history at page
241 of Vol. IV.
Of all the founders of early Grand Lodges the greatest name
is Benjamin Franklin. Of all the early Grand Masters the greatest name is
Benjamin Franklin. The glory of furnishing this name to Freemasonry belongs to
us all. If Massachusetts cares nothing for this the rest of us ought to.
Let us protest against vilifying and blackening him without
cause.
----o----
MASONIC RESEARCH WORK IN IOWA
REPORT OF GRAND LODGE COMMITTEE ON MASONIC RESEARCH
A number of Grand Lodges employ Research Committees to
stimulate Masonic study among their members. It is believed that those
interested in the work of these Committees, in Study Clubs, and Masonic research
generally, will find something worth while in the report of the Masonic Research
Committee of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, submitted to and adopted by the Grand
Lodge at its Annual Communication at Ottumwa last June.
Those who may desire further information concerning the
work of this Committee are advised to write Brother C.C. Hunt, Deputy Grand
Secretary, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
THE COMMITTEE on
Masonic Research in coming before you with a report for another year is
impressed more than ever with the greatness of the work. We have often heard the
adage "Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty." Let us add a corollary to
that truth "Unceasing diligence is the price of progress." As a boatman rowing
against the stream begins to go back the moment he stops rowing, so as Masons we
are striving to gain the heights of truth where the horizon of our life is
widened, our minds enlarged, our sympathies broadened, our souls uplifted and
our affections deepened, must continue rowing against the current of indolence,
indifference and procrastination, if we would not allow ourselves to drift back
to the lowlands of ignorance, narrowness and selfishness. Your Committee has had
to contend against these currents during the past year, but we are glad to say
that progress has been made and that we are on higher ground than we were a year
ago. The Clipping Bureau, the Traveling Libraries, Masonic Lectures, Study
Clubs, distribution of papers and pamphlets, about which we reported a year ago,
have continued to give good results.
CLIPPING BUREAU
For instance, material
for the Clipping Bureau is more than double what it was then, and we hope to
double it again during the coming year. Thousands of short articles on different
Masonic topics have been clipped from magazines and arranged according to
subjects which will be loaned to anyone requesting them. Many members who have
been asked to give a short talk or address on some Masonic subject on various
occasions have been able to receive valuable assistance from this material. We
hope during the coming year to issue a catalog of articles on hand. We can here
simply say briefly that the clippings are divided into about 60 subjects and
placed in letter files with one or more letter files to each subject.
TRAVELING LIBRARIES AND BOOKS LOANED
Your Committee has
found these libraries very valuable in assisting lodges in taking up courses of
reading and study. As stated so often by your Grand Secretary, these libraries
are furnished by the Grand Lodge Library and are put up in two size cases of
respectively one and two shelves each. These libraries are loaned to any lodge
requesting them for a period of ninety days. Where a lodge is making a study of
some particular subject of Masonry we have attempted to supply them with library
books on that particular subject.
In addition to the
Traveling Libraries, a large number of individual books have been loaned for
these purposes. Several duplicate volumes of standard works have been procured.
One or more copies of each are always out on their mission to make man better,
wiser and consequently happier.
Some time ago our M.
W. Grand Master, Brother John W. Barry, prepared two lectures, one on the "Story
of Old Glory," a history of our flag with special reference to Masonic
activities in its design and adoption, and one on "The Pillars," the latter
being a piece of Masonic research of unusual scholarly thoroughness. These two
lectures proved of such value that sets of lantern slides were made to accompany
them. These slides with a copy of the lecture, are now being loaned to such
lodges or individuals as may care to use them.
BROTHER BARRY'S LECTURES
The demand for them
has been continuous during the year and has extended beyond the confines of our
own state. Requests for these lectures have come from the Atlantic and the
Pacific, Alaska and from Canada. When these lectures were not in use by our own
members we have been glad to supply this demand in other states. We make no
charge except the payment of transportation both ways. It is gratifying to know
that the lectures are doing a useful work and that the brethren are finding them
interesting. The Obelisk lecture has been given in several lodges in and around
Washington; D.C., and is now at New York to be given in one of the large lodges
of Brooklyn. Reports from the brother who gave the lecture in these lodges
indicate that it was very well received and great interest manifested, and from
this interest several new members were added to the National Masonic Research
Society. "The Story of Old Glory" continues to be the popular lecture and we
wish that every lodge in the State could arrange to give it some time during the
coming year.
SCHOOLS OF INSTRUCTION
The Grand Lodge
Schools of Instruction, especially the general schools, are continually growing
in interest each year and this year the attendance and interest shown has been
greater than ever. The indefatigable efforts of the Board of Custodians and
members to impart instruction in the ritualistic work cannot be too highly
commended and it is gratifying to know that the Craft appreciates these efforts
and are each year taking an increased interest in such instruction. In these
days when so much is said about parrot Masons, we are glad to say that the
experience at these schools proves that in this State at least, the term is not
applicable to those who are striving to become masters of the ritual so that
they can dot all the i's and cross all the t's to become not only word perfect
but letter perfect. If the ritual has no meaning for them whence this desire of
persevering labor to master its every word to its minutest detail. Men do not
spend time and energy to acquire that which has no meaning to them and the
schools have demonstrated that those who are most diligent in mastering the
letter of the ritual are also most eager to understand its spirit.
The general schools
this year were held at Oelwem, Sheldon, Shenandoah, Davenport and Grinnell. Each
school lasted three days with ritualistic instruction during the day and actual
work in the evening of two of the days. The evening of the second day, however,
each school was in charge of the Research Committee and devoted to the
explanation of the symbolism and practical application of the ritual which had
been studied. Particular attention was paid this year to the work of the Third
Degree and able, explanatory lectures were given by Brothers Naboth Osborne, of
Burlington, and George Williams of Newton. Brother Osborne addressed the schools
at Oelwein and Davenport and Brother Williams at the three other schools. The
address at each place was over an hour in length Though it came at the end of a
very strenuous day the attention paid throughout the entire lecture was very
close and marked, nor did the brethren hasten to leave the hall when the lecture
closed. A representative of the Research Committee was present at each school
and at the close of the lecture invited questions from the brethren present. The
invitation was accepted and all kinds of questions asked, proving beyond
questior the deep interest that the brethren are taking in the practical
application of the ritual to their every day life.
Mention was made both
in the lectures and in the questions and discussions that the principles of
Masonry are at stake in the world war in which our country is now engaged. In
being true to our government we are fighting for the protection of the
principles of brotherly love, relief and truth which are the very tenets of our
professions as Masons. The relations of Masonry to the war, however, will be
covered by the report of the Loyalty Committee and need be given only this
incidental mention here.
In addition to the
lectures given at the Schools of Instruction the lodges themselves have arranged
for others to be given in their own community on the same or kindred topics. We
do not know how many have been thus given but information has been received of
several given by Brothers Robert D. Graham, of Denver, Colo., Robert Tipton, of
Williamsburg, Iowa, and Brothers John A. Marquis and Chas. W. Flint, presidents
of Coe and Cornell Colleges respectively.
THE NATIONAL MASONIC RESEARCH SOCIETY
Notwithstanding the
fact that a large majority of the members of the fraternity find their time
largely taken up with war work of various kinds, interest in the work of the
National Masonic Research Society continues to grow and the membership to
gradually increase. Since our last Annual Communication a number of our sister
Grand Jurisdictions have appointed committees on Masonic Research and Education
and recommended the adoption of the Society's "Bulletin Course of Masonic Study"
in the subordinate lodges of their jurisdictions. Letters recently sent out to
all Iowa Masters by Grand Master Barry and your Committee on Masonic Research
urging that the lodges of this jurisdiction take up the study plan as part of
their monthly meetings for the purpose of educating their members in the meaning
of our ceremonies and symbols, have resulted in committees for this purpose
being appointed in some forty lodges, in addition to those in which the plan has
already been put into effect during the past few months. In response to the call
from other states, Brother Haywood attended two meetings and gave an
illustration of a Study Club meeting in each. On the evening of January 16th, at
St. Paul, the Grand Lodge of Minnesota was turned into a Study Club and as a
result the movement was endorsed by the Grand Lodge. In Chicago, April 12th,
under the auspices of the Masonic Employment Bureau, a meeting was held at which
representatives from a large number of Chicago lodges were present. Brother
Schoonover addressed the meeting and then it was turned into a Study Club which
lasted for two hours and those present expressed themselves highly pleased with
it. The outline followed in these two States was the same as in Iowa and while
the ritualistic work of the American lodges, on which the study outline of the
Research Society is founded, differs in many respects from that of foreign
countries, yet the fundamentals are the same and the installments in THE BUILDER
are being used as the subjects for reading and discussion in the monthly
meetings of lodges and Study Clubs in far-off New Zealand, in the West Indies,
in the Philippine Islands, and even in England, the home of many lodges of
Masonic Research. Our Canadian brethren are not behind their American brothers
in Masonic educational work, there having been scores of Canadian lodges that
have become interested in the study movement during the past year whose members
have affiliated with the National Masonic Research Society.
Many Study Clubs have
been formed by our soldier brethren in the cantonments located in different
parts of the country, and even among the Masons now at the front in France. In
these clubs the Study papers and questions thereon which are appearing in the
monthly issues of THE BUILDER are being used as a basis for discussion. Even one
of our large battleships has its own Masonic Study Club which meets regularly
and is largely and enthusiastically attended by the officers and enlisted men
who are members of the Craft.
PAMPHLETS DISTRIBUTED
Brother Haywood has
written a book on Masonic Symbolism, which we hope will be soon published. Its
purpose is to present the subject in simple language and at the same time adapt
it to the Masonic student. As it is especially designed for lodges and Study
Clubs, the Committee overruled Bro. Haywood's objection and published two
selections from it for distribution to the lodges in pamphlet form. The pamphlet
has been widely distributed and favorably commented on.
Inasmuch as the
present world war is drawing the people of England, France and America closer
together and the Masons of this country are asking themselves why they should
not be brothers in Masonry as well as brothers in arms, and some of the Grand
Lodges have deemed the subject of sufficient importance to convene in special
session to consider it, we thought it a proper subject of Masonic Research for
our lodges to consider. We have, therefore, printed and distributed a paper on
the subject of Masonic recognition, showing the way in which our brethren "over
the seas" are beginning to consider the subject. Whether the views expressed in
either of these papers are accepted or not is of minor importance. If we have
awakened thought and aroused discussion which will lead to a better
understanding of the subject treated, the work will not have been in vain.
During the coming year
we hope to furnish to the lodges three lectures on the Symbolism of the Three
Degrees, by Oliver Day Street, of Guntersville, Ala. These lectures have been
delivered before the Pythagoras Club of Birmingham, and before various lodges
where they have aroused great interest and established their value in throwing
more light on our ritualistic work.
THE BUILDER
We cannot close this
report without calling attention to THE BUILDER, which is the organ of the
Committee. We cannot begin to tell you of the wealth of valuable material to be
found in each number of this publication. Its Study Club talks and discussions -
its question box - its correspondence department - its fraternal forum - its
book reviews - its jurisprudence studies - its papers on symbolism, Masonic Law
and Philosophy - its poems, lectures and papers covering every phase of Masonry
give it a value far in excess of the small annual membership fee in the National
Masonic Research Society.
You say you have no
time to read; no time to study; that your life is so full of work to be done,
with duties to be attended to that something must be neglected and therefore you
cannot take time to read Masonic publications or spend any time in study. Know
ye not that time spent in oiling the machine and keeping it in proper condition
is not lost time? Did you ever hear of the kingdom that was lost for want of a
horseshoe nail ? If you would improve yourself in Masonry, take a little time
each day to read some of the good things continually offered in our Masonic
papers and magazines. As the time spent by the youth in school is not wasted
time so it is true that the odd moments spent by the mature man in thoughtful
reading is time well spent.
Let us so plant
"That seeds of truth and love may grow,
And flowers of generous virtue blow.
And sweet it is the growth to trace,
Of worth, of intellect, of grace,
And lead it on from hour to hour,
To ripen into perfect flower."
----o----
Example is the school
of mankind, and they will learn at no other. - Burke.
----o----
CORRESPONDENCE CIRCLE BULLETIN -- No. 25
Edited by Bro. H. L. Haywood
THE BULLETIN COURSE OF MASONIC STUDY FOR MONTHLY LODGE
MEETINGS AND STUDY CLUBS
FOUNDATION OF THE COURSE
THE Course of Study has for its foundation two sources of
Masonic information: THE BUILDER and Mackey's Encyclopedia. In another paragraph
is explained how the references to former issues of THE BUILDER and to Mackey's
Encyclopedia may be worked up as supplemental papers to exactly fit into each
installment of the Course with the papers by Brother Haywood.
MAIN OUTLINE:
The Course is divided into five principal divisions which
are in
turn subdivided, as is shown below:
Division I. Ceremonial Masonry.
A. The Work of the Lodge.
B. The Lodge and the Candidate.
C. First Steps.
D. Second Steps.
E. Third Steps.
Division II. Symbolical Masonry.
A. Clothing.
B. Working Tools.
C. Furniture.
D. Architecture.
E. Geometry.
F. Signs.
G. Words.
H. Grips.
Division III. Philosophical Masonry.
A. Foundations.
B. Virtues.
C. Ethics.
D. Religious Aspect.
E. The Quest.
F. Mysticism.
G. The Secret Doctrine.
Division IV. Legislative Masonry.
A. The Grand Lodge.
1. Ancient Constitutions.
2. Codes of Law.
3. Grand Lodge Practices. | 
