MEMORIALS TO GREAT MEN WHO
WERE MASONS
ALEXANDER HAMILTON
BY BRO. GEO. W. BAIRD. P.G.M., D!STRICT OF COLUMBIA
THE FIRST Secretary
of the Treasury, the close friend of Washington, is mentioned on page 45 of
"The Old Masonic Lodges of Pennsylvania," and on page 58, as subscribing a sum
of money for the lodge, and on page 73 as having been raised to the degree of
Master Mason on the 16th of December, 1757, in the second lodge of Moderns.
There has been so
much written about this most interesting patriot that it might seem out of
place to dwell at length on his literary, military or diplomatic career.
He descended from a
Scotch father, a French Huguenot mother, and was born in the West Indies. His
opportunities for education were limited. He was at first a clerk. He wrote a
description of a hurricane at St. Kitts, which was largely copied and which
invited attention to him.
Hamilton possessed a
splendid memory, a logical mind, and with them industry and ambition. He was a
man of splendid disposition, having consideration for everybody, with a fixed
determination to do right.
He had one
misfortune - he was handsome. A handsome fellow is usually envied by the men
and spoiled by the girls. He was born at Nevis in January 1757, and was killed
in a duel at Weehawken in July 1804, when only 47 years of age. The modest
memorial over his grave in Trinity Churchyard, New York City, is visited by
many.
From his mother he
learned French, but English was the language at Nevis, and when he went to New
York for his education he was well versed in both languages.
Hamilton's newspaper
work soon placed him in the class of the better literatus of the day, his
ability to speak in two languages, his charming voice, handsome personality
and his magnetism induced followers.
When the war began
he became an Artillery Captain. His military operations were creditable. His
replies in Holts Magazine to the attacks of Mr. Seabury upon the Continental
Congress brought Hamilton into the limelight. In 1777 Washington made him his
aidede-camp with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. It should no longer be
repressed that there was much jealousy between the colonies, and Washington
availed himself of the grand ability of Hamilton to smooth the Governors of
the Colonies the right way and bring peace and harmony among them, which he
did admirably. His knowledge of French enabled him to smooth out difficulties
with our allies, though on one occasion he was roped into being a second in a
duel between Laurens and Lee. He was, however, averse to dueling.
Hamilton was at West
Point at the time Arnold deserted. He strongly urged a compliance with the
request of Andre, to be shot instead of hanged.
He married the
second daughter of Philip Schuyler, after which he resigned his place on
Washington's staff and became a commander of a New York Regiment, but soon
afterward was elected to Congress, taking his seat in November 1783. In
Congress he soon became active in the matter of the settlement of the public
debt. The nation was without money, its credit as limited, its expenses were
reduced to a minimum, the Army and Navy were dismantled and the officers and
crews discharged, only one Navy officer remaining, John Paul Jones, but as a
Commissioner, however, to remain in France for the purpose of settling our
tangled relations. Ships were owned by each nation, and sometimes jointly.
Crews in French hulls were sometimes American, and vice versa. Such were the
problems Jones was obliged to reconcile, but he died before his work was
finished and though the Republic owed him $60,000 at the time of his death, he
was buried by charity.
Hamilton became the
first Secretary of the Treasury and was well qualified for the position. His
efforts went far toward establishing our credit; far toward fostering our
commerce and establishing schemes of economy which have led to the wealth of
the nation. It is a pity we ever departed from the ways of Hamilton.
But there has never
lived a positive man - one who dared to do what he believed was right, but
that man made enemies. Jealousy is the cause of so much of this world's
trouble. If a man cannot be crushed; if his defense is invulnerable; if his
following is overwhelming, you have only to associate his name with an
attractive woman and make the most vague insinuation, and the public will
believe you.
We are not quoting
from the press, but from the gossips of the Capital who have dwelt here for
ages. The writer was born in Washington and, when not absent on public
service, has always lived at the Capital. More than that his parents and
grandparents married and lived in the Capital City. The gossips give a story
of interest. A very beautiful and attractive lady, greatly pleased with the
dimpled cheeks and rosy face of Hamilton, proceeded to make him believe she
was enamored of him. Let us drop the curtain here for a moment.
It was not long
before an infuriated husband appeared at Hamilton's office, asking $10,000
heart-balm. He did not talk shooting, but threatened publication. The game was
apparent and Hamilton was not the kind of man to submit. He refused to pay the
money, and at the appointed time the daily papers printed the scandal, but
with no mention of the demand that had been made for money. The sensation, as
might be imagined, came as a great shock.
Mr. Hamilton
published a card acknowledging his guilt, offering no excuse and begging the
public pardon. He made no counter-accusation, nor did he invite attention to
the peerless charms of the lady. The public seemed to forgive, and the
incident was closed.
Hamilton had
offended Aaron Burr, by opposing him in his candidacy for Governor of New
York. Burr challenged Hamilton and they fought with pistols in Weehawken.
Hamilton fell at the first fire. As a child I often heard the story of Burr
practicing for this duel. Walking in his garden with a book he would suddenly
draw and fire, and in this way became proficient in such tactics.
Hamilton's modest
little memorial in Old Trinity Churchyard is thus inscribed:
The patriot of incorruptable integrity
The soldier of approved valor
The Statesman of consummate wisdom
Whose talents and virtues will be remembered by
A grateful posterity
Long after this marble shall have mouldered
Into dust
He died July 12th, 1804, Aged 47
THE AMERICAN DOUGHBOY
BY BRO. REGINALD WRIGHT KAUFFMAN, PENNSYLVANIA
At a dinner given in
honor of Bro. Col. H.H. Whitney, of Gen. Pershing’s staff, as President of the
Overseas Masonic Club, Paris, on June 20th, 1919, the following address was
delivered by Bro. Reginald Wright Kauffman, author of the American war novel
"Victorious," and the Secretary of the Club was requested by Bro. Whitney and
members of the Overseas Masonic Club and the Masonic Overseas Mission, to send
a copy of the manuscript to THE BUILDER for publication.
Unfortunately the
copy retained by Brother Connaway, the Secretary, was lost, but we have been
able to obtain another from Brother Kauffman and we believe it will have lost
none of its interest through its delayed publication.
BY THOSE who should
know more of such matters than I do, it has been said that the World War,
differing from all preceding conflicts in the extent of its operations, and
involving more countries and more combatants than any other struggle recorded
in authentic history differed from every other conflict also in this: that it
produced no outstanding hero, no figure to claim the admiration or devotion of
mankind. These authorities aver that, just as the war now ended has been vast
beyond comprehension - just as it has evolved theretofore undreamed - of
engines of destruction and produced inventions for wholesale slaughter by
scientific means - so it has lessened individual endeavor and robbed the
soldier of his military acclaim.
My novel
"Victorious," to which you, Bro. Toastmaster, have so flatteringly referred,
was written to controvert such assertions. It was written to pay what tribute
I could to the sole heroic figure that, it seems to me, the chaos of the past
red months has flung upon our ensanguined horizon: I mean the fellow in our
ranks, the American Enlisted Man.
It has been my
fortune to see a deal of the fighting that began in 1914 and that idealists
still hope to end by their League of Nations and the Peace of Versailles. I
remember how, when I left Antwerp eight hours before the Germans entered it, I
got aboard a troop-train that, I was told, carried what remained of the
Belgian Army - and how I took up almost as much room on that train as the
Belgian Army did; I never expected to see it as a battling force again. Time
passed; the dripping shuttle of the war darted to and fro, and I found myself
in the first-line beyond La Panne. I was at that portion of the long front
which, of all others, was then the worst to police and the hardest to
maintain. Trenches could not be dug, because to dig two feet was to reach
water; the dead were buried above ground, and the enemy outnumbered us
ten-to-one. Yet there was the Belgian Army, ensconced behind perfect ramparts,
living in cleanly order, young, vigorous, calm, heroic. And the Belgian
enlisted-man, the Jasse as they call him, was the force that made this
possible. Nor can I ever forget the courage of the Tommy or any of his British
brothers-in-arms. During the Second Battle of Flanders I happened to be with a
unit of the English Army in which there had been many recent replacements -
Cockneys mostly - unused to war, of whose morale there was considerable doubt.
How would such fellows behave under fire ? Well, a shell exploded in a trench
in which were five veterans and a single newcomer. When the smoke cleared a
little, one of the veterans looked at the body of another and cried to his
comrades:
"My God, just see
Bill: his heady blown off!"
There followed a
moment of silence, and then came the thin, complaining voice of the Cockney:
"Aw right, old top;
but where is 'is 'is 'ead ? Carn't you find it for me? 'E was smokin' my pipe
!"
To the stubborn
heroism of the French poilu, moreover, we owe the maintenance of three-fifths
of the Allied line for three-fifths of the war. I know a Breton widow who had
three sons of whom one had gone to America and, prospering, sent home money to
support his mother. In 1915 she wrote him: "Your two brothers have been killed
in battle: come home anal die for France" - and the boy came home and died
before St. Quintin. When the cause was at its blackest hour, I have sat in the
fortress of Verdun and have seen men come in from the trenches for a one-day
rest - men that had been fighting since the outbreak of hostilities. They were
cold, they were wet, the filth of the dugouts was still caked upon them; many
were slightly wounded, all were in a state of exhaustion; yet when one of
their number began to sing "You Shall Not Pass," their eyes glistened, their
bodies stiffened, they stood erect - they joined in the refrain, and they
forgot everything but that they were fighting for their country; they were
glad to go back and fight!
The men of Belgium,
France and England were heroes; they were heroes that the world will do well
to remember; that it will do ill ever to forget. But the native-land of the
Jasse had been devastated; the patrie of the poilu had been invaded, the homes
of the Tommies had been shelled from the air, whereas, from across the wide
Atlantic there came your countrymen and mine, lads who had no reason to
nourish personal revenge in their hearts, boys brought up in the prospect of
perpetual peace, young fellows whose fatherland had summoned them to fight -
for what? Not for reprisal, not for conquest, not for anything - remember the
public avowals of the President, whatever has been the outcome - not for
anything but the worldwide propaganda of democracy. What, I ask you, of them?
We have heard
tonight of how, raised from the ranks by fiat of the War Department that could
not, or would not, help them to the insignia of the grade to which it promoted
them, hundreds of these enlistedmen borrowed from the Masonic Overseas Mission
the scant price of their shoulder-bars, and how every one of them has paid his
debt. We have heard of the difliculties that this commission encountered at
Washington before directed to go abroad as Y.M.C.A. secretaries if it hoped to
go at all, how Mr. Fosdick quoted the American commanding-general in France as
opposed to the commission's presence here and that when it finally came, the
doughboy welcomed it. I think that you know how he welcomed it and why. He
welcomed it because he is of the stuff of which Free Masons are made, and it
was as such that he welcomed it.
I knew the American
Camp in France from its earliest days, and I knew the first American front. At
the Camp, men were billeted, God knows why, in reeking stables, with leaking
roofs, the cattle housed beneath them. In the trenches they found themselves,
amid arctic surroundings, clothed in summer uniforms, wrapped in newspapers
instead of adequate overcoats, their frost-bitten toes bursting from their
imperfect boots. They found themselves in the condition of the Continentals at
Valley Forge, in the condition of the Federal Ninth Army Corps when, after the
Kentucky campaign, it re-enlisted to a man "for the duration of the war." And
these boys of yesterday were the worthy sons of their fathers of the Civil War
and of their ancestors of the Revolution: they knew that they were not there
to complain, and they did not complain; they knew that they were there to
fight - and how they fought no tongue can ever justly tell.
Again, in the
terrible Spring of 1918, I was in Brest. The enemy thundered at the gates of
Paris, and in our own lines there was nothing but disorder and delay. At the
American port I saw over three miles of docks that resembled a house into
which a vast family had just moved. From one end of the place to the other ran
almost uninterrupted ramparts, fifteen , to twenty feet high, piled with
material of war that somehow could not reach the front. Mail-bags, motorcars
and wagon-parts lay there, and had, some of them, lain there for months. Food
rotted before one's eyes. I have seldom witnessed a more dispiriting
spectacle.
Then a Y.M.C.A.
secretary, a Mason, carried me to barracks to speak to soldiers newly arrived
abroad. I stood on a low stage at the end of a vast, tunnel-like hut, and the
secretary had the soldiers sing for me:
"While you are sleeping,
Your France is weeping:
Wake from your dreams, Maid of France!"
They sang slowly,
giving full weight to every word and conferring a true dignity on what they
sang.
"Her heart is bleeding:
Are you unheeding?
Come with the flame in your glance !"
I saw them as a sea
of faces upraised to mine. The secretary had been telling them that I, not as
a Y.M.C.A. man, but as a correspondent, knew what real fighting was and would
tell them of the high battle in which they were now so soon to bear arms.
"Through the gates of Heaven, with your sword in hand,
Come, your legions to command!"
I, newly arrived
from the horrors of the front; they fresh from their clean homes: a sea of
boys' faces, eager, earnest, faithful ! They were come as conscripts, but as
willing ones; they were come here to die - and they knew it, and were ready.
By God, I tell you, gentlemen, I never before realized what a splendid thing
it was to be an American!
I might continue
with sketches of the doughboy - and that word "Doughboy," coined to designate
the infantryman, now stands for every private in our Army - I might go on with
sketches of him in seven different forms of battle, but I content myself with
only one more. It is a sight I caught of men I knew going into action.
It was a gray land
on a gray day. The barren fields stretched eastward under a bleak and humid
sky. From out that way, fighting through the dense atmosphere, came now the
rumble of the distant battle's guns. Gun-carriages crawled along, the steel
tubes of the field artillery dull in the scanty light, the wheels heavy with
clogging masses of blue clay. The infantry, at route-step, marched with feet
mud-shod. There was no bragging, no rude assurance: only a very certain,
though very quiet, determination.
Here was a lad that
had been working his way through Harvard, starving himself in a garret,
because he wanted to become a teacher: the brutal fist of Berlin had
descended, and the boy forever forewent his dreams, put aside his ambitions,
sacrificed what he had sacrificed so much to gain - and volunteered. His
frugal life, his years of self-denial, even his conscious meannesses and
skimpings - they seemed to me to form a veritable halo around that youngster's
head.
There was an older
man, the husband of a wife, the father of a family. He had closed up, when
drafted, business that he had just succeeded in clearing from debt. "Of
course, I don't like it," he confessed to me; "but of course I wouldn't have
stayed at home even if I could, because I know we're here to stop the secret
diplomacy that ends tyranny and to end autocracy, even in America."
The ranks had come
to rest, but now the darkness grew suddenly deeper. The bugles sounded. I knem
whither, through the faint twilight, the thoughts ox these men had gone: they
had gone to mothers, wiver and sweethearts in quiet American towns, to
Americas homesteads and American ways, to the great, bungling busy, loving,
erratic chaos that we cherish and will die for and that we call the U.S.A.
Again the bugle
shrilled into the dark.
"Fall in!"
They were already
there - the double lines of them, the long, narrow packs on their backs, two
lines of them rising out of the dull night and passing into it again.
"Right dress - right
dress - right dress!"
The order passed
along. The men shuffled in the mud, the lines straightened, the soldiers stood
still.
"Front !"
Well, it had come to
this. All their love and longing, all their business deals and drudgery and
economies - all their hopes and fears had come to this night in France, to the
wet and the cold and the now close-by trenches, to the "arrow that flieth in
darkness and the pestillence that destroyeth by noonday" - and not a man of
them all was visibly sorry.
"Squads right -
march!"
Their rifles went to
their shoulders. They turned - by rows of four they turned - and swung off
eastward toward those distant growling guns - swung off on their way to fight.
They believed, and they were prepared to make sacrifice for their beliefs, and
so, even into the darker darkness of the grave, they did not march without the
company of the Immortal Friend. As truly as I stand here tonight, I tell you
that I believe God marched along with them.
My brothers, I am
not what most of you would call a religious man, but I have always believed in
the Supreme Architect, and that Architect has given me the chance to believe
in the American Enlisted Man In His wisdom, God has given America this splendi
heritage, the heritage of the men that fought and came home, and the men that
fought and fell. In the ideal of those fellows, however hidden by a modesty
that flung over itself a blushing coarseness, He has indeed built up for us
and for our country a mighty salvation. If we save that, if we carry on the
work that they magnificently began, if we end autocracy at home as the tried
to end it abroad, we shall indeed, and in the only possible way, "make the
world safe for democracy" but if we waste what they have done, if we neglect
the pure principles of Freemasonry in our national life, i we tolerate ideals
that militate against those of the Fathers of the Constitution in the severe
and immine days of reconstruction, then, I assure you, we shall l committing
the sin against the Holy Ghost and leading our land to eternal damnation.
For my part, I do
not believe that we shall so err. I have a faith in American manhood that
cannot be shaken. Because I have seen the American Enlisted Man in battle, I
believe in America. It is the America Enlisted Man, in very truth, that has
given back the old America to Americans. He fought for you; fight you now with
him. Rise with me, I conjure you, and drink the health of THE AMERICAN
DOUGHBOY
-------o------
From labour health, from health contentment spring;
Contentment opes the source of every joy.
-James Beattie.
-------o------
Keep your eyes and ears open if you desire to get on in
world.
- Douglas Jerrold.
THE CRYPTIC DEGREES
BY Bro. GUSTAV A. EITEL, MARYLAND
Many inquiries have come to us for information
concerning the origin and history of the degrees of the Cryptic Rite, or the
"Council" degrees. To Brother Wm. F. Kuhn, of Missouri, was assigned the task
at the last meeting of the General Grand Council of compiling for that Body an
official history of the degrees. When this official history is completed
Brother Kuhn has promised it to us for publication in THE BUILDER. In the
meantime we give to our readers the following article prepared by a committee
of the Maryland Grand Council of which Brother Eitel was the chairman. The
introductory remarks of this committee are self-explanatory.
FOR THE benefit of the Companions of our jurisdiction,
few of whom have access to what has been written about the degrees of the
Cryptic Rite - their origin, their introduction and dissemination in our
country - we present, without comment, what your Committee has been able to
gather from the writings of the several accepted authorities and searchers in
this field.
It is not the Committee's intention to give an exhaustive
history of the degrees, but only sufficient data to enable our Companions to
get a far understanding of the history of the degrees, and of the claims made
of their origin and dissemination.
None of the later day Masonic writers have given this
subject more research and study than our late Companion Edward T. Schultz, and
we present in full from his "History of Freemasonry in Maryland," (1884,)
Vol. I, pp. 335-344:
THE CRYPTIC DEGREES
Much obscurity has existed regarding the origin of the
Degrees of Royal and Select Masters, and also as to the date where, and by
whom they were introduced into this country. It would appear that the Royal
Master's Degree was first known and worked in the Eastern States, while the
Select Degree was first known, and at a much earlier period, in the Southern
and Middle States.
Nearly all the early Masonic writers of the country
concede that Philip P. Eckel and Hezekiah Niles of Baltimore had, at an early
period, the control of at least the Select Degree, and that from them emanated
the authority under which it was introduced into many of the other
jurisdictions of the country.
In an article in Cole's Ahiman Rezon (1817), written by
Brother Hezekiah Niles on the Select Degree, occurs the following: "Though
this beautiful Degree is known to some persons in many parts of the United
States, we are not informed that it is worked in anywhere but in Baltimore.
We have been told that a regular Chapter of Select was held at Charleston, S.
C., many years ago, but believe it has declined."
Brother John Dove, of Virginia, speaking of the Select
Degree, says: "This beautiful Degree is comparatively of modern origin, having
been with the Degree of Royal Master, in the possession of a distinguished
Chief in the State of Maryland as a purely honourary Degree, elucidatory of
and appendant to Royal Arch Masonry, and by him conferred without fee; he
delegated authority to others to use them in the same way, until the year
1824, when the Grand Chapter of Maryland, with his consent, took charge of the
degrees and ordered them to be given before the Most Excellent Master, where
all intelligent workers in the Royal Arch must at once perceive the propriety
of their location."
Brother Mackey, in his History of Freemasonry in South
Carolina, under the head of Cryptic Masonry, says: "For many years there have
been three distinct claims urged for jurisdiction over these degrees in
America - first by the Supreme Council of the 33rd Degree; next by some of the
Grand Chapters; and lastly by the Grand Councils composed of the Subordinate
Councils of each State."
"Connected with this question of jurisdiction is another
in reference to the historical origin of the Degrees, and as to the person or
persons by whom they were first introduced into America. The Masons of
Maryland and Virginia contend that the Royal and Select Degrees were
introduced by Philip P. Eckel, of Baltimore, one of the most distinguished and
enlightened Masons of his day, who in 1817, communicated them to Jeremy L.
Cross, and gave him authority to confer them in every Royal Arch Chapter which
he might visit in his official character."
The following extracts are quoted from the history of
Brother Robert B. Folger, of New York: "The Masons of that day (1816) were
divided in opinion concerning the proper place to which these degrees (Royal
and Select) belonged. One party preferred that they should be kept separate
and left where they were - a separate system. At the meeting of the General
Grand Chapter in 1816, the whole matter then came up for discussion; Mr. Eckel,
of Maryland, taking a very prominent part in advocating the union of these two
degrees with the services of the Royal Arch Chapters. The discussion became
warm and lasted the better part of two days, when the motion to unite them
with the Chapter Degrees was rejected. Whereupon, immediately after
adjournment, the State Grand Council of Royal Masters was formed, and the
different Councils then came under that governing power, and continued so up
to 1828. It was this move on the part of the General Grand Chapter, in
refusing a recognition of those degrees, that determined Mr. Cross in his
future course:"
"Mr. Eckel, the Baltimore delegate, then went home; and
when Cross, who at that session of the General Grand Chapter had been
appointed and confirmed as General Grand Lecturer, started on his lecturing
tour, he stopped at Baltimore and purchased and received the privilege from
Eckel and Niles to erect and establish Councils of Royal and Select Masters
throughout the Southern and Western States. This privilege he carried out
pretty effectually, beginning with New Jersey; and all the Councils in
existence in those States mentioned in his narrative were established by
himself, also the Eastern States, except Rhode Island."
From the above quotations it will be perceived that it
was the general belief that the control of the Royal and Select Degrees were
vested in Eckel and Niles.
But we think Bros. Dove, Mackey, Folger, and others, make
a great mistake in coupling the Royal Master's Degree with the Select, in
connection with the names of Eckel and Niles; for there is no evidence
whatever to show that these brethren ever exercised or claimed control of the
Royal Master's Degree, or that they were even in Possession of that degree at
the periods named by them.
Brother J.H. Drummond, of Maine, states on apparently
good authority, that Eckel did not receive the Royal Master's Degree until
1819; that in that year he and Bro. Benj. Edes of Baltimore, received it from
Ebenezer Wadsworth of New York. This is probably true; for there is no
mention of that degree being worked in this jurisdiction in any document, or
upon the records of the Grand Chapter or of its subordinates earlier than
1850. Bro. Cole in 1817 speaks of it incidentally, but not as among the
degrees conferred.
The Select Degree is recognized by the Constitution of
the Grand Chapter adopted in 1824, but there is no mention of the Royal
Master's Degree.
Furthermore, the Warrant granted to Cross by Eckel and
Niles, a copy of which, taken from a photograph copy of the original, in the
possession of Bro. Wm. R. Singleton of Washington, is here inserted, and from
which it will be seen that the Select Degree alone is mentioned:
TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.
Imprest with a perfect conviction that the knowledge of
the mysteries of the degree of Royal Arch are eminently promoted by a
knowledge of those revealed in the Council of Select Masons; and Whereas the
said degree of Select is not so extensively known as its wants and the good of
the Craft require -
Therefore Know ye, That reposing especial confidence in
my beloved and trusty Companion Jeremy L. Cross I do hereby, by the high
powers in me vested, authorize and empower him to confer the said degree as
follows, (viz.) In any place where a regular Chapter of Royal Arch Masons is
established, the officers or members approving, he may confer said degree
according to its rules & regulations, but only on Royal Arch Masons who have
taken all the preceding degrees, as is required by the General Grand Chapter.
When a competent number of Select Masons are thus made, he may grant them a
Warrant to open a Council of Select and confer the degree and do all other
business appertaining thereto.
Given under my hand and seal at Baltimore the 27th day of
May, A. D. 1817 and in the year of the Dis. 2817. PHILIP P. ECKEL,
Thrice Illustrious & Grand Puissant in the Grand Council
of Select at Baltimore & approved as G. G. Scribe.
Approved & attested as Ill. in the G. Council. H. NILES.
In the first Warrants issued by Cross under this
commission the Companions were empowered "to form themselves into a regular
Council of Select Masters," but in the Warrants issued by him in 1819 and
thereafter the "High Powers in him vested by the Grand Council at Baltimore,"
were enlarged to include the Royal Master's degree.
In view of the action taken subsequently by the Brethren
of Baltimore, there is every reason to believe that the "enlarged powers"
under which Cross claimed to act were not granted or authorized by Eckel and
Niles.
At the Session of the Grand Chapter held in 1827, Jos. K.
Stapleton, Grand High Priest, submitted "documents upon the subject of the
institution of the Select Degree independent of the Grand Royal Arch Chapter,"
which were referred to a committee, who recommended that a circular be sent to
the several Grand Chapters regarding the matter and which was adopted. A copy
of this circular is here inserted:
M.E.G. Sir and Companion:
I am instructed by the Grand Chapter over which I have
the honour to preside, to address you and through you your Grand Chapter, upon
the unsettled state of the Degree of Select Mason - a subject deemed by us of
sufficient importance to claim the particular attention of your Grand Chapter.
This degree existed under the authority of a
distinguished chief in the State of Maryland, but without the recognizance of
our Grand Chapter, for man years; until, in the year 1824, upon the revision
of our Constitution, it appearing evident that the Select Degree not only has
an intimate connection with, but is in a measure necessary, as preparatory to
and elucidatory of, that of the Royal Arch; it was formally recognized by our
Grand Chapter, and required to be given by our subordinate Chapters, in its
proper order, immediately preceding that of the Royal Arch. Under this
arrangement we have since progressed, much to our satisfaction - but it is
with regret that we have learned that Councils or Chapters of Select Masons
have been established in some of our sister States, independent Royal Arch
Masonry, avowedly in pursuance of, but we are satisfied, through a great
mistake or actual abuse of any authority delegated, or meant to be delegated,
in relation to the Select Degree. We would therefore beg leave respectfully
to recommend to you Grand Chapter the consideration of this degree, and the
circumstances under which it exists, if it does exist, within your
jurisdiction; with the hope that you will see it to be for the general
interests of the Craft take the said degree under your recognizance and
control, to whom of right it belongs, and thereby do away what is felt to be a
grievance by those distinguished chiefs, whose authority, delegated to a
limited extent and for special reasons, has been perverted for sordid
purposes, by the creation of an independent order, never contemplated by them;
and which we believe to be inconsistent with the spirit and best interests of
our institutions.
Respectfully and fraternally, JOS. K. STAPLETON Grand
High Priest.
It will be seen that Bro. Cross is charged with having
abused the "authority, delegated or meant to be delegated" to him. It has
been said by old Masons in the presence of the writer that for his course of
action in this matter, he was expelled by the Grand Chapter; but there is
nothing in the records to warrant such an assertion.
By virtue of the powers claimed to have been received
from Eckel and Niles, Cross established some thirty-three Councils in various
parts of the United States, he also delegated his powers to others, who in
like manner issued Warrants for Councils of Royal and Select Masters. It is
said that as high a sum as one hundred dollars was demanded for a Warrant.
From all that has been stated, it is evident not only that Eckel and Niles
claimed to have had the supreme control and authority over the Select Degree,
but that this claim was generally regarded valid, and it is equally as
evident, we think, that these Brethren never claimed the control of the Royal
Master's Degree.
It has always been a question of much interest with
Masonic writers to know the source whence these Brethren received their
authority and control of the Select Degree. An old document that most
unexpectedly came to the knowledge of the writer about a year ago, settles
that question beyond a doubt. It is as follows:
Whereas, In the year of the Temple, 2792, our thrice
illustrious Brother, Henry Wilmans, Grand Elect, Select, Perfect Sublime
Mason, Grand Inspector General, and Grand Master of Chapters of the Royal
Arch, Grand Elect and Perfect Masters' Lodges and Councils, Knight of the
East, Prince of Jerusalem, Patriarch Noachite, Knight of the Sun and Prince of
the Royal Secret, did by and in virtue of the powers in him legally vested,
establish, ordain, erect and support a Grand Council of Select Masons in the
City of Baltimore and wrought therein to the great benefit of the craft and to
the profitable extension and elucidation of the mysteries of Masonry - and
whereas, we the subscribers to these presents are by regular succession
possessor of all the rights, privileges and immunities and powers vested in
any way whatsoever in the said Grand Council of Select Masons, considering the
great Advantages that would accrue to the Craft in an extension of the
knowledge of the Royal Secret as introductory to, and necessary for the better
understanding of the Superior Degrees.
Know all, whom it may concern, that we do hereby
authorize and empower our trusty and beloved Companions, K.S. --- K.T. ----
H.A. ---- of the same, to open and to hold a Chapter of Select Masons in the
City of Baltimore, under such By-Laws and regulations as may be enacted and
established for the government of the same, subject to the following general
rules and regulations:
Art. 1st. The Degree of Select Mason shall not be
conferred on any one that has not past the Chair and received the Honourary
degree of Mark Master Mason, nor shall it be conferred for a less sum than
Dollars.
Art. 2nd. The Officers and Members of the Chapter shall
pay due obedience to any regulations of the Grand Council which shall be
consistent with the Rules of the Order, and duly respect the Officers and
Chiefs thereof, and the three Chief Officers of said Chapter shall in virtue
of said Officers constitute a part and be Members of the Grand Council. The
said Council shall not levy or receive of any Chapter more than - Dollars per
annum exclusive of the Secretary's fees for Warrants, Dispensations, or other
Official Writings, which shall in no case exceed a reasonable compensation for
the labour and trouble of furnishing the same.
Art. 3rd. In case the G.R.A. Chapter of the State of
Maryland and District of Columbia, or the General Grand Chapter of the United
States shall assume and take charge of the Degree of Select Mason, then and in
that case all power and authority under these presents shall cease and
determine forthwith, provided a charter of recognition is granted to this
Chapter.
Art. 4th. The three Chief Officers of the Chapter must,
and always shall be Royal Arch Masons.
Art. 5th. Select Masons made under the authority of a
Royal Arch Chapter, and by the High Priest thereof in the Jurisdiction of the
State of Maryland and District of Columbia, shall be acknowledged and received
as such by said Select Chapter, which Chapter shall be known by the name of -
Chapter of Select Masons, No. 1.
In Testimony whereof, we have Signed our names and
affixed the Seal of the Grand Council, this
[SEAL (1) ] PHILIP P. ECKEL, H. NILES,
It will be noticed that all that was needed to make this
document effective was the filling of dates, names of officers, and the price
to be charged for conferring the degree. From some cause the dispensation was
not used, but the fact is fully and emphatically stated by Eckel and Niles,
under their hand and seal, that they were, "by regular succession, possessors
of all the rights, privileges, and immunities and powers vested in any way
whatsoever in the said Grand Council of Select Masons" which had been
instituted in the City of Baltimore in the year 1792 by Henry Wilmans, "Grand
Inspector General."
This document, in connection with the Rules and
Regulations of the Lodge of Perfection which have been quoted, leaves no room
for doubt that Wilmans was an Inspector of the Rite of Perfection, and that he
exercised in the City of Baltimore in 1792 the powers claimed by such
Inspectors. But from whom did Wilmans acquire his powers of "Grand Inspector
General," and the authority "to establish, ordain, erect and support a Chapter
of Select Masons?"
We regret we cannot answer the question, nor could the
Brethren in various parts of the country, to whom we applied. The name of
Wilmans does not appear upon any register or document in the archives of the
Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction, or upon any other known document
or record containing the names of the early Inspectors. From the fact that in
both the documents he is styled "Deputy Inspector" led to the supposition that
he might have derived his powers from Europe; acting upon which supposition,
letters were addressed to the Grand Lodges at Berlin and Bremen, while the
result of the correspondence which ensued, was of an interesting nature,
nothing in regard to his Masonic character could be learned.
It has been ascertained that Wilmans was a native of
Bremen, and that he emigrated to this country and settled in Baltimore, as
early at least as the year 1790. The first mention of his name on the records
of the Grand Lodge is in connection with Concordia Lodge in 1793, of which he
was appointed the first or Charter Master. In the same year he was elected
Deputy Grand Master, and in the following year Grand Master of Masons in
Maryland. The register of the Old Zion Lutheran Church, of this City, shows
that he died in 1795.
In a MSS. book of Moses Holbrook, of South Carolina,
written in 1829, it is stated that Joseph Myers, a deputy Inspector General,
deposited in the year 1788, in the archives of the Grand Council of Princes of
Jerusalem at Charleston, "a certified copy of the Royal and Select Masters'
Degrees, received from Berlin."
This is evidently an error, so far as it relates to the
Royal Master's Degree. As initiated, the degree was first known in the
Eastern States, and the earliest reliable mention of it there is in the year
1809.
Bro. Holbrook wrote his book in 1829, a which time both
degrees were conferred at Charleston, and naturally he connected the two in
his statement; making a similar error that others do when stating that Eckel
and Niles claimed the control of the Royal Master's degree. The book referred
to, contains also the statement, that somewhere about the year 1788, Joseph
Myers was for a time located in Baltimore.
Did Wilmans receive the Select Degree from Myers, or did
Myers receive it from Wilmans?
If the degree came from Berlin, it is quite probable that
Wilmans brought it with him, as he came from Germany about the time mentioned
for the deposit, in the MSS. of Holbrook.
There is a tradition existing in the Eastern States, that
Eckel received the degrees from a Prussian temporarily sojourning in
Baltimore. The period of Wilman's residence in Baltimore was perhaps not over
eight years, and with some propriety, he might have been regarded as a
sojourner, - and a Prussian.
It is stated, but upon what authority we know not, that
the Royal and Select Degrees were conferred by Andrew Franken at Albany in
1769, and that he conferred them upon Samuel Stringer who afterwards removed
to Maryland; but we have not been able to find this name upon any of the
records of this jurisdiction.
These statements or traditions, it will be seen, all
point to Maryland as the source from whence the Select Degree or (as the
writer will have it,) Royal Master's Degree also was subsequently introduced
into other parts of the country.
Brother Folger says: Eckel at the Session of the General
Grand Chapter advocated "the union of the degrees with the services of the
Royal Arch Chapter." This has always been the opinion of the Companions of
Maryland.
From 1824 to 1852, the Select alone was worked in the
Chapter. After 1852, both degrees were worked in Councils specially convened
for the purpose, after the Most Excellent and just before the conferring of
the Royal Arch degree. At one period, however, they were, as stated by Bro.
Dove, conferred before the Most Excellent.
At the Centennial Celebration of the Grand Chapter of
Maryland in 1897, Companion Edward T. Schultz delivered an Address on "Royal
Arch Masonry in Maryland." At the conclusion of this paper he augments and
amplifies his previous history of "The Cryptic Degree' by new and additional
evidence and proofs.
Although in some parts the statements of his earlier
history of the degrees are repeated, yet to attempt to excerpt would destroy
its value; and as these historical facts have not been heretofore embodied,
and, that they may be preserved in our Grand Council proceedings, we print
that part of the Address in full:
CRYPTIC MASONRY
The degrees known as the Royal and Select Masters, termed
Cryptic Masonry, have been so closely allied to Royal Arch Masonry in our
jurisdiction that a history of the one is not complete without a reference to
the other; one of the degrees of this system, the Select, having been known
and worked in our jurisdiction before the formation of the Grand Chapter, and
indeed, before the organization of Chapters independent of lodge authority.
Although the earliest known date of the introduction of
the Royal and Select Degrees must be placed at least a half century later than
that of the introduction of the Royal Arch, their origin is equally as obscure
as that degree.
While the degrees are undoubtedly, of European origin,
the first mention of them is found in this country, and the earliest authentic
evidence of the conferment of either of them is to be found in our own City of
Baltimore.
Every one of the many writers upon the subject of these
degrees has assigned a prominent position to Maryland in connection therewith;
but errors are so blended with the facts, in their statements, that it would
seem to be a duty we owe to the memory of the fathers of Royal Arch and
Cryptic Masonry in this jurisdiction, that in this, our Centennial year, we
should eradicate these errors.
Mackey, Dove and Folger, as well as nearly all writers
who have followed them, state in general terms that in the early part of this
century the Maryland Companions claimed that Philip P. Eckel "a distinguished
Chief" in their State had the custody and control of the Royal and Select
Degrees.
This is true so far only as regards the Select Degree;
there being not a scintilia of evidence to show that either Eckel, his
coadjutors, or their descendants in this State, ever claimed or exercised any
control of, or authority over the Royal Master's Degree. On the contrary
neither of them was in possession of that degree until some years later than
the period of which these writers speak.
Dr. Folger, in his history of the Ancient and Accepted
Scottish Rite, says: "At the meeting of the General Grand Chapter held at New
York in 1816, the subject of the Royal and Select Degrees came up for
discussion; Mr. Eckel of Baltimore, took a prominent part in advocating the
union of these two degrees with the services of the Royal Arch Chapters. The
discussion was warm and lasted the better part of two days, when the motion to
unite them with the Chapter degrees was lost."
This is not true, there being no reference to the subject
in the printed transactions of the General Grand Chapter. I wrote to Companion
Christopher G. Fox, General Grand Secretary, who kindly examined the original
proceedings in his custody, and he wrote me that there is no mention whatever
of these degrees in the transactions of that Convention.
Companion Eckel may have urged the members individually
to agree with him to a union of the Select with the Chapter degrees, for it is
well known that he greatly favoured such a union; but it is not at all
probable that he could have advocated a union with a degree of which he was
not in possession, the Royal Master's degree not being conferred upon him, and
Companion Benjamin Edes, until 1819 by Ebenezer Wadsworth of New York.
Another grave and misleading error into which these
writers have fallen is, that in the year 1817 Jeremy L. Cross, the celebrated
Masonic Lecturer, received the Royal and Select degrees from Philip P. Eckel
and Hezekiah Niles, and that he purchased from them the authority to confer
said degrees upon Royal Arch Masons and to establish independent Councils of
the same.
The facts are Eckel and Niles conferred the Select degree
upon Cross on the occasion of a visit by him to Baltimore in the year named,
and these Compassions gave him verbal permission to confer it upon such as he
might find worthy and qualified, but under the sanction of a Chapter Warrant
and without fee."
Cross was greatly "impressed" with the beauties of the
degree and of its importance and value to a full understanding of the Royal
Arch. But to confer it under the sanction of a Chapter Warrant and without fee
did not accord with "his sordid purposes." He therefore, conceived the idea of
establishing Councils independent of Chapters, and accordingly conferred the
degree upon a number of Companions at Windsor, Vermont, and on July 15th,
1817, organized at that place a Council of Select Masters. He then wrote to
Eckel under date of July 17th, 1817, requesting and urging him, as "Thrice
Illustrious and Puissant in the Grand Council of Select at Baltimore," to
confirm his action in the establishment of the Council at Windsor, and to
empower him to establish similar Councils elsewhere. (After Cross's death a
copy of a letter written to Eckel containing such a request was found among
his papers.)
It is not known what answer, if any, Eckel made to this
request, but subsequent developments made it quite sure that such an authority
was not given to him. It is true there was found among Cross's effects a
document in his handwriting, purporting to have been signed by Eckel and
Niles, giving him such authority; it is dated May 27th, 1817, nearly two
months prior to the time when he asked that such power might be given him.
Companion Josiah H. Drummond of Maine, who has more
thoroughly examined the origin and history of the Council degrees than anyone,
especially Cross's connection therewith, exhibited this document, in
connection with undoubted signatures of Eckel and Niles, to experts in
handwriting. He also sent photographic copies to Brethren in various parts of
the country, all of whom, except one, (and he has since reconsidered his
opinion), pronounced the signatures thereupon to be not genuine. (2)
I also submitted one of these photographic copies to
experts in handwriting in our city, four of whom were bank officers, and every
one, by a comparison of Eckel's and Niles's signatures in my possession,
pronounced the signatures on the document in question, simulated, not genuine.
If I am asked, why refer to such matters at this late
day?; why throw a shadow on the reputation of a deceased Companion?; I reply,
justice to the reputations of Companions, also deceased, whose memories are
dear to the heart of every Maryland Mason, demands that the truth be told.
For if this document be genuine, then Philip P. Eckel, Hezekiah Niles, Henry
S. Keatinge and Joseph K. Stapleton basely slandered a worthy Companion Royal
Arch Mason when they stated repeatedly, that such authority was never given to
Cross by Eckel and Niles. Such a denial was incorporated in a circular letter
issued by the Grand Chapter of Maryland in 1827, copies of which were sent to
all the Grand Chapters of the country, including the one of which Cross was a
member. As Companion Drummond says, "Is it credible that if this document had
been genuine, he would not have produced it when so gravely accused?" He made
no special denial, expressed or implied, till more than twenty-five years
afterwards, and all that was done then was to say that he received a Warrant
from Eckel and Niles to confer the degrees and grant Warrants.
Under the authority falsely claimed to have been received
from Eckel and Niles, Cross organized many Councils in the North, South and
West and deputized others to do the same. At first these were for the
conferring of the Select Degree only, but in the year 1818 he received the
Royal Master's Degree, when he united that degree with the Select in Councils.
Without doubt these were the first Councils of Royal and
Select Masters ever organized anywhere, and whatever virtue there may be in
the present Council system, now so generally practised in this country, the
credit of its inception is wholly due to Jeremy L. Cross, in whatever light
his questionable methods to effectuate its establishment may be viewed.
We thus see that in the early part of this century it was
generally believed that Philip P. Eckel had the custody and control of the
Select Degree but neither he nor any of his contemporaries has left us the
slightest intimation as to the source whence he received the degree and his
power of control thereof.
A document that most unexpectedly came into my possession
some years ago, settled that question beyond peradventure. It is a
Dispensation or Warrant for the, formation of a Chapter of Select Masons at
Baltimore, signed by Philip P. Eckel and H. Niles. In the preamble to this
document, it is recited, that in year of the Temple 2792 (1792) our Thrice
Illustrious Henry Wilmans, Grand Inspector General, etc., did, "by virtue of
power in him legally vested, establish, ordain and support, a Grand Council of
Select Masons in the City of Baltimore, and wrought therein to the great
benefit of the Craft, etc.," and that "the subscribers, (Eckel and Niles) are,
by regular succession, possessors of all the rights, privileges, immunities
and powers vested in any way, whatsoever, in said Grand Council of Select
Masons.
It is to be regretted that this document is not dated and
that the blanks for the names of the officers are not filled in, as it shows
that in all probability the organization of the Body was not, at that time at
least, consummated; but as the signatures of Eckel and Niles, as well as the
seal of the Body of which they were officers, are undoubtedly genuine, and the
document having been found in the possession of a descendant of one of the
signers, it must be accepted as evidence of the facts therein stated; namely,
Henry Wilmans established a Grand Council of Select Masons in Baltimore in the
year 1792, and that Philip P. Eckel and H. Niles were, by, regular succession,
the possessors of the power heretofore residing in said Wilmans.
Now this, we boldly assert, is the earliest authentic
evidence so far produced of the conferment of the Select Degree; the earliest
authentic evidence of the conferment of the Royal Master's Degree being in a
so- called Grand Council of Royal Masters at New York in 1807.
The word "Grand" used by these Bodies must not be
construed as it is in our day. The term was at that time assumed by all
Masonic bodies which claimed the power of constituting other bodies of like
character.
It has, however, been asserted that both the Royal and
Select Degrees were conferred in the Lodge of Perfection established at
Albany, New York, in 1766 by Andrew Franken, who received his power of Deputy
Inspector General of the Rite of Perfection from Stephen Morin at Jamaica, who
had received his powers to propagate that Rite in the New World from the
Council of Emperors of the East and West in France, but no evidence whatever
has been produced to substantiate this statement.
It is also claimed by the Grand Chapter of South Carolina
and the Supreme Council for the Southern jurisdiction, that both degrees were
conferred in the Lodge of Perfection established at Charleston in 1783.
As has been adverted to, in 1827 the Grand Chapter of
Maryland addressed a circular letter to the other Grand Chapters of the United
States, in which, after referring to the action of Cross and others in the
formation of Councils independent of Royal Arch Chapters, the Grand Chapters
are urged to take the Select Degree under their "recognizance where of right
it belongs."
The Grand Chapter of South Carolina referred this
circular to a special committee, who made a report in 1829, which was
substantially as follows:
"That three brethren then living received the Royal and
select Degrees in the Sublime Lodge of Perfection at Charleston in 1783, and
that the Grand Officers and Inspectors have been steadily conferring said
degrees under their authority in the South and West. That the committee has
seen and perused the first copy of these degrees that ever came to America and
old copies of Charters that have been returned by Councils in States where
Grand Councils had been formed. Furthermore, that in 1788 Joseph Myers, a
Deputy Grand Inspector, deposited in the Council of Princes of Jerusalem at
Charleston, certified copies of said degrees from Berlin, Prussia."
Companion Drummond who saw what purports to be a
certified copy of the rituals deposited by Joseph Myers, says:
"The ritual annexed is certainly not a copy of the one
deposited, for the ritual of the Select Degree refers to the Royal degree, and
moreover both of them recognize the Supreme Council as the governing
authority, and that body did not exist until 1801." (3)
As has been stated, there is no mention of the Royal
Master's Degree found anywhere, other than in this report, earlier than 1807.
It does not appear in either the 1802 or 1807 published list of the many
degrees, some fifty-five, conferred by the Inspectors.
There is no evidence that these Inspectors or Supreme
Council ever issued Warrants for the formation of Council or Grand Council
earlier than 1860; the returned Charters that the committee "saw and perused"
were those issued by John Barker subsequent to 1818. This Companion claimed
to act as the agent of the Supreme Council, but Companion Drummond is of the
opinion that he never received any authority to do so from that body. It is
believed he received the degrees from Cross.
The Berlin theory of the origin of the degrees must of
course be classed with the Frederick the Great theory of the origin of the
so-called high degrees; no one at this day gives to it any credence whatever.
While I would not for a single moment question the
veracity of the distinguished Companions composing the committee of the Grand
Chapter of South Carolina, it really seems, in view of the facts stated, that
their entire report must be received with considerable misgiving. The
evidence adduced does not, in my opinion, warrant the conclusions reached by
the Companions of South Carolina and the Supreme Council.
(To be continued)
(1) The impression upon the seal is too indistinct to be
read. (2) See History of the Cryptic Rite, by J. Ross Robertson. (3) See
History of the Cryptic Rite, by J. Ross Robertson.
AMERICANISM VERSUS SOCIALISM
BY FRANK ALLABEN, PRESIDENT NATIONAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Amid the many
efforts being made these days to define Americanism it is refreshing to find
one that is crystal clear. Masons have an unfailing desire to uphold the
Constitution of the United States, because they believe that that document is
the bulwark of Americanism. This article, from the pen of one who is not a
Mason, gives us in simple form concrete examples of how some of the theories
now being advanced as cure-alls for our civic ailments are opposed to the most
vital principles contained in our Constitution. The author is President of the
National Historical Society, an organization very similar to that of this
Society in its general plan. We publish this article with the author's
consent, granted because he feels that Freemasonry is devoted to the
advancement of American citizenship. Delivered originally as an address before
the Bergen Reformed Church Men's Club, we feel that it is entitled to the
closest study of the members of this Society.
MY SUBJECT is
Americanism; and I hope we may gain new inspiration and renewed courage by
contrasting the principles which constitute Americanism with two other sets of
principles which just nom threaten our national peace and the welfare of the
world.
One of these hostile
sets of principles is today at work underground, plotting, as secretly as
possible, to throw our social order into sudden confusion by great labor
strikes, in order that under cover of these a small fraction of our
population, the elements of revolution and anarchy, may overthrow the
principles of Americanism, seize the machinery of American government and
convert the powers we have ordained for justice into a weapon of violence to
confiscate private property and dominate the economic means of life. This is
the plot of an unscrupulous minority to crush our governmental safeguards
under a reign of terror in order to rob and ruin the great majority of
law-abiding Americans as the Russian people have lately been robbed and
ruined. You need no argument from me to convince you that this conspiracy of
destruction must be fought to its death. I seek, therefore, only to make the
inherent wickedness of socialistic absolutism more apparent by showing that
its fundamental principles are totally subversive of and utterly
irreconcilable with Americanism; while I also wish to point out how these
doctrines of destruction may be overcome without violation of the personal
liberty guaranteed to all by Americanism.
But another evil now
challenges and imperils Americanism. I refer to the abuse of power by
organized labor and organized capital, by some even claimed as an unalienable
right, in declaring and carrying on private economic war against one another
in our peaceful communities by means of the strike and the lockout, with their
attendant evils of riots, bullyings, assaults, murders, arson, theft, and
economic destruction. Fortunately, these activities are simply abuses of
usurped power, developed under years of toleration, and, unlike the
conspiracies of socialistic absolutism, are not aimed against our Government
nor intended to subvert our institutions and manner of life. But, in the light
of the historic principles of Americanism, these practices belong to license
and not to liberty. They are not rights, but tolerated wrongs. All other
Americans have given up the barbarism of private war, and resort only to their
law-courts to compel justice; and organized labor and capital have no
inalienable rights which do not belong to all of us. Their violences we have
simply suffered for a time, with the optimistic hope of Americans that they
would solve their problems and reach a stable equilibrium.
But today the labor
strike has become a great peril; for it is behind organized labor that the
"red" conspiracy against our governmental safe-guards lurks and hides,
gathering energy to spring out upon us suddenly, camouflaged under the
confusion of some great labor strike. All the European assaults of bolshevism,
successful or abortive, have leaped out of the whirlwinds of labor strikes;
while in America today revolutionary radicalism secretly struggles to seize
the machinery of organized labor as a tool for the destruction of organized
government.
Thus the
labor-strike has become a great problem for the American people. It should be
solved, and solved speedily. I believe it can be solved by a simple
application of American principles. Therefore let us turn now to a brief
examination of these.
Americanism is
defined by the Declaration of Independence, which, basing its doctrine upon
"the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," asserts the rights of man in one
immortal sentence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are
created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that
to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their
just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of
government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to
alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its
foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
This declaration was
received with acclaim by our colonial forefathers, who also expressed their
boundless joy in bonfires, torch-light processions, the firing of guns, and
the ringing of bells. Samuel Adams bears witness that the people received this
statement of their rights "as though it were a decree promulgated from
heaven."
And out of heaven it
came - an assertion in proof of which I cite the great fact that in little
more than one hundred and forty years these principles have covered the earth
and have been received as self-evident by practically all mankind, Christian
and pagan. To me this is conclusive evidence of two things: first, that the
Divine Intelligence Who rules this world, in Whose existence and beneficent
guidance I firmly believe, must be greatly interested in opening to all
peoples the door of liberty first opened to our fathers; and, second, that our
fathers' statement of the principles of liberty and righteous government,
since it carries instant conviction to the universal conscience, must have
gathered the fundamentals of just human government out of "the laws of nature
and of nature's God."
If this be true we
should cherish these principles of Americanism as a sacred trust, held by us
as trustees, for ourselves, for our posterity, and for the world; and we
should reject with jealous zeal any doctrine or practice which transgresses
these principles.
In the light of
these principles let us test two doctrines made in Germany, the doctrine of
autocratic government promulgated and practised by Prussian royalty and
nobility, and the doctrine of socialistic government proclaimed by Karl Marx.
Let us apply the four great tests of Americanism.
Firstly, the appeal
of our Declaration of Indepen dence to "the laws of nature and of nature's
God" is the acknowledgement that eternal principles of right and wrong exist
and can be deduced by man from the laws of God and nature. But German
autocracy and German socialism both deny this great truth. The German ruling
class held that human government is above all standards of right and wrong,
doing what il pleases to accomplish its selfish ends; and under this doctrine
Germany set out to conquer the world with shocking atrocities. This autocratic
anarchy, this monstrous repudiation of all our normal standards of
righteousness, is what we fought and conquered in the late war, thus
reasserting the American doctrine that the laws of nature and of nature's God
establish standarde of right to which individuals, peoples, and governmente
are all alike amenable. But the doctrine of socialistic absolutism, even more
than the doctrine of autocratic absolutism, declares war against all the
standards or right acquired by man through painful centuries, proposing to
overthrow governments like ours, wreck man's social order and industries,
confiscate private property, deny religious and political liberty, and even
invade the sanctity of marriage and the rights of the family circle. Before
our eyes, in Russia, we see these happy gains of human progress trampled into
the slime of socialistic anarchy; and the war for Americanism will not be won
until, with the idol of autocratic absolutism, the idol of socialistic
absolutism is broken and cast out.
Secondly, in stating
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness, and that governments are instituted among men to secure these
rights, the Declaration of Independence simply asserts man's relationships in
nature, the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, with the obvious
truth that just government must recognize and protect the equal rights and
privileges of all the members of man's one race and family. But autocrats and
socialists alike oppose this doctrine. Both preach class-hatred and class-war,
each holding that government must be class-rule, either by the upper crust or
by the proletariat. In other words, autocracy and socialism beat the world
with the same stick of class-rule, and only quarrel as to which end of the
stick shall do the beating. Autocrats believe in government of autocrats, by
autocrats, for autocrats. Socialists believe in government of the proletariat,
by the proletariat, for the proletariat. But Americans believe in government
of the people, by the people, for the people; and by this we mean government
of all the people, by all the people, for all the people.
I may add that the
right to pursue happiness is the right of private ownership - the right of
each individual to pursue and to possess property and all the things of life
which can be enjoyed without invading another's right to pursue them. Yet
their denial of this right of the individual, to pursue and possess as his own
the things which make men happy, is the cardinal error of all forms of
socialism.
Thirdly, the
statement of the Declaration of Independence, that governments derive "their
just powers from the consent of the governed," is necessarily the assertion
that the will of the majority must prevail in all cases where a people differ
in judgment. This principle underlies our Constitution, and was sealed by our
fathers' blood in our Civil War. Yet autocracy and socialism alike attack this
fundamental of government by seeking to impose the tyrannies of minorities
upon the great majorities of the earth.
But, fourthly, while
Americanism gives to the majority the right of decision in all questions open
to debate; it is its glory first of all to secure the rights of the minority
by guaranteeing individual liberties which are not open to debate. Thus while
autocracy and socialism trample the rights of great majorities, Americanism
protects the rights of a minority as small as one man.
The Constitution of
the United States is simply a wonderfully successful plan of government to
carry out the principles and secure the rights proclaimed in the Declaration
of Independence. It provides a representative organization through which the
people may exercise their executive, legislative, and judicial powers on the
principle of majority rule; yet in the very document by which they ordain
this, the people have prohibited their representatives from invading certain
fundamental rights guaranteed to each individual.
These personal
rights, which no executive power, nor legislature, nor law-court may abridge,
include the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, except when rebellion or
invasion requires its suspension; include immunity from bills of attainder, ex
post facto laws, and unequal taxation; include religious freedom; freedom of
speech; freedom of the press; the right to assemble peaceably; to petition
Government for redress of grievances; to keep and bear arms; and to be secure,
in person, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizure;
include the right of trial by jury, even in civil suits, involving more than
twenty dollars; with exemption from bearing witness against one's self; and
include the right never to be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; with the full right of private ownership of property,
which may not be taken, even for public use, without just c
