Difference between revisions of "Central"

Revision as of 15:50, 11 May 2013

CENTRAL LODGE

Location: Dudley

Chartered By: John Soley

Charter Date: 03/14/1827 IV-81

Precedence Date: 03/12/1826

Current Status: unknown

REFERENCES IN GRAND LODGE PROCEEDINGS

• Petitions For Charter: 1826, 1827

OTHER

• 1827 (Constitution of lodge, IV-126)

ø Charter surrendered 06/11/1834

EVENTS

FEAST OF ST. JOHN, JUNE 1830

From Boston Masonic Mirror, New Series, Vol. 2, No. 2, July 10, 1830, Page 11:

From the Southbridge Register.

The anniversary of the nativity of St. John the Baptist, was celebrated at Dudley, on the 24th ult. under circumstances peculiarly interesting to the Fraternity. The exercises of the occasion were under the direction of the Central Lodge, aided by a great number of Masons present from the Lodges in the vicinity. There were also present a large concourse of spectators, apparently willing to testify their respect for an ancient and much abused Institution, which has for its object to make men more charitable, generous and humane. The exercises at the Meeting house were a prayer by the Rev. Mr. Goodwin, of the Episcopal Church, East Sutton, and an excellent address by the Rev. Mr. Colton, of Monson Academy. It is announced with great pleasure that it will be published.

After the exercises at the Meeting house, a large company of Gentlemen and Ladies consisting of about three hundred, sat down to a dinner served up in a beautiful bower by Wm. Winsor, Esq. Col. Alexander DeWitt presided at the table, and after the cloth had been removed, the following sentiments were announced.

• 1st. The day we celebrate - May it admonish us to cultivate peace and good will towards men - a maxim so forcibly taught and exemplified by him in honor of whom we commemorate this day.
• 2d. The Masonic Institution - Like a well Keyed Arch, it gathers strength and compactness, from the intensity of pressure which surrounds it.
• 3d. Freemasonry and Religion - Both well calculated to render all who live agreeably to the precepts they enjoin, better, happier and more useful to their fellow men.
• 4th. Freemasonry - By its aid, science survived the grand wreck of intellect during the dark ages. May its guardianship never be withdrawn.
• 5th. Our Country - May its altars never be polluted by a practical illustration of a leading Antimasonic principle - "pardon, and future affluence to State convicts, on condition that they commit perjury."
• 6th. Ancient Masonry - Though frequently assailed by the storms of envy and prejudice - like the Oak it increases strength with age.
• 7th. Freemasons - May they come forth from the present Antimasonic excitement, like the three who withstood the fiery furnace - without even a bad smell on their garments.
• 8th. Unity and Discord - May they never meet, until the latter becomes a proselyte to the former.
• 9th. The Memories of Washington and Warren - Foremost alike in repelling the foes of their Country, and in cultivating the Masonic arts of peace.
• 10th. Seceders - Ephraim is joined to his Idols, let him alone.
• 11th. Antimasonry - Like the car of juggernaut, it destroys its own votaries.
• 12th. Our Masonic Brethren throughout the world - Whilst they practice upon the principles of our order, they shall enjoy the highest meed which earth bestows on virtuous actions - "a self approving conscience.
• 13th. The Ladies who adorn and honor our festival - May Masons appreciate their worth and deserve their approbation.

A great number of volunteer sentiments were given on the occasion, evincing the good sense and good feelings of the company.

NOTES

Rev. Goodwin was probably Rev. Hersey Bradford Goodwin, who was made a co-pastor with Rev. Ezra Ripley at the Congregational Society in Concord, MA in February 1830; the following sermon and charge were presented at that time.

Rev. Mr. Colton of Monson Academy was Simeon Colton, one of the earliest instructors of that institution. He was raised in Thomas Lodge in 1819; he appears in the Centennial History on Page 1896-410 as follows:

Dr. Colton was a native of Longmeadow, a graduate of Yale in 1806, settled over the church in Palmer in 1811, dismissed in 1821, after which he was for some years the principal of Monson Academy, a teacher in North Carolina, and later president of Clinton College, Mississippi. The degree of D.D. was conferred upon him in 1846. He died at Ashborough, N.C., December, 1868. He was a man of much enterprise and of scholarly attainments. Dr. Colton often officiated as chaplain of the Lodge, and took much interest in the work.

Alexander De Witt (1798-1879) was a textile manufacturer from Oxford who at this time had just been elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives. He later served briefly in the U.S. Congress.

DR. COLTON'S ADDRESS

From Boston Masonic Mirror, New Series, Vol. 2, No. 12, September 18, 1830, Page 89:

From the Hampshire Sentinel.

You have heard of the Gordian knot. Historians inform us that Alexander, in a fit of vexation, because he could not discover the secret of untying it, raised his sword, and determined with a single blow, to end a difficulty, which he had not the sagacity to comprehend nor the magnanimity to let alone.

Much like this is the feeling that has of late prevailed, in relation to the Masonic Institution. While some affect to consider it too contemptible to deserve attention; while some decry it as dangerous, and while others have tortured their invention in trying to find out its secrets, not a few in a fit of vexation have resolved with one blow to end the inquiry by cutting the knot, which they have not the skill to untie.

Under this paroxysm of feeling, a war of extermination has been proclaimed. No truce is to be allowed: no quarter is to be given. Absolute, unqualified submission is the only condition of peace. Such are the feelings which have of late been excited in relation to the Masonic Institution, and which it has been the endeavor of individuals to urge forward into an irreconcilable hatred and an unrelenting persecution.

Called to address you under such circumstances, it is no easy matter to select from the variety of subjects that present themselves a topic to which, for a few moments, your attention may most properly be directed. The history of the Institution; the principles on which it was founded; the salutary influence it has had on society; and its ability to become more extensively useful; are themes, which have often, on such occasions, been discussed. - Passing these, therefore, some may expect that in opposition to the attack recently commenced against the Institution, I should undertake its defence. This might be done, and this defence would furnish a subject to which our attention might be profitably directed. I will not, however, spend the time allotted to me in undertaking to defend that which, for the sake of Masons, needs no defence, and to defend which, in the view of enemies, would be worse than useless.

There are other topics that press upon our attention. - Under the ostensible plea of opposing Masonry, an attack has been made upon rights and privileges that lie at the foundation of all good society. Masons, it is true, are the immediate object of the attack, but should the demand made upon them be admitted there is not a man in the community who would be secure in his right for a moment. Masons, therefore, are not the only persons concerned in the case now pending before the public. Others are alike concerned, and the question at issue is one in which the dearest interest of individuals and society are at stake.

Allow me, then, to ask your attention for a brief examination of some of the claims of this antimasonic opposition - and to some remarks on the utter incompatibility of these claims with the rights of individuals, and on the duty of Masons in view of the existing circumstances of their Institution.

The principle which, if I understand it, is assumed as the basis of the prevailing sentiment is that the Institution is dangerous to the community and hazardous to personal safety. And in accordance with this principle, no pains have been spared to create and strengthen the impression that Masons are unworthy of confidence and unfit for stations of public trust. Attempts have been made to exclude them from offices which they have long sustained, and in instances not a few attempts have been made to exclude them from Christian privileges, as member of churches. These measures have all been attempted, and the work of proscription has not only commenced but in many places has been carried to the greatest extent that public sentiment would allow. Nor has this proscription been confined to Masons. Individuals not Masons, who have dared to question the propriety of the course adopted, have been loaded with opprobrious names, with a view to bring them into public contempt.

A more particular detail of the assumed principles and of the practices of this antimasonic excitement is not necessary at this time, for the history of the excitement is too well known to need a recapitulation. Suffice it to observe in relation to some of them, that they are utterly incompatible with the rights of individuals and subversive of the fundamental principles of liberty.

A demand is made upon Masons that Masonry shall be renounced, at the expense of forfeiting the confidence and favor of all who are not members of the Institution. This is the spirit that is breathed forth in the numerous publication which have been enlisted on that side of the question; in the addresses and what are called lectures which have been delivered in various parts of the country; and particularly in the resolutions that have been passed in antimasonic conventions. That I have not articulated this demand in too strong terms may be determined by numerous facts to which I refer you. What less than this can we infer from votes that have been passed in antimasonic meetings and even in Ecclesiastical bodies, where the subject has been taken up, discussed, and consequent measures pursued? What less can we infer from the votes that have been passed in some churches, concerning the fellowship of members? What less than this can be inferred from the votes of some of our towns, in the selection of names for jurors? What less from the votes of many political meetings and other assemblies that have been called for the purpose of expressing the feelings of the members?

Again then I ask, what is the Mason required to yield? The same that every man may be called to yield, should he happen to be so unfortunate as to be obnoxious to a party - viz., the right of private opinion. And suppose the Mason should yield; what will be the result? He has consented to be controlled by others in his opinions. He has given a pledge that whenever a demand is made upon him, he will consent to submit to dictation. This would be the first and a rapid step toward establishing a tyrannical government. And I hesitate not to say that the moment an individual yields to such a demand he forges a chain for himself that he can never break.

This demand, therefore, involves the general interest of society as well as those of the Mason. Nay, should Masons consent to yield to the demand, every discerning man would object; for in that act he would see but too plainly a signal for a demand to be made upon himself. - This demand is therefore so incompatible with the principles of liberty that antimasons do themselves compel Masons to say they cannot comply; for they demand a surrender, not of what belongs to them as Masons merely, but a right enjoyed in common with other citizens; a right which they cannot surrender without surrendering all that is dear to them as men. Had the demand been limited within the bounds of sober conviction; had it proceeded no further than reason would justify; had it been based upon evidence of wrong - Masons might have yielded to the weight of argument. But to ask men to yield to such a demand as that which is now made is but to require them to make a yoke for their own necks, or submit to be trampled on at pleasure.

Rather than submit to such a demand as this, give me my dwelling in the lonely forest; let my covering be the broad canopy of Heaven, and my food the spontaneous productions of the earth.

But this incompatibility is not the only objection to the claims of antimasonry. They are unreasonable.

That individuals have a right to associate themselves together for the purposes of business, for mutual improvement or for social enjoyment, provided the principles of association involve nothing contrary to the public good, will not I suppose be called in question. Nor will anyone doubt whether such an association may not prescribe its own rules for the management of its concerns, and its own terms on which new members shall be received. So far then, the Masonic Institution stands on the same footing with every association. The object is mutual improvement, mutual and peculiar assistance in the duties and trials of life. But it is said the association is peculiar for it has some things, intended to be secret, and thus it becomes a dangerous Institution. That there are things connected with the Institution which are intended to be known only to the members I do not deny. These however have no connection with the principles of the Institution, which are open to the world, nor have they any possible connection with the public good so that they can either benefit or injure. The forms and ceremonies of initiation, and the tokens whereby the members know each other, are all that can be considered secret. And if to keep these secrets be a crime, where is there an association to which the same objection may not be urged? For where is there an association, formed for business of pleasure or improvement, that does not assume the right of prescribing the terms of initiation, and of directing the mode and manner of operations, and all this without publishing to the world more than it pleases?

DISTRICTS

1827: District 6

LINKS

Massachusetts Lodges