MassachusettsHamiltonHistoryCh15
CHAPTER 15: A QUARTER CENTURY OF GROWTH (PART 3)
At the December Quarterly of 1810 Timothy Bigelow was again elected Grand Master, his second administrarion lasting three years. Bigelow was the only Grand Master after the Union of 1798 who held office for two whole periods of three years each. There were several who were recalled to the chair for a second administration, but in no other case was the second period more than one year.
The meeting for installation of Grand Officers was held on December 17, 1810 instead of on the usual date of December 27. At this meeting the matter of a national Masonic convention again came up. In 1780, as already described, there were movements to make George Washington a General Grand Master. Massachusetts declined to participate. In 1800 overtures were made by Pennsylvania and South Carolina for a national convention to organize a national Grand Lodge. Although the proposal was many times afterward renewed Pennsylvania never again approved of a national Grand Lodge. In 1807 Pennsylvania called a national convention, not to form a national Grand Lodge, but to consult in the interest of a greater harmony between the Grand Lodges and greater- uniformity in law and ritual. Massachusetts provided for representation, but the convention never met. At about the same time the Grand Lodge of North Carolina and Tennessee (then a single Masonic jurisdiction) called for a convention to form a "superintending Grand Lodge." The matter did not move any too well, but North Carolina and Tennessee were persistent. It wanted a national convention called at Washington, and pressed for an answer. On recommendation of a committee, of which Thomas was chairman, Massachusetts voted representation. The delegation was to consist of two Masters or Past Masters of Lodges who should be members of Congress, and they should have commissions good for six months. They were to be strictly enjoined not to agree to any motion or resolves for the formation of a National Superintending Grand Lodge without special instruction from the Grand Lodge so to do. The convention never met, but the action of the Grand Lodge shows its very cautious attitude toward the whole matter. It was willing to send impartial watchers, but would not commit itself to any action.
At a special communication of Grand Lodge held January 30, 1811, it was voted to establish a permanent charity fund. It will be remembered that in 1774 Grand Master Rowe had an elaborate plan for a charity fund adopted. A list of contributions shows that the sum of sixty-seven pounds, six shillings was collected. With the outbreak of the Revolutionary War shortly afterward the plan lapsed. From that time to 1811 there was no charity fund. Any relief extended by Grand Lodge was provided for by appropriations from current account.
Under the plan adopted the fund was to consist of (a) an initial appropriation of one thousand dollars, specie, from the general funds of Grand Lodge, (b) one quarter of the Lodge quarterages, (c) one dollar for each initiate, (d) one half of all donations made to Grand Lodge not specifically allocated by the donors. The fund was to be kept separate from other funds, and controlled by a Board of Trustees. One year's interest was to be held at the disposal of the Trustees, but if any part of it was not expended it was to revert to the principal. No part of the principal was to be used, until the interest amounted to three thousand dollars a year. Trustees were chosen and directed to apply to the legislation for incorporation. Arrangements were made for a general appeal to the entire membership for donations,the appeal to be made by the District Deputy Grand Masters. This was the small beginning of the present large charity fund of the Grand Lodge.
At the September Quarterly of 1811 a petition for relief was received from Fellowship Lodge. The matter was referred to a committee consisting of Foster Smith, Benjamin Russell, and Samuel Thaxter. At the December Quarterly the committee presented a report, which was unanimously accepted, as follows:
"The committee to whom was submitted the petition and representation of Fellowship Lodge, at Bridgewater, produced a lengthy and important report, which being read was unanimously accepted, vizt:
"The committee appointed to take the foregoing petition into consideration, ask leave to report, That, in their opinion, the vote of paying the expenses of their meetings out of the fees received for initiations, there being no money in the treasury, carries with it marks of procedure repugnant to Masonry as well as being subversive of the first principles of the Institution, - which, among other considerations, is to accumulate a fund for the assistance of poor and penniless Brethren, their widows and orphans.
The conduct connected with this vote, after paying the charges of the meeting, of dividing the funds among the Brethren present, merits in their opinion, pointed censure.
To alleviate their departure from Masonic principles, the committee are happy that a number of indigent Brethren received any assistance. Taking notes for initiating ought to be discountenanced; it is giving credit, perhaps, where it ought not to be given.
As Masonic institutions are not corporate bodies, no one is legally authorized to prosecute. Independent of that, how would an action of that kind strike the unprejudiced mind? The committee regret that from December 5801, to March, 5809, there was no meeting; they regret this more when they reflect on the character of those who first took the charge of Fellowship Lodge.
Your committee are not able to give an opinion upon that part of the petition which says: *That from 5801 to 5809 but eight Brethren were initiated, the Lodge having been removed three times since its consecration, by which considerable expense has accrued. But inasmuch as the petition to the Grand Lodge comes in a respectful manner your committee are of opinion that it is the official duty of the District Deputy Grand Master to give an opinion relative to the propriety of an abatement of their quarterages due to the Grand Lodge.
Signed,
- Foster Swift,
- Benj. Russell,
Committee.
November 30th, 5811."
The Important feature of this report is its emphatic statement as to the proper and Improper use of initiation fees.
At the June Quarterly a general revision of the Grand Constitutions was adopted and published later in the year. For the most part this revision fixed in law certain standing votes, such as those relating to the charity fund, and certain customs not heretofore defined by statutes. The requirement was made that the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, Grand Wardens, Grand Treasurer, Recording and Corresponding Grand Secretaries, -District Deputy Grand Masters, Grand Marshal, and Grand Deacons must "have passed the Chair of a regular Lodge." This provision excluded from his office John Proctor, who had been Grand Secretary eleven years. For a good many years this provision was evaded by a legal fiction, the Past Master degree in the Chapter being considered a compliance with it. There was a provision that no person residing in a town in Massachusetts wherein there was a Lodge should be admitted a candidate by a Lodge in any other town without the approbation of the Master and Wardens of a Lodge in the town of his residence. This was a long way from establishing a principle of territorial jurisdiction of Lodges. It left all towns in which there was no Lodge absolutely open territory and permitted the free reception of candidates living outside the state. It settled the somewhat troublesome question of the duration of commissions of proxy by providing that they should all expire with the closing of Grand Lodge on the Feast of St. John the Evangelist.
An attempt was made to change the title of the District Deputy Grand Master to Inspectors. Fortunately it did not succeed and was never repeated. It would have conveyed a very erroneous idea of the meaning and functions of the office. There was not and never had been, any statute limiting membership to one Lodge. Neither of our parent Grand Lodges had any restriction on the number of Lodges a Brother might join, and so far Massachusetts followed their example.
Some question having arisen as to the exact qualifications necessary to constitute a legal representative in Grand Lodge it was voted, on report of a committee, at the March Quarterly of 1812, that individuals could not designate personal proxies, that the commission of proxy did not empower such proxy to vote when the Master and Wardens were present, but did entitle him to a seat, but if the proxy and only one of the three officers were present, the proxy might vote. This was changed in the general revision of 1843 to provide that the proxy should not vote if either one of the three officers were present. Otherwise the regulations of 1812 still stand.
Timothy Blgelow's second administration came to an end with the close of 1813. At the December Quarterly Benjamin Russell was elected Grand Master.
Russell was born in Boston, September 13, 1761 and died there January 4, 1845.
On the morning of April 19, 1775 young Russell was as usual at his desk in Master Carter's Town School in Scollay's building. Military music was heard in the street and one of the boys was sent out to find out what was happening. He came back with exciting news. The British soldiers had attacked the Americans at Lexington and Concord, had had serious casualties, had sent for reinforcements, and troops were parading on the Common. Carter at once said "Boys, war has begun - the school is broken up." Russell and some other boys followed the soldiers as far as the Harvard College buildings in Cambridge and waited there to see what would happen. In the early evening they were rewarded by seeing the harassed troops streaming back to Boston after a very tough day.
The college buildings were used by the Americans as barracks and young Russell attached himself to a Connecticut company as a clerk. After about four months of this irregular soldering his father found him and induced General Israel Putnam to discharge him. The next day Mr. Russell took his boy to Worcester and apprenticed to Isaiah Thomas to learn the printer's trade. Five years later Russell enlisted in the American army in which he served until demobilized.
There were two outstanding incidents in his military service. He was one of the guard of the unfortunate Major Andre when he was executed.
One day Russell was passing a tent when a sudden gust of wind blew the flap open. Glancing in he was greatly surprised to see a Sergeant-Major sitting with his hat on on an elevated chair while General Washington was sitting uncovered among a group of soldiers and officers. Asking what was going on he was told that it was a meeting of a Lodge of Masons. He was so impressed by this spectacle of practical brotherhood that he resolved to become a Mason at his first opportunity.
One other incident in his life has interest not only personal but as showing Masonry in war at that period. During the war of 1812 he learned that a kinsman of his had been captured by the British and was being held a prisoner on the frigate Nymph, the Captain of which was known to be a Mason. Russell tried to get a flag of truce to enable him to visit the Nymph, but it was refused. He then hired a boat on his own responsibility and set out to find the Englishman. After some days of cruising he sighted the Nymph and sailed to meet her. Although ordered to show colors or be fired on he kept on his way and got alongside the frigate. Making himself known Masonically, he was received on board with every courtesy and was allowed to take away not only his kinsman but four other American prisoners.
On Russell's discharge from the army he resumed his work as a printer and on March 24, 1784, he commenced publication of the Columbian Centinel, which he edited and published until his death in 1845. So ably was it edited that it soon became the most influential paper in New England and one of the most influential in the country. Russell was a staunch Federalist and his paper was the leading Federalist organ. It was largely through his popular influence that New England became and continued the stronghold of the Federalist party until its final collapse in 1823.
Russell was Commander of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company, President of the Mechanics' Association, President of the Boston Board of Health, Member and President of the Boston Common Council, member of the Board of Aldermen, Representative and Senator in the General Court,and a member of the Governor's Council.
Shortly after his discharge from the army he joined Rising States Lodge. The records of that Lodge are not in existence, so that we do not know the date of his degrees nor his full Masonic record. He was Secretary of the Lodge in 1792 and was its Master about 1800. When Rising States Lodge surrendered its Charter on December,1810; Russell promptly and satisfactorily accounted for the money received in the division of its property and immediately affiliated with St. John's Lodge. His record in Grand Lodge was most remarkable. He was Grand Sword Bearer in 1792 to 1795, inclusive, Grand Marshal 1796 to 1810, inclusive, Junior Grand Warden 1811 and 1812, Senior Grand Warden 1813, Grand Master 1814, 1815, and 1816, a continuous service of twenty-five years as an officer of Grand Lodge.
Such was the man who became Grand Master at the age of fifty-three and at the height of his powers.
At the June Quarterly of 1814, John Dixwell presented a resolution "That when the Master and Wardens of a Lodge shall be summoned before this Grand Lodge, they shall appear in person and not by proxy." This resolution was referred to a committee of five. The committee twice reported progress and asked further time. In March 1815, the committee was discharged on its own request and a new committee was appointed, this time a committee of three. In September two members of the committee reported. They regretted the absence of their chairman "by which they have been been deprived of his opinions." They went on to say "they are satisfied for themselves, it would be improper for the Grand Lodge to adopt said resolution. . . That by a fair construction of the Masonic Constitutions and the established principles of the Order, when any officer of a Lodge is summoned to appear before this Grand Lodge to answer to any charge touching or implicating the character of the Lodge, he has a right to appear by proxy; and your committee are of opinion, it would be highly dangerous to take it away."
This report was read and accepted.
This astonishing report, and the action upon it, was not allowed to go unchallenged. At the following Stated Communication, December 27, 1815, the following protest was presented:
"Whereas the Mt. Wl. Gd. Lodge of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts accepted a report of a Committee at the Quarterly communication in September last which advanced the following principle. Viz. That the Master & Wardens of a lodge, when summoned to appear in Grand Lodge, and answer to any charges brought against the Lodge, over which they preside, are not bound in duty to appear in person but may be represented by Proxy:
"And whereas in the opinion of the undersigned, the adoption of this Report most seriously affects the rights and Prerogatives of this Grand Lodge & all other Masonic bodies; they respectfully request that this their solemn Protest against said Act, may be entered on the records of the Grand Lodge as a permanent declaration of their dissent, and an evidence that they have not assisted in the Establishment of a principle, which is an unconstitutional and dangerous encroachment on the Authority of all Institutions of Masonry.
"The undersigned are sensible that error arises from an undue exercise of the most laudable feelings.— Those kind affections and liberal sentiments which, as masons, we are taught to cherish may sometimes lead us to view the faults of each other, through so dense a medium of brotherly love, as to completely refract the rays of truth, and convey an Inverted image to the mind. An erroneous impression being once made, We call forth all our energies for its support, & in our zeal to effect a favorite object, we lose sight of those principles which ought to govern, and are essential for general security. Thus with the best intentions, we may be, imperceptibly, led to support the most unreasonable dogmas.
"To causes of this nature may be attributed the adoption of the unmasonick Act protested against.
"The constitutions of Free masonry are, from the nature of the Institution, totally different from all other Constitutions. The most obligatory principles are not and cannot be written, and upon these rests the power, by which the written Constitutions are enforced. In judging them of the correctness of any Masonic Act, we are not to consult a political bill of Rights nor the voluminous acts of civil jurisprudence; neither ought we to suffer ourselves to be influenced, in the least degree, by the particular forms of government under which we live; but on the contrary, we should keep our minds singly directed to the first principles of our peculiar Institution, and the Ancient Usages of the Craft.
"The first, and most important of all the principles of masonry are contained in the obligations, which every man takes upon him, on entering the fraternity. These cannot by any mason be violated, without his forfeiting all claim to morality or Integrity; much, less can he expect to retain the character or enjoy any of the privileges of a Mason.
"No one who has acquired the honour of a Seat in this Grand Lodge, can be ignorant of the solemn nature of a summons and the necessity of giving implicit obedience to its mandate, whether Issuing from this Grand Lodge, or from any regularly constituted lodge. Nothing short of absolute inability can absolve a Mason from his obligation to perform this duty; and in such a Case it is incumbent on him to present the evidence of his inability to the tribunal that summoned him; which, without doubt would exercise the utmost liberality, and give the most favorable construction to his representations, should a proper disposition be exhibited on his part. It is presumed no one will deny that this principle is strictly Correct, as it respects Masons individually; how is it possible then, that it ceases to be so, when applied to them collectively? Do masons lose any of their accountability by uniting themselves into a Lodge? On the contrary, their obligations and duties are increased; particularly towards the Grand Lodge which constituted them. They renew their obligations, and enter into more explicit bond to adhere to the Ancient usages of the Craft and to obey all Edicts and Regulations of the Grand Lodge. Should it be thought necessary for the purpose of securing the Order, and good government of the Craft, or for any other important object, to summon every individual of a Lodge to appear in Grand Lodge, it would be the duty of every individual to give his attendance accordingly, not by Proxy, but in propria persona. Such is the solemn & Obligatory nature of a Summons according to ancient & established Usage.
"If this principle be correct when applied to every individual of a Lodge, the obligation is still stronger, when applied to the Master and Wardens, for they are accountable for the Conduct of the Lodge over which they preside, and it is presumed are better acquainted with the proceedings, than any other individual composing it.—
"Hence should it be thought advisable in any instance to wave the right of summoning every individual to answer for the disorderly conduct of his Lodge there is a peculiar propriety in the Master and Wardens being designated for this purpose; and it should be consider'd as a measure resulting from an accommodating & conciliatory disposition. And it is the indispensable duty of the Officers thus summoned to present themselves before the Grand Lodge. It is presumed that the Committee to whom this important subject was referred, did not duly reflect on the wide distinction that exists between the nature of a Summons, and that of a common Notification to attend the Communications of the Grand Lodge.
"One is, in some degree, optional, the other is an absolute Command, which the person, or officer summoned is bound to obey. In the one Case the lodges are called upon to attend to their own general interests and Concerns: and in this Case the lodge has its election, either to be represented by its master and wardens, or by one Proxy as may suit its own Convenience. Here the observations of the committee are, in some degree applicable; for the Gd. Lodge has conceded this right to the Lodges under its Jurisdiction, and it would be hazardous to attempt the innovation of revoking it.
"In this case however the lodge is to be represented by Proxy not the Master and Wardens In the other Case, the interests of the Fraternity at large, are concerned, which it is the duty & prerogative of the Gd. Lodge to watch over and protect. When these are invaded and cannot be otherwise defended the solemnity of a summons is adopted, either to make suitable enquiry on the Subject, or to punish the offenders according to their deserts - And it cannot be qualified nor evaded, consistently with the fundamental principles of the institution.
"Should it be urged that this explanation of the Obligatory nature of a Summons has a severe effect on distant Lodges, it may be answered, that so long as they keep themselves within Compass and act upon the Square there is no danger of their being incommoded with its operation; for it is an established principle to reserve a summons for the most important occasions.— when a spirit of disorganization is apparent— when disunion is to be prevented, or when subordinate Lodges show a disposition to disavow their allegiance, and violate their most Sacred engagements.
Boston, A.L. 5815."
Signed,
- BENJ. RUSSELL FRANCIS J. OLIVER
- JOSIAH BARTLETT CALEB BUTLER
- THOMAS DENNIE ELIJAH MORSE
- THADDEUS M.HARRIS PAUL DEAN
- JOHN SOLEY HENRY FOWLE
- SHUBAEL BELL JOHN ABBOT
- EZEKIEL BASCOM ANDr. SIGOURNEY
- JOHN DIXWELL.
An analysis of the signatures to this protest is very interesting as showing the weight of personal prestige behind it. Eight of the signers, Russell, Bartlett, Soley, Dixwell, Oliver, Butler, Dean, and Abbot, had been or were later Grand Masters. Heading the list was the presiding Grand Master, and included was Soley, then Grand Secretary, and later Grand Master. Harris, Past Deputy Grand Master, was, as is known one of the great leaders of the Graft. Morse was to be Deputy Grand Master and later Grand Treasurer. Bell and Fowle, the latter especially one of the most prominent men in the Craft at that period, had both filled the offices of both Junior and Senior Grand Warden. Dennis was a Past and Sigourney the present Grand Treasurer, while Rev. Bro. Bascom had served with distinction as Master of his Lodge, Grand Chaplain, and District Deputy Grand Master.
The protest was referred to a committee of five which included Isaiah Thomas and Timothy Bigelow. This committee evidently found the arguments of the Protest too strong to be attacked and made no report at the March Quarterly of 1817. Oliver being then Grand Master, Grand Lodge discharged the committee and voted to ask the Grand Master to appoint a new one. This he did, but the new committee was no more successful than the other. It never reported.
When the Grand Constitutions were amended in 1818 Grand Master Oliver, on declaring a vote expunging a certain article in the then existing code, "remarked that he wished it to be explicitly understood that this decision was not considered as affecting the unalterable and inalienable right of the Grand Lodge to require the personal attendance of any member of the Fraternity upon a regular summons, a right which had been transmitted from the earliest ages, and which he could not consistently with the obligations he considered himself under, suffer to be questioned, so long as he had the honor to preside over the Grand Lodge." That definitely settled the matter. The Protest was quite unanswerable and the principles laid down therein have remained the law of the Grand Lodge.
We have seen how an English Port Captain had treated Russell in the matter of some American prisoners of war. That Masonic charity was not hindered by war was again demonstrated in 1814. At the December Quarterly a committee from Essex Lodge presented a petition "stating that the town of Salem, in which their Lodge is located, continues to be a depot for prisoners of war, among whom are many Brethren of the Craft who merit and require the charitable notice of the Fraternity. They pray on behalf of said Lodge, that the Grand Lodge would take the subject into consideration and afford relief as in their wisdom and ability may be deemed expedient."
The petition was referred to a committee upon whose recommendation the Grand Lodge appropriated five hundred dollars for "the relief of distressed prisoners of the Masonic family, who, in the course of calamitous war, in which our country is engaged, may be brought among us," voted an appeal to the Lodges in Boston and vicinity and other populous places to remit to the Grand Lodge quarterly during the continuance of the war the fees of one candidate, or thirty dollars annually, and asking from every other Lodge a contribution of ten dollars a year, and appointed a board of seven Commissioners of the Prisoners Fund. The war theoretically closed with the signing of the Treaty of Ghent, December 24, 1814, but owing to slowness of communication the Battle of New Orleans was fought two weeks later and hostilities continued at sea until the latter part of March, 1815. There was a good deal of detail to be arranged regarding the repatriation of prisoners and the like. The Commissioners of the Prisoners Fund made a final report at the September Quarterly of 1815. They had drawn from the appropriation one hundred and fifty dollars. They had used one hundred and thirty-one dollars and sixty-eight cents for the relief of eighteen prisoners, three of whom were Masters of Vessels. The balance had been returned to the Grand Treasurer. The Grand Lodge assumed the entire expense. Thanks were voted to the commissioners and arrangements were made to notify the Lodges that the conclusion (bf peace rendered the contributions, which had been called for unnecessary and to return any sums which had been paid in by Lodges. There were pleasant episodes even in war. We shall see others in a later and much larger war.
One of the conditions which arose out of the slow and difficult communication of this period,probably intensified by the much greater reticence regarding all Masonic proceedings than now prevail, was the difficulty of preventing rejected applicants from obtaining degrees in some other than the rejecting Lodge. It must be remembered that the familiar system of the territorial jurisdiction of Lodges was not yet established. At the December Quarterly in 1814 a committee was appointed to investigate the matter and report legislation. The committee reported at the December Quarterly in 1815, but their report was recommitted for amendment. The amended report was presented at the Stated Communication, December 27, and was adopted. It recommended that "No candidate whose application may be rejected by a Lodge shall be initiated in any Lodge other than the one to which he first applied, without a recommendation from Six members of said Lodge, of whom the Master and Wardens shall be three; and it shall be the duty of every Lodge, immediately to communicate all rejections to the Grand Lodge, to the several Lodges within the Masonic District, and to the two nearest Lodges of any adjacent State, if such Lodges be within the distance of thirty miles. And if any Mason, knowingly, assist,.or recommend for initiation, to any Lodge whatever, any candidate, rejected as aforesaid, who may not have obtained a recommendation, as is before provided, such Mason shall be expelled from or debarred the privileges of the Institution." The report was accepted-. It was the basis of all subsequent legislation on the subject. It will be noted that it gave the rejecting Lodge perpetual control of the candidate, and that owing to the indefinite nature of the territorial sovereignty of Grand Lodges it crossed state lines. It was not until 1936 that the Grand Constitutions were amended to recognize the principle that one Grand Lodge can not legislate for another and the only proper course in case of conflict of laws is to recognize the regularity of whatever is regular when it is done. Conditions in later years warranted dropping the requirement of immediate notification of all presumably interested parties.
The matter of District Deputy Grand Lodges had been more or less considered ever since the beginning of the District Deputy Grand Master system. At the December Quarterly of 1814 a memorial was presented by Past Grand Master Thomas and two Past District Deputy Grand Masters, James J. Thompson and Ezekiel L.Bascom, on the subject of forming District Deputy Grand Lodges "in certain cases and fur the consideration of local subjects." The memorial was referred to three very wise members of Grand Lodge, John Abbot, Thaddeus Mason Harris, and John B. Hammatt, Their report was much more important and significant than a cursory reading would indicate. The memorial has not been preserved, but the report indicates that some difficulty or other had arisen in the Sixth Masonic District, where the memorialists resided, and it was desired to convened District Deputy Grand Lodge to deal with it. The memorialists apparently thought that there should be general legislation to cover not only this but any future similar cases.
The committee reported at the following June Communication. They recommended that the specific request contained in the memorial be granted and laid down careful directions as to the conduct of the District Deputy Grand Lodge so authorized. The concluding paragraph of the report reads "The committee further report that not being fully satisfied of the expediency of convoking District Deputy Grand Lodges, in all cases, as the Craft might thereby be subjected to additional duty and increased expense without corresponding advantage, they have not exhibited any general system, but confined the foregoing report to the case started in the memorial, as in this instance a District Deputy Grand Lodge may conduce to the harmony of a part of the great Masonic family."
The members of the committee were doubtless astute enough to see that a general system might well be the entering wedge for something like the English Provincial Grand Lodge system which would give the Masonic Districts a considerable degree of autonomy and defeat the essential purpose of the District Deputy Grand Master system. They wisely refrained from raising that question, on which there would probably been considerable difference of opinion, and based their objection on the obvious and convincing argument of trouble and expense. The acceptance of this report effectually disposed of the District Deputy Grand Lodge question. We never hear of it again. Only one vestige of it remains. When the District Deputy Grand Master makes his official visitation he appoints certain Brethren to act as Wardens, Treasurer, Secretary, and Marshal. This adds to the dignity of the occasion and serves a convenient purpose as well in carry out the required duties of the visitation. It is now customary for the District Deputy to use the same Secretary and Marshal throughout his term of office, a very wise and helpful custom.
From this period dates also the first groping movements toward the establishment of a Grand Lodge Library, a movement which after several false starts and more than one disaster finally culminated in the present Massachusetts Grand Lodge Library, one of the finest in the United States.
Thaddeus Mason Harris was a man of literary tastes and abilities as we have already seen. His work in Grand Lodge, especially as compiler of the Constitutions of 1798, had interested him in the philosophy and history of Freemasonry, He had collected a considerable number of Masonic books and conceived the idea that these ought to have a wider sphere of usefulness than his study shelves afforded. Accordingly at the December Quarterly of 1814 he offered to sell thai to the Grand Lodge. Like all the ministers of that period Harris had but a meager income, upon which there were many calls, and he could not afford to give the books to Grand Lodge, perhaps even needed the money to be derived from their sale. As usual the matter was referred to a committee which reported the next March endorsing the project of a Library and recommending the purchase of the Harris books at the price named by the owner. The report was accepted and the committee was authorized to buy the books, draw on the Grand Treasurer for the price, and "to report suitable regulations for the safe keeping, future use, and increase of the Library of the Grand Lodge." The books were ordered to be placed for the time being in the hands of Rev. Bro. Paul Dean.
The whole matter, though well intended, was premature. There does not seem to have been any general interest in a Library for a good many years. The Grand Lodge had no place to use a Library and no person to serve as a Librarian. A considerable number of volumes of Proceedings and other material had come to the Corresponding Grand Secretary, but he had simply stored them and no attempt was made to combine them with the Harris collection. The committee never reported any regulations, as required, and for the present the whole matter lapsed with purchase of the Harris collection.
Up to this time the Grand Constitutions, while fixing the fee for the degrees had made no provisions regarding its collection. It was assumed that collection must be made because a part went to Grand Lodge, but the matter rested there. A rather interesting question had arisen already in connection with the fees of ministers. As early as 1809 Timothy Whiting, District Deputy for the Fifth Masonic District, had stated that Middlesex Lodge had initiated a minister, apparently without fee, and asked that the portion of the usual fee due to the Grand Lodge be remitted to the Lodge and the request was unanimously granted. In 1813 the Grand Lodge received a committee report "That from the best information they have been able to obtain, it appears to have been customary, upon the application of a clergyman for initiation, to remit the usual fee. Your committee are therefore of opinion, that such cases, and in such only, the fee payable to the Grand Lodge, on initiations, may in the future be remitted." The report was recommitted "with directions, that they define the denomination of the clergyman the report is intended to embrace." The committee reported the recommendation back amended by inserting the words "ordained and permanently settled clergyman." In this form the recommendation was adopted. The resolution did not cover the Methodists, who were becoming increasingly active in Massachusetts, as they made great use of lay preachers and one of the chief points in their system was the itinerancy. The discrimination was probably not made on religious grounds, but rather because it did not seem wise to encourage the initiation to transient sojourners in the community.
This Matter was soon merged in a much more sweeping measure. At the December Quarterly in 1814, on motion of Zachariah G. Whitman, a committee was appointed to consider the expediency of legislation to prohibit taking notes or giving credit for fees. The committee reported at the next Quarterly:
"Whereas great inconveniences have arisen, by several of the Lodges, under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge, taking notes of hand from initiates for their initiating fees, whereby they have been unable to discharge their dues to the Grand Lodge,promptly; and persons that were unworthy have obtained the degrees by reason of credit allowed them for said fees, which have been finally lost and the cause of charity suffered thereby:
Now to prevent, in future, the aforesaid inconveniencies, VOTED, That no subordinate Lodge under this jurisdiction shall, hereafter, take notes of hand from initiates for their initiation fees, or grant any time of credit therefor: and all such fees shall be paid to said Lodge at the time any candidate shall receive the degrees."
The report was referred to a committee and upon their report and recommendation was adopted at the December Quarterly, 1815.
A strict interpretation of the last part of the statute would forbid the remission of any fees. Either there was some doubt as to the meaning of the statute in view of the previous legislation concerning clergymen, or the old practice was continued without authority, as we find in the general revision of 1818 a provision that "the initiation fee may be remitted to all Clergymen, or persons approbated by competent authority to preach the Gospel, who shall be received into the order: and the Grand Lodge will remit their initiation to the Lodge wherein such Clergymen were received." This re-enacted the legislation of 1813 and broadened its scope. This remained the law until 1843, when the part relating to preachers was omitted from the general revision of the Grand Constitutions.
The prohibition of notes and credit is still the law, but has been clarified by forbidding giving the degrees for no fee or for a reduced fee, or returning the fee or any part of it after the degrees have been conferred.
One other precedent of importance was established during Russell's administration. In 1816 republican Lodge petitioned Grand Lodge for a loan of two Thousand dollars to enable them to finish a hall for a meeting place. On report of a committee the Grand Lodge voted: "That it would be inexpedient, in any case, for the Grand Lodge to loan money to a subordinate Lodge" and the petition was not granted.
At the end of 1816 agitation was started for the establishment of the office of Deputy Grand Secretary. There was considerable discussion of the matter in Grand Lodge and it was voted to have such an officer. A Deputy Grand Secretary was actually appointed for 1818. The office does not appear to have justified itself, as it is not recognized in the Grand Constitutions of 1818 and no further reference to it appears.
One incident of touching personal interest connected with the war of 1812 deserves record. One Richard Holston, whose Lodge membership we unfortunately we do not know, was captured by the English and confined in Dartmoor prison, where he died. Somehow he had been allowed to retain in his possession his Masonic diploma, sash, and apron. Feeling himself about to die he returned these objects to a friend, probably a Brother Mason, with the request that they be given to the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. In,due time they were delivered and received by the Grand Lodge with a warm expression of grateful recognition of Bro. Holston's devotion and thoughtfulness. Unfortunately these objects, like so many others, perished in the fire of 1864.
In 1816 the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania ceased corresponding with the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and Henry Fowle was told in private conversation by members of that Grand Lodge that it was understood in Pennsylvania that the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts had chartered a Lodge of Black Masons, held communication with them, and sanctioned their proceedings. Fowle reported this to the Grand Lodge and a formal communication was sent to the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania to say that this Grand Lodge had never chartered a Lodge of colored men, that it was aware of the existence of such a Lodge originally chartered by the Grand Lodge of England, but that it held no Masonic intercourse with it or with any of its members. One would have supposed that the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania would have taken the small amount of trouble needed to ascertain the facts before getting excited by a rumor.
£44. The misunderstanding undoubtedly arose from the activities of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. Confusion has arisen from time to time between that Grand Lodge and the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. Within a few years one of the colored Grand Lodges claimed to have been chartered by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, Exactly what basis the claimants supposed they had, if indeed they really supposed they had any, is not clear. Probably it went back to the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. It may be as well to state here that the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts has never chartered a Grand Lodge and does not think itself competent to do so. We shall see how this matter was dealt with when the Grand Lodge of Maine was set up in 1820.
An interesting and rather amusing instance of the tendency to look to Grand Lodge for action quite beyond its powers occurred at this time. Masonic song books had been published from time to time for many years. Jordan Lodge felt itself outraged by the appearance of one called the Masonic Minstrel and memorialized the Grand Lodge to do something about it. Grand Lodge replied to the effect that the book was indeed worthless, or worse, but that it did not possess any inquisitorial power or authority to control such publications. The only remedy was for Lodges and individuals to be guided by their own taste and sense of propriety in the purchase and use of such books.
The close of Russell's administration at the end of 1816 marks in a very real sense the end of an era. For a quarter of a century the western world had been in constant turmoil. The French Revolution began in 1789 and the monarchy was destroyed in 1792. The French Republic went to war with all Europe and war continued, with brief intervals, until Napoleon finally fell from power at Waterloo in 1815. With the turn of the century the conflict became practically a life and death struggle between England and Napoleon, which has been aptly characterized as a battle between a whale and an elephant. England, by Orders in Council, attempted to blockade French ports and possessions while Napoleon, by his Berlin and Milan Decrees, attempted to build up a "Continental System" which should prevent England from trading with the Continent. Neutral commerce was crushed between the upper and nether millstones. The United States suffered particularly, especially New England, whose interests were predominantly commercial.
The efforts to set up a commercial warfare of our own has already been noted. Matters went on from bad to worse until at last we blundered into the disastrous War of 1812. This war poetically swept our flag from the sea, and not only destroyed our commerce but indirectly inflicted enormous loss on the non-commercial sections. Our infant navy covered itself with glory and inflicted painful wounds on the pride of England, but from a military point of view its work was negligible, with the exception of the victories on the Lakes by Macdonough and Perry which crippled English attempts to invade from Canada. The New England privateers did much damage to English commerce and furnished occupation to many seamen and profits to some owners.
Investigation has, however, shown that with losses of privateers, recapture of prizes, and unsuccessful voyages privateering was not on the whole a profitable business. Practically the only offset against the distress caused in New England by the war was the stimulus given to starting manufactures to supply the place of goods which could not be imported. In the closing days of the war the United States government was in a state of collapse. A little longer and the collapse would have become evident. The government was at the end of its financial resources, Congress was incapable of effective action, the administration, civil and military alike, was helplessly inefficient. Only the securing of peace saved the country from downright disaster.
Freemasonry shared in the general distress, and this fact must be kept constantly in mind in reading the Masonic history of the period. In the years 1800 to 1816 inclusive the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts chartered fifty-eight Lodges. In the second half of that period the number annually decreased until during the period actually covered by the war, June 18, 1912 to December 24, 1814 only two Lodges were chartered. The next one came in September, 1815.
The peace with England was really a part of the general pacification of the western world which followed the elimination of Napoleon. The vexatious interferences with neutral trade ceased and commerce was free to seek its natural channels. Immediate recovery took place in the United States . Prosperity returned and Freemasonry shared it with the rest of the community, as evidenced , among other things, by an immediate increase in the number of new Lodges. With the return of prosperity discontent naturally disappeared, less criticism was leveled at the administration, and political party feelings, which had been intense and acrimonious, soon subsided. Monroe, who had been a prominent, but not altogether happy, member of Madison's administration, was handily elected President in 1816 and at his second election, in 1820, only one Presidential Elector voted against him, and he did so for no political reason but because he had an idea that a presidential election should not be unanimous.
The period we have been reviewing is marked by certain interesting features. One is the frequent changes in the location of Lodges. Lodges, particularly in the western part of the state, commonly served a group of towns. When a Lodge was chartered it was located in the town where most of the petitioners lived or the prospect for additions seemed best. As time passed it often happened that the center of Masonic population changed to some other town. The members living there wanted the Lodge moved to suit their convenience. Generally these matters were amicably arranged, but sometimes they led to bitter disputes and one party would petition for removal while the other would file a protest. Grand Lodge acted on these petitions with nothing before it except a petition, and perhaps a protest.
In September of 1813, the Grand Treasurer, Andrew Sigourney, one of the best and wisest members of Grand Lodge presented a resolution:"That no petition for removal of a Lodge from the place it is located, be sustained in Grand Lodge, unless said petition is sanctioned by the District Deputy Grand Master of the District where such Lodge is situated." This was referred to a committee of which the wise and experienced Henry Fowle was chairman. Desirable as such a measure appeared, it immediately encountered opposition. Massachusetts always has and now does cherish the principle of the largest possible local autonomy. Masonic Lodges share this feeling and are always quick to resent any invasion of what they consider their local rights. As a consequence any Grand Lodge legislation which appears to restrict the Lodge in any way has always to be preceded by a campaign of education to convince the Craft that the proposed legislation is for the general good. The Lodges took alarm at a proposition which would give the District Deputy Grand Master a certain measure of control. As representative of the Grand Master the District Deputy was well enough, but when it came to giving him personal authority sufficient to prevent a Lodge from moving if it so chose, they did not like it. Moreover, they thought there were other Lodges to be considered besides the one which wanted to move. Consequently it was not until December 1815 that the committee reported. They then brought in a resolution which was adopted, "That in future, no petition for the removal of a Lodge from the place where it is located.be sustained in Grand Lodge unless said petition be sanctioned by the District Deputy Grand Master of the District where said Lodge is situated; and the approbation of the Lodge nearest the place where the said Lodge is intended to be held; the same being signified in writing to the Grand Lodge." This remained the law on the subject, except for modifications required by the defining of territorial jurisdiction of Lodges in 1843, until the revision of 1930. At that time there had been no removals of Lodges for many years and the statute was shortened to read "A Lodge shall not remove from the place where it is located without first obtaining the consent of the Grand Lodge.upon petition."
As a natural result of prevailing conditions the Lodges found great difficulty in meeting their financial obligations. Under the Constitutions of 1811 each Lodge paid annually a Lodge fee of eight dollars and three dollars for each initiate. The fixed fee of nineteen dollars left the Lodge sixteen dollars for its treasury. Petitions to the Grand Lodge for remission of these fees were frequent. All these petitions were carefully considered. The majority were refused, but in some cases where special conditions existed relief was granted. A committee headed by Henry Fowle, reporting on some of these petitions to the June Quarterly of 181B said: "That they have taken into due consideration the numerous applications for remission of dues to the Grand Lodge, and also the importance of that respectable and honorable support which it is the duty of every Brother of the Masonic family to afford to the parent Grand Lodge as well as the establishment of the Grand Charity Fund, and are of opinion that when any Lodge finds it inconvenient to comply with the Rules and Regulations of the Grand Lodge, which they have promised to support and maintain it is their duty to return their charter and regalia to the Grand Lodge to be deposited, during their inability, among the archives of Masonry: and that it is inexpedient, unjust and inconsistent with that support, which the Grand Lodge has a right to expect from the Lodges under its jurisdiction,for them to grant remission of dues under any circumstances, as the demands of the Grand Lodge are very moderate and are chiefly paid by the initiates." The report was accepted. The business revival speedily ended these petitions.
An examination of the annual reports of the Committee on Finance shows that on the financial side the District Deputy Grand Master system was not yet functioning with entire efficiency. Each Deputy was supposed to visit every Lodge in his District at least once a year, but in the case of the more distant Lodges they might delegate their duties "to some suitable Brother". No time was fixed for the visitations except that they must be before the last week in November. The collection of returns and moneys due the Grand Lodge was not a prescribed part of the official visitation. This looseness was due to the difficulty and delay involved in travel, even for what we should now regard as negligible distances, but the results were bad. Lodges got into arrears and found it hard to get out. The Deputies were supposed to turn in returns and cash but were sometimes far from prompt in doing so. They were not, and under the circumstances hardly could be, regular in their attendance at Grand Lodge. It took time and money to get from eastern Maine or western Massachusetts to Boston. The more distant Lodges were either not represented at all or were represented by proxies who lived in or near Boston. The transmission of money was much less simple than now. Neither the banks not the Post Office were well developed. The Deputies sometimes retained collections in their possession longer than they should have and in a few unfortunate instances appear to have used the money. In one case the Grand Lodge had to accept an endorsed note for over five hundred dollars. The note, however, was paid in due time. Practically all the money thus detained was ultimately collected. In a few cases Lodges asked to be allowed to retain the Grand Lodge dues in their own possession to be administered as local charity funds. It was pointed out to them that this could not be permitted, as it amounted to practical independence of Grand Lodge. One distant Lodge addressed the neighboring Lodges in circular letters which were regarded by Grand Lodge as decidedly disloyal. A sharp reprimand brought prompt apology and disclaiming of disloyal intent.
In spite of all difficulties the Grand Lodge was steadily progressing in building up the compact and smoothly working organization of later time. The time was to come before long when the work of these years was to be tested. Tie shall see how splendidly it stood the test. When we take all the conditions into consideration we can not praise too highly the wisdom, patience, and skill shown by the Grand Masters and Grand Officers generally in this difficult formative period. The procedure of Grand Lodge was well settled on lines which have never been changed. The Quarterly Communications, then held in the evening, were short. Business was transacted smoothly and with dispatch, but without haste. Everything of any importance whatsoever was referred to a committee as soon as introduced. These committees considered the :.-; matters before them carefully and, as we have seen, sometimes took a great deal of time about it. The members of these committees enjoyed the confidence of the Grand Lodge and ordinarily their reports were simply favorable or unfavorable without much comment. Occasionally a detailed report was made and these reports are models of sound principles and conclusive reasoning. Almost the only exception was the ill-fated report on answering summonses by proxy, which the Grand Lodge rather thoughtlessly accepted. The counter blast which that action called forth was a good deal like using a sixteen inch gun to shoot a sparrow - but the sparrow was very dead when it was all over.
As a consequence of this method of procedure there was little or no discussion in Grand Lodge. The real business was prepared in committee rooms and there was no time wasted in talk in Grand Lodge. This is as true now as it was a century and a Quarter ago. The same method prevails with the same admirable results.
