FROM MOUTH TO EAR by Missouri Freemasons

FROM MOUTH TO EAR THE GENEALOGY OF OUR MISSOURI RITUAL

HENRY C. CHILES JUNIOR GRAND WARDEN, GRAND LODGE A. F. & A. M. OF MISSOURI

A study prepared for the Masonic Research Council of Missouri and presented at its annual meeting, Saint Joseph, Missouri, September 23, 1935

1936 PUBLISHED BY THE GRAND LODGE A. F. & A. M. OF MISSOURI

PRINTED IN U. S. A.

PRINTED BY THE OVID BELL PRESS

FULTON, M;O.

PLAN OF THE STUDY THE Baltimore Convention was a Masonic convention composed of distinguished members of the Order, representatives of Grand Lodges, held in the City of Baltimore, Maryland, May 8-17, 1843. The main objective of this Convention was to agree upon a "mode of work" and recommend the adoption of the same to the various Grand Lodges of the United States, to the end that the "mode of work" might be uniform throughout the Nation. This study attempts to answer, and will be found to follow a general outline suggested by, five questions namely: (1) What is the meaning of the phrase, "mode of work" ? (2) What was the "mode of work" prior to the Convention? . (3) Why was the Convention held? (4) What did the Convention do? ( 5) What evidence is there that the present Missouri ritual follows the "mode of work" agreed upon by the Convention?

[3]

Part I THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND SAINT John the Baptist's Day, the twenty-fourth day of June, the day of light and roses, marks the high noon of the year, and is one of two days in each year recognized by immemorial custom among Freemasons as occasions of celebration. It was on this day, in the year 1717, that the modern history of Freemasonry may be said to begin, for, then, at the Goose and Gridiron Alehouse in Saint Paul's Churchyard, in London, Anthony Sayer, gentleman, was elected Grand Master of Masons. This election of a Grand Master made complete the organization of the premier Grand Lodge, which had been formed pro tempore at the Apple Tree Tavern, Charles Street, Covent Garden at an unknown date (probably in 1716), by the members of four London Lodges,l and some old brethren there assembled. On the twenty-eighth day of February, 1723, new style,2 a book was published by authority of this Grand Lodge, which was the first Masonic work ever officially published, and 1 These four Lodges took their designations from the taverns or alehouses where they met, and were: (1) The Lodge meeting at the Goose and Gridiron Alehouse; (2) The Lodge meeting at the Crown Alehouse; (3) The Lodge meeting at the Apple Tree Tavern; and (4) The Lodge meeting at the Rummer and Grapes Tavern. These taverns and alehouses had signs above their doors corresponding to their names. The Builder, February, 1920, Vol. VI, p. 35; March, 1924, Vol. X, p. 82; May, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 130. 2 The shift from the Julian to the Gregorian Calendar made January 1 the beginning of the calendar year instead of March 25, and was not legally sanctioned in England until the enactment by Parliament of the Act 24 George II, c. 23, in 1752. Popularly, however, the shift was made many years previously, and "new style" was used to indicate the Gregorian, and "old style" the Julian Calendar. The same Act adjusted an error of eleven days created by the Julian Calendar, by making the third day of September, 1752, the fourteenth day of that month. [5 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

which is usually referred to as "Anderson's Constitutions," 3 because it was edited by Dr. James Anderson, who was a Presbyterian minister. The full title of this book was The Constitution, History, Laws, Charges, Orders, Regulations and Usages of the Right Worshipful Fraternity of Accepted Free Masons; Collected from Their General Records and Their Faithful Traditions of Many Ages. This title was followed by these words, "To be read at the admission of a new brother when the Master or Warden shall begin, or order some other Brother to read as follows." The work had three important parts: First, an historical introduction which purported to detail the history of Freemasonry beginning with Adam, who, it stated, "must have had the Liberal Sciences particularly Geometry, written on his Heart"; second, the "Charges of a Free-Mason," six in number and now usually called the "old" or "ancient charges," and, third, the "General Regulations" in thirty-nine articles, now usually called the "old" or "ancient constitutions:' Presumably, these three parts were to be read on the admission of a new member, and were in that respect ritualistic in their nature. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

But Anderson's Constitutions was not the ritual in the secret sense of that term. As a matter of fact, the idea of a ritual in 8 The volume contained 91 pages, exclusive of frontispiece, title-page and dedication, and was 9 by 11% inches in size. Benjamin Franklin republished it at Philadelphia, in August, 1734, making it the first Masonic book路 to be printed and published in America. A facsimile (except as to size) was published in 1924 by The Masonic Service Association of the United States, as Volume I of the Little Masonic Library. The Builder, August, 1923, Vol. IX, p. 227; September, 1923, Vol. IX, p. 283; January, 1924, Vol. X, p. 28; April, 1924, Vol. X, p. 111; September, 1924, Vol. X, p. 286; December, 1924, Vol. X, p. 372; May, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 133; June, 1926, Vol. XII, p. 167.

[6]

THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND

which every word, syllable and letter is prescribed was not evolved until long afterward. The celebrated Albert G. Mackey, in his Lexicon of Freemasonry4 said that prior to the publication of Anderson's Constitutions, Dr. Anderson and Dr. Theophilus Desaguliers, F.R.S. (the third Grand Master of the premier Grand Lodge), had arranged "the lectures" in the form of questions and answers, a catechism. And, as will presently appear, a knowledge of the catechism became the prescribed basis for working the degrees. Of these "lectures" the noted Dr: George Oliver, in his Symbol of Glory,5 stated there were three; and that the first lecture was lengthy, and the second, not so long. In his Historical Landmarks of Freemasonry, 6 he said, "The Master's part, as it was called, or in other words, the third lecture, consisted formerly of only seven questions, with very brief replies, exclusive of the Lodge examination on the principal points, which have the same reference as our present third degree . . ." 7 The point must be stressed that "the lectures" were a series of questions and answers, a catechism, a word, which, according to Webster, means "a form of instruction by question and answer." As a matter of fact, the term, "the lectures," continued to have this significance (questions and answers) and had it at the time of the Baltimore Convention in 1843. In proof 4 Second edition, Charleston, S. C, 1852, p. 274.. The first edition was pub. lished in 1845. G Lecture I, p. 17. 8 Vo1. II, p. 234, note 87. 'Beginning On page 9, Anderson's Constitutions makes reference to Solomon's Temple, and a footnote at page 11 is devoted to an accomplished workman named Hiram sent to Solomon by the King of Tyre to assist in building the Temple. It is interesting to note that in the very year (1723) Anderson's Constitutions was published, a model of Solomon's Temple was on exhibition in London. Another model was exhibited in 1759-60. A. Q. C, Vo1. XII, p. 150; Vo1. XIII, p. 24.

[7]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

of this statement, the official printed proceedings of the Convention may be quoted: The Chairman of the Standing Committee on Work stated that the Committee had, after mature deliberation, decided on the Lecture of the First Degree, and proceeded to report-Br. Moore giving the answers. 8

Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon, made this clear, when he said of the lectures: These constitute the simple text of Masonry, while the extended illustrations which are given to them by an intelligent Master or Lecturer, and which he can only derive from a careful study of scripture, of history, of the manuscript lectures of the philosophical degrees, and lastly of the published works of learned Masonic writers, constitute the commentary, without which the simple text would be comparatively barren and uninstructive. 9

A revision and improvement of "the lectures" (the catechism of Anderson and Desaguliers) was made in 1732 by Martin Clare, F.R.S., who is said to have added moral and scriptural admonitions and to have introduced an allusion to the human senses and an allusion to the theologicalladder. 10 Subsequently, Thomas Dunckerly is said to have extended and improved the lectures and he, it is stated, gave names to three rounds of the ladder .11 The author (whose name is not given) of an article entitled the "History of the Ritual," first published in 1863, stated that in 1763 the Reverend William Hutchinson revised and imPage 8, Wednesday, May 10, 1843. Second edition, p. 276. 10 Mackey's Lexicon, second edition, p. 276. 11 Ibid. Dr. Oliver in his Historical Landmarks said that in the cave of Mithra there was a ladder of seven steps, representing the "seven spheres of the planets by means of which souls ascended and descended," and that "this is precisely the ladder in Jacob's vision," Vol. I, p. 131. A ladder depicted in Cross' Chart (16th ed.) has only three rounds visible. 8

(8)

THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND

proved the lectures and introduced references to the three great pillars or supports and to the cardinal virtues. 12 WILLIAM PRESTON

William Preston (1742-1818) revised, improved and extended the lectures, and was the first great teacher of Freemasonry.13 He established a school of instruction in London for the purpose of spreading the light. After many years of study and preparation, on May 21, 1772, he delivered the first lecture "at a grand gala held at his own expense at the Crown and Anchor Tavern in the Strand." 14 In that same year he published his work entitled Illustrations of Masonry and in so doing became the "Father of the Masonic Monitor," for Preston's Illustrations, as it is popularly known, is the predecessor of our present-day monitors or manuals. Twelve editions of this book were published during Preston's lifetime. By 1774 he had completed his system of lectures and in that year he became a member of and the Master of the Lodge of Antiquity, then meeting at the Mitre Tavern in Fleet Street, and the same Lodge (then unnamed) which met at the Goose and Gridiron in 1717. In 1787, his school of instruction became the "Grand Chapter of Harodim," and in 1796 he established a Lodge of Instruction. 14 Under the provisions of Preston's last will and testament, Masonic charities benefited to the extent of one thousand pounds, and he also bequeathed "To the Right Honourable, the Earl of Moira, Acting Grand Master for the time, three 12

This article was republished in The Builder, December, 1915, Vol. I,

p.29l. 13 "The Philosophy of Masonry," by Dean Roscoe Pound, The Builder, January, 1915, Vol. I, p. 7. 14 "William Preston and the Preston Lectures," by Captain C. W. Firebrace, P. M. of the Lodge of Antiquity, The Builder, April, 1924, Vol. X, p. 101, et seq.

[9]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

hundred pounds, Three per cent Consolidated Bank Annuities, the interest of which shall be applied by him to some wellinformed Mason to deliver annually a Lecture on the First, Second or Third Degree of the order of Masonry according to the system practiced in the Lodge of Antiquity during my Mastership." 15 This provision of the will of Preston shows the importance he attached to "the lectures." And, indeed, it was the custom, in his day, not to close the Lodge without giving a lecture or a part of a lecture if time and opportunity permitted. 16 This custom also obtained in America and no doubt was the source from which Thomas Smith Webb derived the theme of his "Master's Song," 17 the first verse and chorus of which are quoted: I sing the Mason's glory, Whose prying mind doth burn, Unto complete perfection Our mysteries to learn; Not those who visit Lodges To eat and drink their fill, Not those who at our meetings Hear lectures 'gainst their will, But only those whose pleasure, At every Lodge can be, T' improve themselves by lectures, In glorious Masonry. Hail! glorious Masonry! Hail! glorious Masonry! T' improve themselves by lectures, In glorious Masonry. The Builder, April, 1924. Ibid. Many readers will recall that this custom was also reflected in the ancient form of the degree of P. M. IT Cross' Chart, 16th ed., 1853, p. 183. 15

[ 10 ]

THE LECTURES IN ENG'LAND

Preston divided 18 the lectures into sections, and the sections he subdivided into clauses. The first lecture had six sections; the second, four; the third, twelve. Of the six sections in the first lecture, the first section had five clauses; 19 the second, third and fourth sections had six clauses each; the fifth had five, and the last, six. These divisions into sections and the subdivisions into clauses are said to have been more or less arbitrary and to have been made more for the purpose of allotting a task to a pupil than for the purpose of making a logical division of the subject matter. In the Grand Chapter of Harodim, the sections were assigned each year, by the Chief Harod, to competent brethren who were called "Sectionists." These Sectionists assigned the clauses, in their respective sections of the lectures, to brethren who were called "Clause Holders," One who had committed to memory all the sections became a "Lecturer."20 PRESTON'S METHOD, PURPOSE AND PHILOSOPHY

The celebrated Rob Morris, in his Monitor, explained Preston's method of teaching: sa "The Masonic Ritual in the United States" by A. L. Kress, The Builder, October, 1923, Vol. X, p. 292, et seq. 19 Ibid., in which the questions of the fourth clause of the first section are stated to have been: 1. Whence came you principally? 2. What recommendation do you bring? 3. What other recommendation? 4. What is the purpose of your visit? 5. How do you hope to accomplish it? 6. What was the first grand natural object you viewed? 7. Through what medium? 8. What was the second grand natural object you viewed? 9. Through what medium? 10. What was the third grand natural object you viewed? 11. Through what medium? ~ Firebrace in The Builder, April, 1924, Vol. X, p. 103. [ 11 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

The learner was first enjoined to commit to memory a catechism, or form of questions and answers for each Degree. This catechism being committed to memory, the learner was supposed to possess the method of work, that is the drill and drama, or ceremony, of Masonry, which was made literally to conform to the Lectures. Thus, no material innovation could be introduced without changing the language and order of the Lectures. 21

Morris further explained that as a part of the answers to the questions were considered to be exoteric in their nature, that portion could be found in Preston's Illustrations. Esoteric matters were suggested by means of representations of various symbols and emblems. These representations were not illustrations printed in the book but were depicted upon what were called "floor cloths" or "carpets." 22 This explanation 21 Quoted by Ray V. Denslow in his The Masonic Conservators, published by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, 1931, page 33. The reader will note that Morris used the phrase "method of work," which is synonymous with "mode of work," and his explanation answers our first question, "What is the meaning of the phrase 'mode of work'?" 22 W. W. Covey-Crump, in The Builder, May, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 151, stated that "the designs originated in sundry crude geometrical diagrams, which, in the Freemasonry prevailing in England during the early part of the eighteenth century were usually drawn (with chalk, charcoal or similar substances) upon the tavern floor when a candidate was to be initiated. The task of thus 'drawing the lodge' as it was termed, being regarded as a rather menial operation, was frequently delegated to one of the inferior officers; but the duty of erasing the diagram when the ceremony ended usually devolved upon the newly entered Apprentice:' From this developed the delineation on canvas or other cloth, concerning which the same writer stated that, "the use of these floor cloths was primarily intended merely for the first degree, but emblems associated with superior degrees were soon added; and thus the diagram became a pictorial design desirable for use upon all occasions of Masonic business, because it naturally added dignity to the proceedings. Various appellations were given to the new appurtenance, especially when in many instances it developed into a framed canvas or a wooden panel, but gradually the terms 'tresselboard' and 'lodge board' predominated, and the latter became familiarly abbreviated to 'the lodge: " These were also known as "floorings," a term which Mackey in his Lexicon (2d ed., p. 150) defined as "a framework of board or canvas on which the emblems of any particular degree are inscribed, for the assistance of the Master in giving a lecture. It is so called because formerly it was the custom to

[ 12 ]

THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND

makes understandable the reference which may still be found in monitors to the "Master's Carpet." Another reason William Preston is of peculiar interest to Freemasons of the United States is that his Masonic philosophy is still expressed in the work today. Preston believed that mankind could be brought nearer perfection by enlightenment, by the diffusion of knowledge, by the spread of education. Preston admonished the brethren to study and to acquire learning, and, as he lived in a day when educational advantages were limited and restricted, he purposed to make of each Masonic Lodge a school where a complete system of inscribe these designs on the floor of the lodge room in chalk, which was wiped out when the lodge was closed. It is the same as the 'carpet' or 'tracing board.''' â&#x20AC;˘ The form of ceremony for constituting a new lodge adopted by the BaltiÂˇ more Convention (Official Proceedings, p. 21) included in the division of the grand procession composed of the new lodge, "two brethren carrying the lodge." A footnote asterisked to the word "lodge" contains the single word, "flooring." In Benoist's print which depicts the procession of the Scald Miserable Masons of April 17, 1742, (frontispiece, The Builder, October, 1917, Vol. III), are shown two persons carrying long poles which support high in the air a large rectangular object, depicted on which is a coffin lid, on which are the capital letters M B and above the top end of the lid is what appears to be a shrub. Marching behind is another person, also carrying a pole, which braces the rectangular object. An explanatory note on the print states that the object is "A Master Mason's Lodge." Elsewhere in the procession is shown another rectangular object, of similar size, supported by poles as just described, and on this object are depicted the square, level and plumb, the sun and moon, a five-pointed star, and a rule divided into three equal parts. The term "Master's Carpet" came to have such general acceptance that it lost its original meaning, as is indicated by the fact that there appears in the 16th edition of Cross' Chart (1853) a frontispiece, a full page plate on which are depicted various symbols, entitled "Master's Carpet." According to Dr. Mackey's Lexicon (2d ed., p. 287), the word "lodge" also had this meaning: "The lodge, technically speaking, is a piece of furniture, made in imitation of the Ark of the Covenant, which was constructed by Bezaleel, according to the form prescribed by God Himself, and which, after the erection of the Temple was kept in the Holy of Holies. As it contained the table of the law, the lodge contains the Book of Constitutions and the warrant of constitution granted by the Grand Lodge."

[ 13 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

organized knowledge would be taught. 23 This philosophy and this purpose are strongly evidenced when mention is made of the seven liberal arts and sciences and when instruction is imparted concerning architecture, geometry, music, astronomy, etc. Monitors of today provide further evidence in that noble passage where we are told what to do in youth and what in manhood, that we may in old age ÂŤenjoy the happy reflections consequent upon a well spent life." EIGHTEENTH CENTURY WORK

Before transferring our study of ÂŤthe lectures" from England to America, let us picture, so far as possible, the making of a Mason, in London, in the eighteenth century, by quotations from sources worthy of serious consideration: Writing in The Builder, January, 1927, Vol. XIII, page 27, A. L. Kress and R. J. Meekren, said: This is the fact, that many Lodges through the eighteenth century were opened and closed and worked with the members seated about a table. A great variety of practice seems to have existed. Even in the second half of the century, it would appear that in some places candidates were initiated, the Lodge being so arranged. In other places initiation ceremonies were performed in another room, or another part of the same room, or the table removed. Where the more slovenly 23 Pound's "Philosophy of Masonry," The Buildef', January, 1915, Vol. I, p. 7, et seq. "Knowledge is proud that he has learn'd so much; Wisdom is humble that he knows no more."-William Cowper; The Task, Book VI. "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom; and with all thy getting, get understanding."-Proverbs IV:7. "Most of mankind's troubles are man-made, and arise from the compound effects of decisions taken without knowledge, ambitions uncontrolled by wisdom, and judgments that lack understanding. The blend of wisdom with knowledge would restrain men from contributing to this endless cycle of folly, but only understanding can guide them towards positive progress."-Hart, in Colonel Lawrence.

[ 14 ]

THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND

habit prevailed, as we may surely call that in which the members remained at the table, it is probable that the diagrams that properly were drawn on the floor were transferred to the table.

Dr. J. W. S. Mitchell, in his Masonic History and Digest, (10th ed., 1870, Vol. II, p. 696) under the title "Arrangement," quoted Dr. George Oliver as follows: The appointment and arrangement of a Masonic Lodge room in the eighteenth century were very different to our present practice. A long table was extended from one end of the room to the other, covered with a green cloth, on which were placed duplicates of the ornaments, furniture and jewels, intermixed with Masonic glasses for refreshment. At one end of this table was placed the Master's pedestal, and at the other, that of the Senior Warden, while about the middle of the table, in the South, the Junior Warden was placed, and the brethren sat around as at a common ordinary.24 When there was a candidate to be initiated, the candidate was paraded outside the whole; and on such occasions, after he had been safely deposited at the Northeast angle of the Lodge, a very short explanation of the design of Freemasonry or a brief portion of the lecture was considered sufficient before the Lodge was called from labor to refreshment. The song, the toast, the sentiment, went merrily round, and it was not until the brethren were tolerably satiated that the Lodge was resumed and the routine business transacted before closing.

The proceedings of a Lodge in the early eighteenth century were reproduced in October, 1927, by Westmount Lodge No. 76, Quebec, and were thus described in the Lodge Bulletin, quoted in The Builder, February, 1928, Vol. XIV, page 48, et seq.: Picture the Lodge of the period. Two long tables, parallel; at one end is placed the table and chair of the R. W. M., the space between the tables being used by the candidate. The Lodge is held in an upper U

A public dining room where patrons were seated at one common table.

[ 15 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

room of an old London tavern and Mine Host is also the Tyler of the Lodge, indeed he is the first person to appear, clad in serviceable cloth and wearing a large white apron. 25 • • • Little can be described here of the ceremony of making a Mason, save that the ritual of the period was closely followed, from the introduction of the candidate by the Tyler to the concluding ceremony in which he was provided with a mop a.nd pail. The candidate gradually progressed, receiving the charge at the hands of the senior Entered Apprentice, followed by the reading of the by-laws. The ritual throughout, strangely worded, fundamentally as today's, was delivered by the Master, Wardens and others, as readily as though it were a matter of daily habit. During the delivery of the lecture, which took the form of a dialogue between Master and Wardens, the brethren were "called off" half a dozen times when they refreshed themselves with good rye bread and cheese, Mine Host seeing to it that the punch flowed' freely. After the toast to His Majesty the King, the brethren loaded their church warden pipes and thus created a truly friendly and Masonic atmosphere. The candidate was toasted by the Senior Warden, the brethren drank his health in the style peculiar to the times and the initiate was suitably hesitant in his reply. The brethren sang together "The Enter'd 'Prentice's Song"26 . . . Then came a quartette "Guardian Genius of Our Art Divine" . . . The closing of the Lodge was musical, too, when the brethren sang the catch, "Hark! The Hiram Sounds to Close." The brethren did not disperse, however, before drinking, at the behest of the jovial Tyler, to the health of "all poor and disIS William Hogarth's engraving "Night" (1738) reproduced in The Builder, March, 1923, Vol. IX, p. 66, depicts a W. M. wearing a large apron reaching to within six or eight inches of the ground; his companion has a similar apron. 2e This song is one of the most ancient songs of the Craft. It was composed by Matthew Birkhead, who had departed this life prior to the publication of Anderson's Constitutions, 1723, in which the song was published (page 84). The first of six verses is quoted:

Come let us prepare, We Brothers that are Assembled on merry Occasion; Let's drink, laugh and sing; Our Wine has a Spring Here's a Health to an Accepted Mason.

[16 )

THE LECTURES IN ENGLAND

tressed Masons." The brethren then left their seats and, surrounding the R. W. M., drank his health as a mark of loyalty and affection. 21

In commenting upon the work, the writer of the Lodge Bulletin said, "The ritual proper is (or rather was) worked entirely by the Master and Wardens. It would thus call for only three participants to commit much to memory. Though if it were desired the work could be divided to some extent. The part of the Master is by far the longest of these, and of the two Wardens, the Junior has the larger share." The description of "the lecture" as being in the form of a dialogue is highly suggestive and will remind many of the concluding portion of the degree of Mark Master as it was conferred for many years. Unhappily, what was evidently a survival of the ancient mode of working the degrees has been heaved over among the rubbish, notwithstanding its peculiar form and beauty and the fact that it had the mark of our ancient Craft upon it. 2'1 It is said that the custom of drinking toasts was introduced into the Grand Lodge upon the installation of Dr. John TheophiliIs Desaguliers, F.R.S., as Grand Master, June 24, 1719. The Builder, March, 1924, Vol. X, p. 88.

[17 )

Part II THE LECTURES IN THE UNITED STATES THOMAS SMITH WEBB THOMAS SMITH WEBB (1771-1819) was the Preston of America. Prior to 1797, the Preston lectures were brought to the United States and were acquired by Colonel Webb,28 then of Albany, N ew York, who in that year published the first edition of his Freemason's Monitor or Illustrations of Masonry, in the foreword to which he said: The observations upon the nrst three degrees are principally taken from Preston's Illustrations of Masonry, with some necessary alterations, Mr. Preston's distribution of the nrst lecture into six, the second into four, and the third into twelve sections, not being agreeable to the present mode of working, they are arranged in this work according to general practice.

It is said that Colonel Webb had the Preston lectures from a printer named John Hanmer, one of Preston's pupils, who had come to Albany from London. 28 In this connection it must be noted that Webb's Monitor appeared in the same year the Convention was held which resulted in the formation of the General Grand Chapter, and in that Convention, Temple Chapter of Albany was repr~sented by Webb as High Priest and by John Hanmer as Scribe. In an article entitled "The Webb Ritual in the United States,"28 Silas H. Shepherd, of Wisconsin, said of the Preston work: 28

The Builder, June, 1916, Vol. II, p. 166, et seq.

[ 18]

THE LECTURES IN THE UNITED STATES

Webb abridged it, arranged it differently as to sections and taught this revision to Benjamin Gleason, Henry Fowle, Bro. Snow (John Snow) , and others.

Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon, said that the Preston lectures were much modified by T. S. Webb, whose system has been the basis of all those taught since his day in the Lodges of the United States. No changes of any importance have been made in the lectures, in this Country, since their first introduction. 29

In the preface to his Monitor, Rob Morris said: "with the publication of the Freemason's Monitor Webb commenced a career of instructionwhich continued until his death in 1819," and that "with the exception of Pennsylvania, every Grand Lodge jurisdiction adopted his teachings."3o Too much stress cannot be laid upon the profound influence which the publication of Webb's Monitor had upon Freemasonry in the United States, an influence which, as will presently be developed, was continued and extended through the publication of Cross' Chart. Webb's Monitor was the working tool of the lecturers and of their pupils. Several editions were published before its author's death,31 which occurred July 6, 1819. 32 If the reader will examine a copy or reprint of Webb's Monitor 33 and compare it with the present Second edition, page 276. Quoted by Denslow, in his The Masonic Conservators, p. 32. 81 New York, 1797, 1802; Providence, 1805; Boston, 1808; Salem, Mass., 1812; Andover, 1816; Boston and Salem, 1816; Montpelier, 1816; Salem, 1818, by Flagg; Salem, 1818, by Cushing. The Builder, January, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 32. 32 The New Age, May, 1935, Vol. XLIII, No.5, p. 300. 33 Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co., New York, 1920, in pub路 lisher's preface to which it is stated to be "a verbatim reprint of the fifth and most approved edition of Webb's Freemason's Monitor, revised by himself and published in 1816; to which has been added many valuable symbolical illustra29

[ 19]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Missouri Manual, or with the monitors or manuals of other jurisdictions, he will appreciate the force of this statement. Among the followers of Webb; who were his pupils, or his pupils' pupils, were Benjamin Gleason, Henry Fowle, John Snow, John Barney, Samuel Willson, Samuel Cushman, David Vinton, and Jeremy L. Cross. These brethren were professional Masonic lecturers, and, according to the custom of the time, they received their pay from the brethren whom they instructed. When these teachers held commissions from Grand Lodges or from Grand Masters they were called Grand Lecturers. They did not set up schools, as did Preston in London, but they travelled about visiting one community after another. For this reason they were sometimes commissioned as Grand Visitors. THE MODE OF WORK

They taught the lectures and when the pupil had learned the lectures he was, according to Rob Morris, "supposed to possess the method of work, that is the drill and drama, or ceremony of Masonry, which was made literally to conform to the Lectures."34 In the early days of which we write, the idea of a ritual in which every word, syllable and letter is prescribed, had not yet been evolved. What was prescribed was a series of questions and answers. What was permissible in putting on the degrees was revealed by Dr. Mackey in his Lexicon, when he said of the lectures: "These constitute the simple text of Masonry, while the extended illustrations which are given to them by an intelligent Master or路 Lecturer . . . tions." In consulting this reprint, the reader should bear in mind that the illustrations are "added" as Webb's Monitor was not an illustrated book. 34 Supra} note 21.

[20 ]

THE LECTURES IN THE UNITED STATES

constitute the commentary, without which the simple text would be comparatively barren and uninstructive." 35 A further conception of the latitude permissible may be gathered from a joint committee report recommending the adoption of the Webb lectures to the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 1806 (which report was adopted), in which it was set forth that in the three degrees, every Master of a Lodge should be indulged with the liberty of adopting historical details, and the personification of the passing scene, as most agreeable to himself, his supporting officers . and assisting Lodge. 86

Indeed, as late as 1916 there was one jurisdiction in the United States which had no uniform ritual, another where it was uniform "only in essentials," and still another where Lodge No.1 did not use the uniform ritual prescribed for all other Lodges. 37 JEREMY L. CROSS

Of the followers of Webb, Jeremy L. Cross (1783-1861) requires our particular notice, as already suggested. He commenced his career as a lecturer in New Hampshire in 1813. 38 As early at 1816 he had a certificate signed by Webb, John Snow, Henry Fowle and others, stating that he was "well skilled and correct in the lectures and mode of working in the three first degrees . . . and fully competent to teach." 39 Entries in his diary40 show that he was at Providence, Rhode Supra, note 9. "History of the Ritual," The Builder, December, 1915, Vol. I, p. 293. 8'1 The Builder, November, 1916, Vol. II, p. 349. 38 Ray V. Denslow's Jeremy L. Cross and the Cryptic Rite, 1930. 39 Cross' Chart, 16th ed., 1853, p. 18. .0 History of Cryptic Rite, 1931, Vol. II, pp. 1223-1298. 3D

[21 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Island, from August 26 to September 5, 1817, and that he spent much of that time with Webb, who had removed to that State about 1801, and who was then a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Rhode Island, having been elected in 1813 and re-elected in 1814. 41 One purpose of Cross' visit was to assure himself that he had the Webb lectures correctly. He recorded in his diary, under date of September 1, "Lectured through the day with Col. Webb." Another purpose of his visit, it seems to the writer, must have been to consult with Webb upon the subject of publishing a Masonic monitor. He indicated in his diary that he had "business" with Webb, although he did not state what it was. But inasmuch as Cross. used almost unchange4 the text of Webb's Monitor and published his book in Webb's lifetime, the conclusion that at some time he must have consulted with and obtained the permission of Webb is almost inescapable. At any rate, during the year 1818, according to entries in his diary, Cross was busy with the project, and the second entry for the year 1819, that of April 4,42 reveals that the monitor had been published, for he recorded on that ~ate, "Reed a Letter from J. Cushman & answered it at Norfolk & sent him at Philadelphia 105 Masonic Chart." Cross entitled his monitor the True Masonic Chart or Hieroglyphic Monitor. It is popularly known as Cross' Chart. The Chart differed in plan from the work of Preston and that of Webb in that it was illustrated. In the book there appeared, separate from the text, plates showing representations in due order of symbols and emblems, including, it has been said, some that had never been represented previously on 41 Sketch of Webb by R. M. C. Condon, The Builder, October, 1918, Vol. IV, p. 304. 42 The diary is fragmentary and embraces the period from August 17, 1817, to April 2, 1820. [22

THE LECTURES IN THE UNITED STATES

the floor cloths or carpets. Cross' Chart was the first illustrated Masonic monitor, and was regarded as an innovation, for, by the time of its publication, the "Master's Carpet" had come to be looked upon as a landmark (although it, in its day, had been regarded as an innovation in causing a departure from the old practice of drawing designs upon the tavern floor or the tracing board) and met with violent criticism from the older brethren. 43 But the Chart proved to be very popular and passed through at least sixteen editions during the lifetime of its author. As its text followed the text of Webb's Monitor closely, its use may be regarded as a continuance of the monitorial work of Webb. On this point, Dr. J. W. S. Mitchell, Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, said editorially in his magazine, The Masonic Signet and Literary Mirror: Cross' Chart appeared, which was mainly a copy of Webb's Monitor, with the addition of such emblems as in the estimation of the author were i11ustrative of the work and lectures. 44 The Masonic Signet, May, 1852, Vol. VII, p. 60. In 1759, the Grand Lodge of Scotland forbade the use of "such painted floorings" which action was occasioned by the fact that a "flooring" of a Master's Lodge was hanging publicly exposed in a painter's shop in Edinburgh. See Lyon's Freemasonry in Scotland, Edinburgh and London, 1873, p. 195. The first edition of the Chart (and perhaps other early editions) contained a plate on which were depicted two brethren, one of whom has the right-hand corner of his apron tucked up. The corresponding plate in later editions did not have this feature. In this connection, the reader is referred to Chapter XVIII of Masonic 5ymbo/ism, by Charles C. Hunt, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, published at Cedar Rapids, 1930. See also, The Builder, July, 1922, Vol. VIII, p. 222, and April, 1928, Vol. XIV, p. 128. .. Issue of May, 1852, Vol. VII, p. 60. This magazine was the pioneer Masonic magazine of the West. It was a monthly; the subscription price was $2.50 per year, and the size of the page was 5짜2 by 8짜2 inches. Volume I was for the year May, 1848-April, 1849, Volume II for the following twelve months. During this period there were forty or more pages in each issue. Beginning with Volume III, May; 1850, the number of pages was increased to a minimum of sixty-four, and there were two volumes per year. It was published from Saint Louis from May, 1848, to May, 1853, and from Montgomery, Alabama, to May, 1854. The total number of volumes was ten. 43

[23

FROM MOUTH TO EAR MISSOURIANS LEARN WEBB SYSTEM

In addition to his diary, Cross left another interesting personal record, his autobiography, which was published as an appendix to the sixteenth edition of the Chart in 1853. From. this autobiography we learn that following the .Convocation of the General Grand Chapter held in the City of New York, June, 1816, and the organization of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar of the United States, which occurred there that month, Cross spe':lt a year on a grand tour as an itinerant Masonic lecturer, visiting New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Louisiana. He related that while in Cincinnati, Ohio, Frankfort and Lexington, Kentucky, he was joined by Thomas Smith Webb (then Deputy General Grand High Priest) and John Snow (then General Grand King) and that while he was at Cincinnati and Louisville, he (Cross) was visited by brethren "from Indiana and Missouri, who obtained and carried home with them a correct knowledge of the Master Masons, Royal Arch, and Royal and Select Masters' Degrees." Thus was the W ebb system taught to Missourians in the very year in which the Grand Lodge of Tennessee chartered Missouri Lodge No. 12, located at Saint Louis, now Missouri Lodge No.1, on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Missouri. It is even possible, although Cross did not say so, that Webb himself may have taken part in or have been present at their instruction, although his primary purpose in visiting Kentucky was to warrant Chapters at Lexington, Frankfort and Shelbyville, which a year later formed the Grand Chapter of Kentucky.46 4&

Official reprint of Proceedings of General Grand Chapter, p.\53.

[24 ]

Part III THE EFFECTS OF ANTI-MASONRY THE first quarter of the nineteenth century was a period of great prosperity for Freemasonry in the United States and the establishment of Lodges followed rapidly the onward march of the pioneers. The Institution was extremely popular and the end of the quarter found it in a preeminent position. In its membership were included a great many prominent, substantial and influential men. Ministers of the Gospel, lawyers, physicians, merchants, teachers, bankers, politicians, were not only members, but were active in the affairs of the Fraternity and were proud to hold office in the various bodies, grand and subordinate. 46 For example, DeWitt Clinton was elected General Grand High Priest in June, 1816 (after Webb . had declined the office in his favor). 47 Clinton also became Grand Master of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar of the United States upon its organization in the same mbnth,48 and was continued in both offices until his death, which occurred February 11, 1828. 49 But adversity was waiting just around the corner and the first half of the second quarter of the century saw the Fraternity almost wiped out of existence in the United States. The excitement created by the disappearance of one William 46 The Anti路M.asonic Party, a Study of Political Anti-Masonry in the United States, 1827路1840, by Charles McCarthy, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin, 1902, American Historical Association Rep. 1902, p. 365, et seq. This thesis is hereafter referred to, for brevity, as McCarthy. 47 Reprint General Grand Chapter, pp. 45路6. 48 Reprint Grand Encampment, p. 11, et seq. 49 "A Short History of the Days of Templarism," by Stanley C. Warner, The Builder, July, 1922, Vol. VIII, p. 208, et seq.

[25 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Morgan, of Batavia, New York, in September, 1826, ripened into what is known in history as the anti-Masonic movement, which became nationwide and extraordinarily bitter. It developed into a crusade against the Masonic Fraternity as an organization and against its individual members because of their membership. An anti-Masonic political party was formed, which actually nominated persons for the presidency of the United States and other offices. In its most repugnant form, it became persecution, bitter and relentless. 50 The period has been aptly called the period of the "Morgan Warfare." NATURE OF ATTACKS ON THE FRATERNITY

Anti-Masonic newspapers were published; by 1832, there were 141 of them. 51 Orations were delivered. Collections were taken up for the support of Mrs. William Morgan. Anti-Masonic pamphlets, almanacs and addresses were printed and distributed in large quantities. Itinerant lecturers toured the country, each striving to outdo the others in denunciation of an institution which was declared to be "repugnant to the Christian religion and inimical to the republican form of government.' , And not all were profanes who took part in the crusade; not by any means. Persons who had been members of Lodges 50 "The Morgan Affair and Anti.Masonry," by John C. Palmer, Little Masonic Library, Vol. VII. "The Anti-Masonic Movement," by Emery B. Gibbs, The Builder, December, 1918, Vol. IV, p. 341, et seq. "The Anti-Masonic Party," by Erik McK. Erikson, The Builder, March, 1921, Vol. VII, p. 71, et seq. "Three Dates in Vermont Masonry," by Herbert H. Hines, The Builder, November, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 336, et seq. "The Morgan Affair," by Erik McK. Erikson and J. Hugo Tatsch, The Builder, September, 1926, Vol. XII, p. 257, et seq. 51. Gibbs, in The Builder, December, 1918, Vol. IV, p. 346.

[ 26]

THE EFFECTS OF ANTI路MASONRY

"renounced" Freemasonry and joined in the attacks upon it. Such persons were referred to in the remarks of Dr. Mitchell, Past Grand Master, in his address before the Grand Lodge of Missouri: I have lived through a period made dark by the baseborn efforts of the political schemer and the cowardly desertion of the so-called Mason, uniting to bring derision and scorn and ruin upon an institution honored by long ages for its deeds of benevolence and charity and love. 52

In his study Dr. McCarthy related that Ex-Masons opened Lodges, and disreputable characters, as poor blind candidates, were initiated as entered apprentices, passed to the degree of fellowcraft, raised to the sublime degree of master mason, advanced to the honorary degree of mark master, installed in the chair as past master, received and acknowledged as most excellent master, and exalted to the degree of the holy royal arch, before delighted audiences.

Herbert H. Hines, in his article "Three Dates in Vermont Masonry" (note SO), recorded that in Vermont: Caravans travelled from town to town giving exhibitions of. the degrees. One day, in the Windsor County court house, 300 received the Third Degree by proxy.

It will be recalled that the Morgan trouble had its inception in.1826 when he filed with the Clerk of the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of New York an application for a copyright on a book to be written by him entitled trillustrations of Masonry by one of the Fraternity-God said let there be light and there was light." A book with such a title purporting to be by William Morgan was published in 1827, 62

Proceedings, Grand Lodge of Mo., October, 1848, p. 80.

[27

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

after he disappeared. This book purported to be an expose of Freemasonry and with some variations was a copy of a work entitled Jachin and Boaz, which had been published in England many years previously and editions of which had appeared in the United States in 1798, 1803, 1812, 1817, and 1818.53 Following the "Morgan" work, the Reverend David Bernard, a Baptist minister, published his Rituals and Illustrations of Masonry, and Avery Allyn, an anti-Masonic lecturer, published his Rituals ofFreemasonry. Allyn's book also included in its text what was claimed to be "a key" to the Phi Beta Kappa, the Orange, and the Odd Fellows work. These books were sold in large numbers. THADDEUS STEVENS

In the halls of the legislative assemblies of the various states the political solons made the welkin ring. This phase of antiMasonic activity is well illustrated by the resolutions 54 introduced in Pennsylvania by one Thaddeus Stevens directed against "Extrajudicial Oaths." These resolutions called upon the judicial committee to bring in a bill which when enacted into law would effectually "suppress and prohibit the administration and reception of Masonic, Odd Fellows and all other secret, extrajudicial oaths, obligations and promises in the nature of oaths." The lengthy preamble recited that in Masonry "the candidates are stripped nearly naked, and led to the imposition of their awful oaths, hoodwinked, and with a rope or cord around their necks, called a cable tow; that in the Royal Arch degree, they affect to enact the sublime and sacred scene of God appearing to Moses in the burning bush 63

Palmer, Little Masoni& Library, Vol. VII, p. 29. McCarthy.

[28 ]

THE EFFECTS OF ANTI-MASONRY

on Mount Horeb." In his study, Dr McCarthy condensed what followed by stating "here was a long statment accusing them of intemperance, drinking wine out of a skull, etc." The preamble also recited that Freemasonry "is an anti-republican and an insidious and dangerous enemy to our democratic form of government; that it creates and sustains secret orders of nobility, in violation of the spirit of the Constitution," etc., and that "the truth of all these things has been repeatedly proclaimed to the world under the signatures of thousands of honest men by authentic documents procured from the lodges themselves, and by the testimony under oath of numerous adhering Masons of good character; and it has never yet been contradicted by the sworn testimony of a single witness." Mr. Stevens became so violent in the halls of the Pennsylvania legislature that finally that body set up two smelling committees, one to investigate Masonry and the other to investigate anti-Masonry. Then Mr. Stevens announced, among other things, that he proposed to call the various Judges before the first-mentioned Committee to ascertain "whether . . . the grand hailing sign had ever been handed, sent or thrown to them by either of the parties litigant, and if so, what had been the result of the trial." This well-organized, violent and widespread persecution could have but one result-about three-fourths of the Lodges in the United States either gave up their charters or were "sunk without a trace." In Vermont, where anti-Masonry was most violent, every Lodge succumbed; the legislature revoked the corporate charters of the Grand Lodge and of the Grand Chapter, and no meetings of these bodies were held for ten years, 1836-1846. In lesser and varying degrees the Fraternity was seriously affected in all the states. [29 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR ANTI-MASONRY IN MISSOURI

In Missouri, then the Masonic frontier, far from the center of the violence, the opposition to our Institution became so strong that in October, 1831,55 it was actually proposed to dissolve the Grand Lodge, and in October, 1833,55 that body adjourned to meet at Columbia in December, and continued to meet there (except 1835,55 when no communication was held) up to and including October, 1836,55 at which communication only four Lodges were represented. Communications of the Grand Lodge in Saint Louis were resumed in October,1837. Missouri Lodge No.1, located in Saint Louis, the premier subordinate Lodge in the State, surrendered its charter to the Grand Lodge on October 5, 1833, and did not resume labor until it was reorganized and its charter was retU:.rned to it in October, 1842. Two great figures in the Grand Lodge of Missouri in the days of the Morgan Warfare were Colonel Stephen W. B. Carnegy of Palmyra Lodge No. 18, who was elected Grand Master at Columbia, in October, 1836, and who served to October, 1839, and Judge Priestley H. McBride of ParisUnion Lodge No. 19, who succeeded him and served to October, 1844, the longest period of service of any Grand Master in the history of the Grand Lodge. At the Grand Lodge Communication, October, 1841, held in Saint Louis, a Past Grand Master's jewel was presented to Colonel Carnegy by the Grand Lodge. The quotations which follow are from the address of Judge McBride in making the presentation, and the response of Colonel Carnegy, as preserved in the official proceedings: 56 GG 66

Reprint of Proceedings of Grand Lodge of Missouri. Proc., October, 1841, p. 25, et seq.

[30 ]

THE EFFECTS OF ANTI-MASONRY

Said Judge McBride: You labored in a period of travail, . . . at a time when the douds lowered and the storm of persecution beat most violently and furiously, when the feelings of despondency were visible in every countenance, and the stoutest hearts became faint and almost ready to yield our citadel to the ruthless hand of ignorance, blind fanaticism and unhallowed pollution-and what would have been the consequences had you not been a faithful sentinel at the post assigned you by . . . the Grand Lodge, can only be a matter of conjecture. . . . You enjoy that delightful state of feeling which invariably springs from a consciousness of having fought the good fight and kept the faith. . . .

In responding, Colonel Carnegy said: When the government of the Grand .Lodge . . . was first confided to my hands, I found whatever of ancient Freemasonry that belonged to the Grand Lodge located far, far upon the confines of our western population, just upon the line which separates civilized from savage man. . . . It was then the stout-hearted little band, which then composed the Grand Lodge, came forth to the rescue, and the hopeless wanderer in the wilderness . . . was triumphantly led back to this goodly City. 57 • • • And now that the douds have passed away . . . I . . . delight to acknowledge that to others in an equal, if not a superior degree, is Masonry in Missouri indebted for the happy issue. . . . Nor must I fail, sir, to remark in justice to myself and you, that to no one is Masonry more indebted for the high and honorable station now occupied by her, than to yourself; for that which was begun in weakness by me has been performed in strength by you. . . . Bigotry, prejudice and irreligious fanaticism have, for the last time we trust, usurped the place of reason. The reign of tyranny is past, and liberty, reason and true religion, so long trodden down, are once more, and we hope forever, restored to their rightful 67 He referred to the fact that the Grand Lodge, after having been driven from Saint Louis to Columbia, had returned to its ancient seat and resumed its communications there in October, 1837. This occurred at the close of his first year as Grand Master.

[ 31 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

influence in the hearts of men. The hydra monster, intolerant persecution, frowned down by the good sense and love of justice of our fellow citizens~ has slunk back into the covert darkness from which it first came forth, and our peaceful institution is again standing forth, a guide to the wanderer, a beacon light to the tempest-tossed mariner on the ocean of life, the shield of the oppressed, the succor of the weak, the solace of the distressed; to the orphan a parent, to the widow a friend, nay, to all a friend to teach and practice toward all "brotherly love, relief and truth" . . . Such, M. W. Sir, is the happy condition in which I rejoice to find that heaven-inspired and heavenpreserved institution for which we all have so long and so ardently contended. . . . CHAOTIC CONDITIONS

The long years of the Morgan Warfare were, of course, a period when very little, if any, Masonic work was done in the Lodges which remained alive. The older and more skillful members either passed away or lost their proficiency. The old professional lecturers sought other means of livelihood. So, when the petitions commenced to come in to the Lodges once more, the younger generation received instruction only in an imperfect way. Then, too, conditions which had arisen as a result of the Morgan Warfare obliged the Fraternity to guard very carefully against the approach of cowans and eavesdroppers, and evidence of membership had to be critically and severely tested. Examining committees were obliged to proceed on the theory that the presumption was against the would-be visitor, or, as Dr. Mackey expressed it in his Lexicon,58 it is better that ninety and nine true men should be turned away from the door of a lodge, than that one cowan should be admitted. G8

Second edition (1852). page 140.

[ 32 ]

THE EFFECTS OF ANTI-MASONRY

Under conditions such as these, a lack of uniformity in the lectures among the several路 Grand Lodges or even among the subordinate Lodges in the same State, was a formidable obstacle to fraternal intercourse. It was only natural that a demand should have come for relief from these chaotic conditions and that the form of relief suggested should have been uniformity of the lectures, because if such could be adopted and promulgated, a basis for working the degrees would be established and identification of members could be made more readily, and the Lodges could discontinue turning away so many visitors, among whom must have been large numbers who were members in good standing. DEMAND FOR UNIFORMIlY

It must be here stated that while the demand for a uniform mode of work for the Lodges of the United States came as a result of conditions brought about by the Morgan Warfare, the idea itself had an earlier origin. The concrete proposal for action by the Grand Lodges at this time came from the Grand Lodge of Alabama, which adopted and circulated among the several Grand Lodges in 1840, the following resolution: Resolved that all Grand Lodges in correspondence with the Grand Lodge of Alabama, be requested to elect one delegate to meet in general convention on the first Monday in March, 1842, in the City of Washington, for the purpose of determining upon a uniform mode of work throughout all Lodges of the United States, and to make other lawful regulations for the interest and security of the Craft. 59 69 Proc. G. L. of Mo., reprint, October, 1840, p. 274. In October, 1829, the Grand Lodge of Tennessee (Tennessee reprint, p. 253) adopted and circulated resolutions suggesting a general convention of representatives of Grand Lodges for several purposes, among them, "the establishment of a uniform mode of work:'

[33 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

At the time appointed, March 7, 1842, representatives of ten Grand Lodges assembled in Washington, D. C., viz: Alabama, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, 'Rhode Island, South Carolina and Virginia. 60 On March 8, a committee of five, John Dove, Charles W. Moore, James Herring, William Field, and Isaac E. Holmes, were appointed "to revise and suggest a uniform mode of work." On the day following the Committee reported that, among its members, "there exists a satisfactory degree of uniformity," but owing to the fact that many Grand Lodges were unrepresented, recommended that "every Grand Lodge in the United States appoint one or more skillful brethren to be styled Grand Lecturers, who shall meet and agree upon the course of instruction necessary and proper to be imparted to the Lodges and the Fraternity in their several jurisdictions." 60 Following the adoption of this report, the Convention: Resolved, That should the Grand Lodges or a majority of them determine to adopt the recommendations contained in the report of the Committee, respecting the appointment of Grand Lecturers, that it be further recommended by this Convention that the first meeting of said Grand Lecturers be held in the City of Baltimore, on the second Monday in May, 1843. 61 00 Printed "Journa:I of a Convention of Delegates from the Grand Lodges of the United States held at Washington, D. c., on Monday, March 7, A. L. 5842:' Printed at Richmond, by John Warrock, 1842. 61

Ibid.

[34 ]

Part IV THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION MISSOURI, as the reader will have observed, was not represented in the Washington Convention. Indeed, no copy of the resolutions was received from the Grand Lodge of Alabama, and the matter only came to the attention of our Grand Lodge through the report of its Correspondence Committee, which reported the resolutions as published in the Proceedings of some other Grand Lodge. 62 When, however, the resolutions of the Washington Convention were brought to the attention of our Grand Lodge, October, 1842, resolutions were adopted, which had been prepared by Joseph Foster, Senior Grand Warden, and presented by Colonel Carnegy, making it the duty of the Grand Master to appoint a representative to attend the Baltimore Convention and authorizing the payment of expenses out of the treasury.63 THE MISSOURI DELEGATION The Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, as printed, do not show the appointment of delegates to the Baltimore Convention, but Colonel Carnegy and Joseph 'Foster were appointed by Judge Priestley H. McBride, Grand Master. 64 They attended the Convention, and also in attendance from Missouri, as visitors, were Frederick L. Billon, Past Reprint, page 274. Proc., October, 1842, p. 29. 114 Dr. Mitchell in his "Autobiography" published in connection with his Common Law of Masonry, Griffin, Ga., 1869, said, "Bros. Foster and Carnegy both desired to go; they mutually agreed to divide the appropriation and each man to pay his share of the balance." 62

[ 35]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Grand Secretary, and the Reverend Hiram Chamberlain, Grand Chaplain. Alexander T. Douglass was Grand Lecturer at the time, having been reappointed by Judge McBride, in October, 1842.. His removal to New Orleans, no doubt, is the reason he did not go to Baltimore. As the reader should know something about these four brethren who composed the Missouri delegation in the Baltimore Convention, a brief biographical sketch of each is here included. STEPHEN WEBSTER BARNES CARNEGY

Colonel Carnegy was a Kentucky Mason. He was born in Harrison County, Kentucky, January 29, 1797, and received the Craft degrees in Saint Andrew's Lodge No. 18, at Cynthiana. He was twice Master of that Lodge. He was a lawyer and served as Justice of the Harrison County Court. His title owes its origin to the fact that he was Colonel of the 86th Kentucky Regiment of Militia. In March, 1829, he removed to Palmyra, Missouri, and the following year assisted in organizing Palmyra Lodge No. 18, of which he was Master in 1831 and subsequent years. His first appearance in the Grand Lodge of Missouri was in 1832. He was elected Grand Master at Columbia in October, 1836, and was reelected at Saint Louis in October, 1837, and in October, 1838. It was largely through his efforts and those of his successor, Judge McBride, that the Grand Lodge was preserved during the anti-Masonic period and restored to its former activity. He and Judge McBride were the prime movers in establishing the Masonic College of Missouri. He removed to Canton, Missouri, in 1849, and resided there until his death, January 5, 1892, at the age of ninety-five. He was one of the great fig[36 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

ures in the Grand Lodge throughout his active life. He was appointed Grand Lecturer in October, 1840, and reappointed in October, 1843, 1844, and 1845. At the time he attended the Baltimore Convention, he was Past Grand Master and Past Grand Lecturer. As will appear he was one of the foremost members of the Convention. JOSEPH FOSTER

Joseph Foster was a Virginia Mason. He was born in Mathews County, Virginia, November 20, 1802, and received the Craft degrees in Portsmouth Naval Lodge, No. 100, in 1823. He settled in Saint Louis in 1834, and his first appearance in the Grand Lodge of Missouri, was October 2, 1837, when he is listed as a visitor from that Lodge. At the Communication of October, 1839, he represented Napthali Lodge, U. D., which was chartered at that Communication and numbered 25. He was its first Secretary. Joseph Foster was a member of and one of the great figures in the Grand Lodge of Missouri for thirty;-eight years and was absent from only three annual communications during his membership. He was elected Senior Grand Warden in October, 1841, reelected 1842, appointed Deputy Grand Master in October, 1843, elected Grand Master October, 1847, and reelected 1848. He was appointed Grand Lecturer in October, 1839, and reappointed in May, 1850, June, 1853, and May, 1854. His occupation was that of builder and architect. In March, 1847, he and George A. Kice of Lexington were appointed a Committee to "draft plan of buildings" for the Masonic College at Lexington, a duty which they faithfully performed. A contemporary and protege in Masonry, William R. Singleton, said of him, "As a Mason he had no superior either in ritualism or [ 37]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

jurisprudence. His wonderful memory served him in both branches, and no one was more happy in imparting instruction from the Orient than he was; and he well deserved the designation always given him of 'H. A: .. 65 He was Past Grand Lecturer at the time of the Baltimore Convention. His death occurred May 22, 1878, and his remains were at his request, buried by the side of those of Anthony O'Sullivan in Bellefontaine Cemetery. FREDERICK L. BILLON

Frederick L. Billon was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 23, 1801, and came to Saint Louis in 1822. He received the Craft degrees in Missouri Lodge No.1, the following year. He first appeared in the Grand Lodge of Missouri, in April, 1824, and is listed in the Proceedings as Grand Senior Deacon, pro tern. In October, 1829, he was appointed Deputy Grand Master. The following October, he was elected Grand Secretary, and was reelected in October, 1831 and 1832. He became Grand Secretary again in October, 1845, and was reelected the following year. At the time of the Baltimore Convention, he was Past Deputy Grand Master and Past Grand Secretary. He represented the Grand Lodge of Missouri at the Convention held in Winchester, Virginia, in 1846. That Convention did not muster enough delegates to transact business. His report of what transpired at Winchester is published in our Grand Lodge Proceedings, October, 1846, page 47, and is the only known published minutes of that Convention, which was held pursuant to a resolution of the Baltimore Convention and was intended to be a continuation of the work undertaken by it. R. W. Brother Billon rose to great 6G

Appendix, Proc. G. L. of Mo., October, 1880, p. 16.

[38 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

prominence in Saint Louis; he was Comptroller of the City and later its Auditor. At a still later day he was Secretary and Treasurer of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. He was a man of fine mental attainments and in historical circles is celebrated for his Annals of Saint Louis which were published in 1886-88 in two large volumes. He departed this life in Saint Louis, October 20, 1895, full of years and honors. The memorial prepared by Dr. John D. Vincil and adopted by the Grand Lodge said of him, "I have never met with anyone whose mind was so abundantly stored with information respecting men and things." HIRAM CHAMBERLAIN

Hiram Chamberlain was a minister of the Gospel of the "old school" Presbyterian faith and was one of the pioneer ministers of Missouri. In an early day, he was located at (old) Franklin, in Howard County. His first appearance in the Grand Lodge of Missouri, was October, 1838, as the representative of Ijiram Lodge No. 23, located at Saint Charles, one of the four Lodges represented in that Communication, and he served as Chairman of the Committee on Petitions and Memorials. Colonel Carnegy was reelected Grand Master at this Communication and appointed him Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge. He was the first Grand Chaplain the Grand Lodge had had since the Communication of 1831, a circumstance that is understood when it is recalled that during the anti-Masonic period, many ministers, churches and even denominations joined in the opposition to the Fraternity. He was reappointed by Judge McBride in October, 1839, and was Grand Chaplain at the time of the Baltimore Convention. The only delegate to that Convention who was a minister of [39 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

the Gospel, so far as can be ascertained from the minutes, was Reverend Albert Case of South Carolina, who was Secretary of the Convention, Chairman of its Committee on Funeral Service, to which Committee was also committed the subject of "Prayers and Charges." Rev. W. E. Wyatt, D.D., of Maryland, was Chaplain of the Convention, but the Proceedings do not indicate that he was regarded as a delegate. The last reference to R. W. Bro. Chamberlain in the Proceedings of our Grand Lodge is at the Communication of October, 1845, where it is stated that he was excused from all Committees, "he being about to leave the State." PERSONNEL OF THE CONVENTION

The Baltimore Convention was held pursuant to the resolutions of the Washington Convention and it convened on Monday, May 8, 1843, and was in session, excepting Sunday, to and including Wednesday, May 17, 1843. In attendance upon the Convention were the following: Alabama: Edward Herndon, Past Grand Master. District of Columbia: Nathaniel Seevers, Grand Lectuier. Florida: Thomas Hayward, Past Deputy Grand Master. Georgia: Lemuel Dwelle, Grand Lecturer. Louisiana: E. Cruben, a visitor. Maryland: Daniel Piper, Grand Lecturer; W. E. Wyatt, Chaplain of the Convention; Charles Gilman, Grand Master, a visitor; Cornelius Smith, Senior Grand Warden, a visitor; Joseph K. Stapleton, D. G. M. Grand Encampment. Massachusetts: Charles W. Moore, Grand Secretary. Missouri: Stephen W. B. Carnegy, Past Grand Master; Joseph Foster, Senior Grand Warden; Frederick 1. Billon, Past Grand Secretary, a visitor; Hiram Chamberlain, Grand Chaplain, a visitor. Mississippi: John Delafield of Memphis, Grand Lecturer. New Hampshire: Thomas Clapham.

[40 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

North Carolina: John H. Wheeler, Grand Master. New York: Ebenezer Wadsworth, Past Grand Secretary. Ohio: John Barney, Grand Lecturer; W. J. Reese, Grand Master, a visitor. Rhode Island: William Field. South Carolina: Albert Case, Grand Chaplain. South Wales: Edw. J. Hutchins, P. P. D. G. M., a visitor. Virginia: John Dove, Grand Secretary.

Two comments upon the personnel of the Convention are in order. First, it is to be noted that of the Committee of the Washington Convention which reported that among its members "there exists a satisfactory degree of uniformity," three were present at Baltimore, John Dove, Charles W. Moore, and William Field. Second, it must be mentioned that while none of the old professional lecturers, contemporaries of Thomas Smith Webb, was present at Washington, one was at Baltimore, in the person of John Barney66 of Worthington, Ohio, 80 In an address before the Grand Lodge of Vermont, January, 1859, pp. 35-42, Grand Master Philip C. Tucker said that in 1817 John Barney went to Boston and received the lectures from either Benjamin Gleason or Henry Fowle, and in October of that year was examined by a Committee of that Grand Lodge, "which reported that these lectures were according to the most approved method of work in the United States" and he was by the Grand Lodge given a letter of recommendation. That in the year 1818 Barney instructed Samuel Willson, "now and for several years past Grand Lecturer of this State:' "Upon this occasion Bro. Barney wrote out a portion of them in private key, and Bro. Willson wrote out the remainder. Both were written in the same book, and that part written by Bro. Willson was examined carefully and approved by Bro. Barney." "These are the only lectures which hav~, been sanctioned in this jurisdiction from October, 1817, to the present

d~.

From The Masonic Conservators, by Ray V. Denslow, previously cited, we learn that in 1857, Rob Morris visited Samuel Willson in Vermont and made a copy of the cipher, which he published in 1858 as a sort of preliminary step to publishing The Mnemonics. Afterwards, Willson said that Morris did not copy the original cipher but a copy of it, which, by mistake, omitted part of the original, and that Morris also made mistakes in taking the copy. The Mnemonics was based upon this, and, according to Morris, the first degree, Section 1 had 56 questions and answers, Section 2, 18; Section 3, 44; the second degree, Section 1, 38; Section 2, 54; the third degree, Section 1, 38;

[41 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

who had commenced his career as a lecturer in Vermont in 1817. ORGANIZATION AND AGENDA

The opening day of the Convention was given over to organization. 67 Dr. John Dove, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Virginia, was elected President of the Convention, and in his address of acceptance stated that sixteen Grand Lodges of the United States were represented, out of a possible twenty-three. Reverend Albert Case, Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of South Carolina, was chosen Secretary. On the second day, May 9, agenda were adopted declaring the two purposes of the Convention to be: 1. To produce uniformity of Masonic work. II. To recommend such measures as shall tend to the elevation of this Order to its due degree of respect throughout the world at large.

To accomplish the first object, four Committees were appointed, viz.: 1. On the work and lectures in conferring the degrees. 2. On the funeral service.

3. On the ceremonies of Consecration and Installation. 4. On Masonic Jurisprudence.

To accomplish the second object, three Committees were appointed, the first of which was charged with a duty which requires consideration in this study, viz.: Section 2, 53. The total of these questions and answers is 301. It is to be noted that the third degree appears to have had but two sections, which Willson said was a gross error. There is a copy of these "Willson notes" in the Library of the Grand Lodge. of Iowa. The notes begin with the cryptic letters "wcy." f11 The facts about the Convention are, of course, derived from the official printed proceedings, "Proceedings of the National Masonic Convention,. held at Baltimore, Maryland, May A. L. 5843-A. D. 1843. Printed at Baltimore, by Joseph Robinson, No. 110 Baltimore Street, 1843."

[42 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

To report on the expediency of adopting a regularly authorized Masonic Trestleboard; and further to report on the propriety of publishing a work of antiquarian research and learning on the origin and history of the Order, of such a character as shall exhibit the excellence and antiquity thereof in its true light.

The committee "on the work and lectures in conferring the degrees" consisted of Dr. Dove, as Chairman,Moore of Massachusetts, Barney of Ohio, Wadsworth of New York, and Carnegy of Missouri. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE ON WORK

There will now be detailed what the printed Proceedings of the Convention show relative to the work and reports of this, its most important committee: This committee was appointed on Tuesday, May 9, and made its first report on Wednesday morning, May 10, which is a strong indication that there existed a "satisfactory degree of uniformity." The Proceedings state: The Chairman of the Standing Committee on Work stated that the Committee had, after mature deliberation, decided on the Lecture of the first degree, and proceeded to report-Br. Moore giving the the answers.

Herndon, Past Grand Master of Alabama, offered the resolution, That the Lecture of the first degree of Masonry, as reported by the Committee, be by this Convention now adopted, as the authorized work in that degree, to be recommended to the Fraternity throughout the Union.

And the Proceedings then state, "After an animated discussion the question was taken on the Resolution, and it was [43 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

adopted, 14 to 1-the delegate from New York (Wadsworth of the Committee) dissenting." On Thursday morning, May 11, "The Chairman of the Committee on Work, reported on the opening and closing ceremonies of the first degree," which was adopted. Then, "The Chairman of the Committee on Work, assisted by Br. Moore, reported the Lecture of the second degree:' "Br. Wadsworth moved an amendment to the report, which was rejected." The resolution to adopt the report was then adopted. Then, "The Chairman of the same Committee reported on the opening and closing of a ~odge in the second degree. After some discussion, in which several brethren took part, the report was adopted. Br. Wadsworth requested to be excused from serving longer on the Committee on Work. Excused, and Br. Herpdon of Alabama substituted." On Friday morning, May 12, "The Committee on Work presented a verbal report on the opening of the third degree," which was adopted. Then, "The Chai.rman of the Committee on Work presented a verbal report on the first section of the lecture in the third degree," which was adopted, "after a slight amendment." At the afternoon session, on the same day, "Br. Moore from the Committee on Work, reported the second section of the lecture in the third degree. Br. Case moved an amendment, which was adopted." The report as amended was then adopted. Then, "Br. Moore from the same Committee, reported the third section of the Lecture in the third degree," which was adopted. At the afternoon session, Saturday, May 13, "The Commit[44 }

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

tee on Work reported another section of the work of the third degree," which was adopted, "New York dissenting." On Monday evening, May 15, "The Committee on Work exemplified the opening and closing of the Lodge in the third degree." On Tuesday morning, May 16, "The lecture of the first degree was given and repeated." "The afternoon was spent in exemplification of work in the second degree." At the evening session, "The President repeated the first section of the F. C. and M. M. degrees; and Br. Moore, the second sections of the same degrees. The Committee then exemplified the work in the third degree." On Wednesday, May 17, "The Committee exemplified the work in the Master's degree." THE BALTIMORE WORK DESCRIBED

As to what it was the Baltimore Convention adopted and recommended to the various Grand Lodges of the United States for adoption by them, fortunately, we have the testimony of one of its most distinguished members, one of the five members of the Committee on Work, Charles W. Moore of Massachusetts. A letter written by Moore, in 1863, twenty years after the Convention, and quoted by Silas H. Shepherd in his article, "The Webb Ritual in the United States,"68 to which previous reference has been made, was as follows: The work and lectures of the first three degrees, as adopted and authorized by the Baltimore Convention in 1843, were, with a few unimportant verbal exceptions, literally as they were originally compiled by Bro. Thos. S. Webb about the close of the last century and as they were subsequently taught by him during his lifetime, and also 68

The Builder, June, 1916, Vol. II, p. 168.

[45 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

by his early and favorite pupil, Bro. Benjamin Gleason, from the years 1801-2 until his death in 1847. In a note to me, under date of Nov. 25, 1843, Bro. Gleason says: "It was my privilege while at Brown University, Providence, R. I. (1801-2), to acquire a complete knowledge of the lectures in the first three degrees of Masonry, directly from our late much lamented brother Thos. S. Webb." In 1805, Bro. Gleason was commissioned by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts as its Grand Lecturer and empowered to visit and instruct the Lodges in the ritual, as he had received it from Bro. Webb. This duty he performed with great fidelity and to the entire satisfaction of the Grand Lodge; and this ritual is in use in the lodges of Massachusetts at the present time. There may be some verbal departures from the original, but no material change has been made in it. In 1823-24, Bro. Gleason was my Masonic teacher. I learned the work and lectures of him. We were connected by family ties and close Masonic relations continued to exist between us until his death in 1847. I was associated with him in all the various branches of Masonry for nearly a quarter of a century, and enjoyed all the rare advantages of his extensive and accurate knowledge of the various rituals of the different grades of the Order. In 1843, I was appointed by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts a delegate to the Baltimore Masonic Convention, called for the purpose of revising the various modes of work then in use, and agreeing upon a uniform system for the country. Before leaving home, and as a preparation for the better discharge of the duties of the appointment, I availed myself of the assistance of Bro. Gleason,69 in a thorough and careful revision of the lectures, which I had originally received from him and which, on frequent occasions, I had been called to deliver and work with him, both in and out of the Lodge. I was, therefore, qualified to report them to the Convention, through its committee on the work, in their purity and integrity, and, beyond all doubt, just as they originally came from the hand of the late Bro. Webb. I had the honor to be a member of the committee, and to report the amendments, and the lectures as amended to 69 At New Haven, Conn., under date March 24, 1820, Cross made this entry in his diary, which may reveal professional jealousy, "rode Home calld on Br Smith was introduced to Br B Gleason found him a great talker & not so mutch refind as I could wish."

[46 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

the Convention. This I did without notes, but subsequently took the precaution to minute down the alterations from the originals; and these are now in my possession. They are mostly verbal, few in number, and not material in their results. The only change of consequence was in the due guards of the second and third degrees, which were changed and made to conform to that of the first degree in position and explanation. This was analogically correct. 70 A CHANGE, A DECISION AND A STEP

Further light upon "the only change of consequence" mentioned in Moore's letter, is to be had from the pen of A. L. Kress, in answer to an inquiry, in the Question Box Department of The Builder,71 where he said: In 1760, what is now the EA sign was called the EA's "due guard or sign." What are now the EA and FC DG's were unknown or at least not used as such. There was only one sign each in the EA and FC degrees. Some time about 1800 (the date is indeterminate) it occurred to someone to incorporate one movement or action to be known as the due guard, and the other as the sign. These were as follow: In the EA degree, what is now the due guard was then termed the sign and what is now the sign was called the due guard. In the FC degree, the two were given almost as now, except they were never given separately. In the MM degree, the due guard was given with the right hand only. In 1843, a convention was held at Baltimore, Md., to agree on a uniform ritual. Among other things, they reversed the procedure in the EA degree. What was then the due guard they made our present sign and vice versa. In the MM degree they adopted the use of both hands in giving the MM due guard. 70 This letter was written at the height (1863) of the controversy over Rob Morris' Conservators, and was no doubt, although Bro. Shepherd did not say so, a reply to circular letters issued by Morris. See Chapter IX of Denslow's The Masonic Conservators. 71 September, 1926, Vol. XII, p. 288. See Iowa G. L. Bulletin, June, 1935, Vol. XXXVI, p. 212, for article "The Due Guard," by C. C. Hunt.

[47 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Rob Morris defined a due guard as a position and a sign, a movement. Up til11843 there was, as we have shown, no distinction.

Another decision of the Baltimore Convention is indicated by Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon,72 where, under the title, "Immoveable Jewels," he said: According to the old system in England, the immoveable jewels of the lodge are the Rough Ashlar, Perfect Ashlar and Trestle Board; but in this Country, by the decision of the Baltimore Convention, in 1843, they are made to consist of the Square, Level and Plumb.

A third step taken by the Baltimore Convention may have been brought about by the following preamble and resolutions adopted by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, October, 1839: 73 WHEREAS, it has been represented to this Grand Lodge that in many States, of these United States, a system has obtained among subordinate Lodges of merely opening in the degrees of Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft, and in those degrees performing the work of the Lodge; . . . and WHEREAS, this Grand Lodge considers such system as conflicting with the ancient landmarks. . . . Lodges, as such, cannot consistently work as Apprentices or Fellow Crafts, even provided none but Masters be present, and, in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, no business can legitimately be transacted in those degrees, other than lecturing, the examination of candidates for advancement, or the conferring of the degree. Many other reasons 14 why a change should be made of this mode of working suggest themselves, but which it would not be proper to record, . . . therefore Resolved, that the several Grand Lodges in the United States and all other Grand Lodges in correspondence with the Grand Lodge, be respectfully requested to take this matter into consideration, and give

Second edition, p. 209. Reprint, pages 262-3. 74 Undoubtedly, these were the reasons which moved the Baltimore Convention to take this step, and to arrive at the decision and to make the change previously detailed. 72

'l8

[48 ]

THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION

to it such an expression of opinion as they may deem right and proper. Resolved, That a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolution be transmitted to all Grand Lodges corresponding with this Grand Lodge. MISSOURI'S DELEGATES MAKE REPORT

The next communication of the Grand Lodge of Missouri following the Baltimore Convention opened in Saint Louis, Monday, October 9, 1843.7ÂŁ' On Thursday afternoon, Theodore S. Parvin, representative of Iowa Lodge No. 42, later Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, and founder of its great Masonic Library, moved that the hour of ten o'clock, A. M. Friday, the thirteenth, be set for the Baltimore Convention delegates to begin their report. This they did, and the report continued all day and evening Friday and all day and evening Saturday. The report was adopted without a dissenting vote and the work of the Baltimore Convention became official in Missouri, as the subordinate Lodges were directed to observe it. In a single instance, there was a lack of unanimity. When the vote was taken upon that portion of the report having to do with the second degree and the first section of the third, Hiram Chamberlain, who, it will be recalled, was a visitor at the Convention, was excused from voting. Why he did not desire to vote is an enigma, which probably will never be solved. At this Communication, Judge McBride was reelected Grand Master and appointed Colonel Carnegy, Grand Visitor, that is, Grand Lecturer, than whom no one could have been better qualified for the post. The printed Proceedings of the Baltimore Convention were 15 Page references to official Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Missouri will not be given hereafter, unless special considerations seem to require them.

[49 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

also presented at this Communication and were referred to a Committee of which Dr. Mitchell was Chairman. The report of this Committee was adopted, and its nature may be indicated by quotation from it: We find that they have stripped the work and lectures of those gaudy trappings introduced to make fame for the innovator, restored our sacred institution to its primitive simplicity, and placed a mark upon the wretch who shall strive to build up his own fame by innovations upon our ancient landmarks. 76

Dr. Mitchell was well qualified to comment on the mode of work adopted by the Baltimore Convention, for in his autobiography, after relating the circumstances surrounding his entrance into the Fraternity in 1820, and that he travelled eighty miles to Lexington, Ky., in order to learn the work, he said: Bro. Hunt (William Gibbs Hunt) had received the lectures from Bro. Cross,77 and J. M. Pike of Lexington had them word for word from Hunt, and between Hunt and Pike, Bro. Mitchell's time, day and night, was spent until he had the work and lectures of the three degrees as familiar as his A. B. C.'s.

In May, 1850, as Chairman of the Correspondence Committee of our Grand Lodge, Dr. Mitchell (writing in the third person) said: he now solemnly declares that the work and lectures reported to this Grand Lodge by its delegates to the Baltimore Convention are sub16 This report does not appear in the Proceedings of October, 1843, but in those of the adjourned Communication of April, 1844, p. 90. 17 In his autobiography, p. 348, Cross said: "The author would mention one Companion, William G. Hunt, Esq., who resided at the time in Lexington, Ky., as one very expert, and who acquired a perfect knowledge of all the degrees up to and including the Royal and Select Masters', with the view of imparting the knowledge to his Companions, wherever he might sojourn. The author was introduced to the Hon. Henry Clay, at that time a zealous Mason, and member of the Lodge in Lexington."

[50 ]

THE MASONIC TRESTLE BOARD

stantially, yea, almost word for word, the work and lectures which he received as above in 1820. . . . the Baltimore work and lectures, as reported to this Grand lodge, contain less extraneous matter and less modern Masonry than any we have heard. We know it is said, and with much truth, that it is difficult to know what is the Baltimore work, for nearly all the members of that Convention differ widely, nor is this to be wondered at, as we are told, few, if any, but the Missouri delegates took the means after the adjournment of the Convention, to learn the work and lectures well enough to take them home. THE OFFICIAL MONITOR

As The Masonic Trestle Board was the official monitor prepared by authority of the Baltimore Convention, it and matters connected with it are of great interest in this study. At the session of the Convention on Saturday afternoon, May 13, 1843, Colonel Carnegy "moved that a Committee be appointed to report on a Masonic Trestle Board. Referred to Brs. Moore, Delafield and Carnegy." This Committee reported at the afternoon session on Monday, May 15: That a Committee be designated to prepare and publish at an early date, a text book, to be called The Masonic Trestle Board-to embrace three distinct, full and complete Masonic Carpets, illustrative of the three degrees of ancient Craft Masonry; together with the ceremonies of consecrations, dedications and installations; the laying of corner stones of public edifices; the funeral service, and order of processions. To which shall be added the Charges, Prayers and Exhortations, and the selections from Scripture, appropriate and proper for lodge service. The Committee further report, that they deem it expedient that a work be published to contain archaeological research into the history of the Fraternity in the various nations of the world.

The report of the Committee was adopted, and on Tuesday morning, May 16, "On motion of Br. Carnegy, it was voted, [ 51 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

That a Committee of three be appointed to prepare a TrestleBoard for publication. Referred to Brs. Dove, Moore and Carnegy." The Masonic Trestle Board was published as the act of a majority of the Committee (Moore and Carnegy) , as the third member of the committee, Dr. Dove, did not concur. This book was published late in 1843 and had the endorsement of Joseph Foster and of the delegates from South Carolina, New Hampshire, Georgia, Rhode Island, Florida, Alabama, Maryland and North Carolina. It also had the endorsement of Benjamin Gleason, to whom references have been made. A copy of this book was presented at the adjourned Communication of our Grand Lodge held April 1, 1844, in Saint Louis, and referred to a Committee consisting of Hiram Chamberlain, Dr. Mitchell, E. S. Ruggles, J. F. L. Jacoby, John Bull, Frederick L. Billon and George H. C. Melody. The committee, of course, did not report at the adjourned Communication. At the annual Communication following, October, 1844, Melody and Bull were absent, and William D. Marmaduke and Thomas S. Miller were named in their stead. MISSOURI FAILS TO ADOPT MONITOR

A majority of this cOIiUnittee, consisting of Jacoby, Mitchell, "Ruggles, Marmaduke and Billon, reported, October, 1844, that they found in the book along with some excellencies, defects which lead to insuperable objections to its adoption as a text book for Lodges of our jurisdiction.

A minority of the committee, Hiram Chamberlain and Thomas S. Miller, offered, as a minority report, this resolution: [52 ]

THE MASONIC TRESTLE BOARD

Resolved, That while this Grand Lodge does not enjoin its use on any of the subordinate Lodges under its jurisdiction, some of whom prefer other guides, to which they have been long accustomed, yet she does recommend this as a suitable text book, and approves of its general use and adoption, whenever in the opinion of the subordinate Lodges, it may be profitably introduced.

These majority and minority reports were presented on Wednesday afternoon, October 16. At the evening session on Saturday, October 19, the majority report was by the Grand Lodge rejected, and the resolution submitted by the minority adopted. On the face of the record as printed in our Grand Lodge Proceedings, this result appears to have been anomalous as well as unfortunate. The mode of work recommended by the Baltimore Convention had been unanimously adopted a year previously. Colonel Carnegy, one of the delegates, had been made Grand Visitor (Lecturer), thus assuring the correct teaching of that mode of work. And yet, the text book or monitor, The Masonic Trestle Board (of which Colonel Carnegy was one of the editors), intended to be an aid in the dissemination of that mode of work, was not adopted, its use was not enjoined, and it could be utilized or ignored as the subordinate Lodges might see fit. OBJECTIONABLE FEATURES

But an examination of The Masonic Trestle Board itself reveals the fact that at least three objections of a serious nature are apparent. First. The Baltimore Convention adopted the report of a Committee, of which Albert Case was chairman, which included the "charges" to be delivered to a candidate at the [53 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

conclusion of each of the three degrees. These "charges," by the way, are, for all practical purposes, the charges appearing in Webb's Monitor, and in our official Missouri Manual now in use. The "charge" published in The Masonic Trestle Board for use in the first degree, and the one for use in the second degree, while very good, are not the ones adopted by the Convention. Second. At the beginning of Chapter IV of The Masonic Trestle Board are published paragraphs entitled "On the Qualifications and Duties of Candidates for Freemasonry," and these paragraphs are followed by paragraphs generally entitled "Ancient Charges," with the following subtitles, "The Private Duties of Masons," "Duties as Citizens," "Duties in the Lodge," "Duties as Neighbors," and "Duties Towards a Brother." These paragraphs are not taken from the "Charges of a Free-Mason," that is from the true "ancient charges," published in Anderson's Constitutions, 1723, by authority of the premier Grand Lodge. They appear to have been taken from a book entitled "Ahiman Rezon," edited by Laurence Dermott, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge, which was a rival of the premier Grand Lodge, and published in London in 1756. 78 J

The premier Grand Lodge was established in 1717; by 1751, as a result of a movement commenced as early as 1739, a rival Grand Lodge had been set up in London. This rival organization has often been called a schismatic Grand Lodge, but it is now thought fairer to describe it as a rival. This younger Grand Lodge claimed that it maintained unchanged the ancient usages and customs, and it charged that the premier or older Grand Lodge had modernized Masonry by departing from certain of those usages and customs. Hence there arose the anomaly that the premier or older organization came to be known as the Modern Grand Lodge and its members as The Moderns, while the rival or younger organization came to be known as the Ancient Grand Lodge and its members as The Ancients. Each of these Grand Lodges chartered Lodges in America. The rivalry, in England, did not come to an end until the adoption of the Act of Union, December 27, 1813. Laurence Dermott who became Grand Secretary of the Ancient Grand 18

[54 ]

THE MASONIC TRESTLE BOARD

Third. Under the title, "Opening of the Lodge," Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon, said, In the English system, which seems, according to the Trestle Board published under the sanction of the late Baltimore Convention, to have been adopted by that body, the lodge is opened in the first degree "in the name of God and Universal Benevolence" ; in the second, rr on the square, in the name of the Great Geometrician of the Universe" ; and in the third, rr on the centre, in the name of the Most High."

That this met with serious objection is indicated by the fact that, in the second edition of The Masonic Trestle Board (1846) , these matters were published as a footnote and it was Lodge February 5, 1752, was its leading spirit. He was an Irishman, highly intelligent, aggressive, witty and resourceful. A quotation from his writings (Ahiman Rezon, 2d ed., 1764, p. xxxii) will serve to illustrate the kind of warfare he waged against the 'premier Grand Lodge: "Nor is it uncommon for a tyler to receive ten or twelve shillings for drawing two sign posts with chalk &c and writing Jamaica (rum) upon one, and Barbadoes (rum) upon the other, and all this (I suppose) for no other reason than to distinguish where these Liquors are to be placed in the Lodge." But Dermott was willing to admit good points in his adversaries, as is evidenced in the same edition of his book (p. xxiv): "I have not the least antipathy against the gentlemen members of the modern society, but on the contrary, love and respect them, because I have found the generality of them to be hearty cocks and good fellows (as the bacchanalian phrase is) and many of them I believe to be worthy of receiving every blessing that good men can ask or heaven bestow. . . ." For further particulars regarding The Moderns and The Ancients, the reader is referred to "The Anglo-Irish Grand Lodge," by Joe L. Carson, The Builder, September, 1923, Vol. IX, p. 267, et seq. "Chapters of Masonic History," by H. 1. Haywood, Parts XI and XII, The Builder, April and May, 1924, Vol. X, p. 111, et seq. "The Craft in the Eighteenth Century," by Arthur Heiron. The Builder, May, June and July, 1926, Vol. XII, p. 136, et seq. "Masonic Jurisprudence," by Dean Roscoe Pound, Little Masonic Library, Vol. IV. "Modern Masonry," by Joseph Fort Newton, Little Masonic Library, Vol. VI. "The Rival Grand Lodges of England," by Charles C. Hunt, Iowa Grand Lodge Bulletin, April and May, 1934, Vol. XXXV, p. 100, et seq., September, 1935, Vol. XXXVI, p. 260, et seq. The fantastic title of Dermott's book, Ahiman Rezon, the book of constitutions of the Ancient Grand Lodge, is supposed to mean "worthy brother secretary," although Dr. Mackey in his Lexicon expressed the opinion that it was

[ 55 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

explained that "they had been inserted for use, if their use were found desirable, and not with the idea of making their use mandatory." DR. MITCHELL'S OBJECTIONS

In his autobiography (1869), Dr. Mitchell detailed four objections, which, he related, were raised by him to the report of Carnegy and Foster (1843) on their return from Baltimore. But inasmuch as the printed record of our Grand Lodge Proceedings indicates that the sharp division of opinion was in 1844 when The Masonic Trestle Board was under consideration, and not in 1843, and inasmuch as Dr. Mitchell is shown by the record to have sided'with the majority of the Committee derived from three Hebrew words, ahim, manah, ratzon, and meant "the law of chosen brothers." This book was introduced into America at an early day and was republished in Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina and Pennsylvania, and appears to have come into very general use and to have been widely regarded as authoritative. It is supposed by the writer that the controversey over The Masonic Trestle Board gave rise to the enquiry in the Grand Lodge of Missouri as to what were the ancient landmarks, etc. (October, 1846). In May, 1850, a Committee of which Dr. Mitchell was chairman, reported that the ancient charges published in Anderson's Constitutions contained "all or nearly all the ancient landmarks and usages of Masonry proper to be published." Prior to this Committee report, Dr. Mitchell had published these ancient charges in his magazine, The Masonic Signet (December, 1848, Vol. I, p. 298, et seq). Editorially, in the same issue (pp. 315-316). he explained that he had visited the Grand Lodge of Illinois, October, 1848, and "We noticed in the Grand Lodge procession, a large old-fashioned-shaped Book, and having observed the place of its deposit, at the conclusion of the services, we lost no time in looking at its title page, and to our great joy, found it to be a copy of Anderson's Constitutions, edition of 1756. On enquiry we found the work belonged to Brother Souther of Alton, to whom we and our readers are greatly indebted for his liberality, in permitting us the use of it long enough to make such extracts as will be of infinite interest to the Craft. . . . We may have been more unfortunate than others, but we have tried in vain to see a copy of this work ever since we knew anything of Masonry; we know the work is scarce-having gone out of print-and if we judge from the following extract, which we make from the first blank page of the work, written in a fair hand, we marvel not that there are so few copies in the' United States: 'James Eveleth's. Bought in Boston the 12th day of July, 1778. Price, ÂŁ6-4 L.M: "

[56 ]

THE MASONIC TRESTLE BOARD

in recommending a rejection of the textbook, it seems probable that his objections were made in 1844, and not at the time Carnegy and Foster reported to the Grand Lodge. In his autobiography, he related that he moved to strike out: first, so much as taught the doctrine that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge was no Lodge at all, and that a Fellow Crafts' Lodge was no Lodge at all; second, so much as taught that a Lodge under dispensation was no Lodge at all, but a thing in abeyance, out of which a Lodge might be born at a future period, viz., when it exchanged its limited charter for a permanent one, and yet aU this time this thing could make Masons ; third, so much as taught that the business of a Lodge should be transacted in a Masters' Lodge; fourth, so much as taught that the Lodge should be opened on the third degree, and the Lodges below presumed to be opened, and to close the third degree, presuming the degrees below to be closed.

The Masonic Trestle Board, however, did contain many "excellencies"-to utilize the word used by the majority of the committee in recommending its rejection by the Grand Lodge of Missouri. Aside from those features which unfortunately brought criticism upon it, as comparison will show, it was a lineal descendant of Webb's Monitor, as was Cross' Chart. A comparison of the present Missouri Manual with all three of these textbooks reveals that it, too, has the same "excellencies," and is a true descendant of Webb's Monitor.

[57 ]

Part V THE MISSOURI RITUAL AND THE BALTIMORE WORK AMONG the powers of the Grand Lodge of Missouri enumerated in its first Constitution,79 which was framed in February, 1821, was the power To establish an uniform mode of working 80 throughout the State, strictly adhering to the ancient landmarks, usages and customs of Masonry. And in furtherance of this desirable object it shall be the duty of the Grand Master, by himself or some well informed brother by him appointed, at least once in every year, to visit every subordinate Lodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, to lecture and instruct the brethren, and to correct such errors as may have obtained among them. To require from the several lodges under their jurisdiction such annual dues as they shall deem necessary, to be appropriated for the benefit of the Craft.

It seems apparent that the Grand Master would be more likely to appoint some one to perform these functions than to undertake them himself; and, that is what actually happened. As a natural consequence of the use of the phrase "to visit" the brother so appointed came to be known as the "Grand Visitor." No provision having been made for the payment of either compensation or expenses, it is likewise apparent that the constitutional provision was not a workable one; consequently Mo. reprint, pp. 16, 17. Paragraph (3), Section I, of Article V, of the present Constitution reads: "To establish and preserve a uniform mode of Work and Lectures within the ancient landmarks and customs of Masonry." 19 80

[58 ]

MISSOURI RITU AL-BA LTIMOR EWORK

the first amendment to the constitution proposed was one, at the semi-annual Communication of April, 1822, providing that another office be created, that of Grand Lecturer, such officer to be charged with the duty of visiting all the subordinate Lodges once a year, "of establishing an uniform mode of working," correcting errors, etc. The original Constitution could only be amended by referendum to the subordinate Lodges, and upon favorable action being taken by a majority of them. No such action was ever had upon the proposal. In this connection, it is to be noted that in this proposed amendment we have the first use of the term "Grand Lecturer" in the Missouri Proceedings. GEORGE H. C. MELODY

Our first Grand Visitor was George H. C. Melody (17931860), a member of Missouri Lodge No.1, Saint Louis, and one of the organizers of the Grand Lodge. We only know of his appointment by the inference arising from the fact that at the Communication of October, 1822, Melody brought in a bill showing that he had been engaged 56 days in visiting and lecturing Lodges numbered 1 to 10,81 except No.8, at $3 per day, making a total of $168, which he had credited with $64.32 collected from Lodges, leaving a balance of $103.68 still due him. The Grand Lodge ordered this balance paid out of its treasury and directed its Grand Treasurer to charge it to the nine Lodges in question, according to their respective liability as shown by the statement. Whether the Grand 81 No.1, Missouri, St. Louis, Mo.; No.2, Joachim, Herculaneum, Mo.; NO.3, Hiram, St. Charles, Mo.; No.4, Harmony, Louisiana, Mo.; No.5, Olive Branch, Alton, Ill.; No.6, Unity, Jackson, Mo.; No.7, Franklin-Union, (Old) Franklin, Mo.; No.8, Vandalia, Vandalia, Ill.; NO.9, Sangamon, Springfield, Ill.; No. 10, Union, Jonesboro, Ill.; No. 11, Eden, Covington, 111., chartered October, 1822; No. 12, Tyro, Caledonia, Mo., chartered April 6, 1825.

[59 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Lodge treasury was ever reimbursed cannot be ascertained from the printed record. The next mention of the subject occurs in the Proceedings of October, 1826, where it is recorded that Melody was appointed Grand Lecturer by Edward Bates, Grand Master. So far as the printed record shows, Melody 82 is the only person who acted as Grand Visitor or Grand Lecturer up to October,' . 1839, when Joseph Foster was appointed Grand Visitor, by Judge McBride. In October, 1840, Colonel Carnegy was appointed Grand Visitor by Judge McBride, who in October, 1841, appointed Alexander T. Douglass, and reappointed him in October, 1842. As has already been stated, Colonel Carnegy was appointed Grand Visitor by Judge McBride in October, 1843, following the Baltimore Convention. THE REVISION OF 1844

At the Communication of April, 1843, complying with a resolution then adopted, Judge McBride appointed a Committee consisting of Carnegy, Foster and Billon, to revise the , constitution and by-laws. The report of this Committee was submitted at the Communication of October, 1844, and after being read a third time was unanimously adopted, October 17, 1844.

Let us review these briefly in the light of the subject matter of this study: Article II of the Constitution created the office of Grand Lecturer, which officer, under the provisions of Article III was to be appointed annually by the Grand Master. 82 In Ray V. Denslow's History of Royal Arch Masonry, page 150, it is stated that Melody "is said to have received his lectures and ritual from no less a teacher than Thomas Smith Webb, with whom he once visited in Albany, N. Y."

[60 ]

MISSOURI RITUAL-BALTIMORE WORK

Under paragraph 3, Section 1, Article V, the Grand Lodge was declared to have the power, "To establish and preserve a uniform mode of work and lectures within the ancient landmarks and customs of Masonry." Three sections of Article V of the By-Laws are pertinent, VIZ.:

Section 14. The several lodges in all cases of conferring the several degrees shall deliver the Lectures appertaining to the degree conferred. Section 15. No work or other business of the Craft shall be performed in any other than the Master's degree, except only lecturing, examination of candidates, and conferring the previous degrees. Section 27. No Lodge shall permit the delivery of lectures on the work and degrees of Masonry, by anyone who is not a member of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, or of some Lodge under its jurisdiction, or by some one duly authorized by the Grand Lodge. Nor shall any Lodge permit the delivery of any lectures except such as have been sanctioned by the Grand Lodge.

Article XX of the by-laws had to do with the Grand Lecturer, and was composed of four sections, viz.: Sectio~ 1. The Grand Lecturer shall acquaint himself thoroughly with the work and lectures of the four 8S first degrees. He shall attend the meetings of the Grand Lodge and exemplify the work and lectures when required. Section 2. He shall visit the several Lodges, if necessary, and instruct them in the work, lectures and ceremonies, and also, in every department of the duty and business of Masonry. Section 3. He shall be entitled to his travelling expenses, and a reasonable compensation for his services, to be paid by the Lodges respectively, to which services are rendered. Provided, however, that he shall visit no Lodge without the request of the Lodge. 83 Includes the degree of Past Master, then used in the Lodge as an installation ceremony. Section 2 of Article VI of these By-Laws required the Lodges to confer the degree of Past Master upon the Wardens, which section was repealed October, 1845.

[61 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Section 4. Ten days' notice, in writing, to the Worshipful Master of any Lodge, shall be deemed due notice of the intended visit of the Grand Lecturer to such Lodge. GRAND LECTURERS,

1843-1855

Having adopted the mode of work recommended by the Baltimore Convention and having enacted the provisions of Constitution and law just mentioned, our Grand Lodge was in possession of a standard or official mode of work; the same was in the custody of a constitutional official of the Grand Lodge, namely, the Grand Lecturer. It is apparent that official could not be a very active one, however, for the reason that his pay and expenses came from the Lodges which were instructed, and he could not officially visit and instruct a Lodge without being invited to do so. The actual result was that only those Lodges were instructed who thought they could afford it, or where the expense was negligible. As a matter of fact, the Grand Lecturer's chief function was to exemplify the work at the annual Communications of the Grand Lodge. It was not until the period of service of Anthony O'Sullivan as Grand Lecturer (May, 1855, to May, 1866), that that official functioned to any great extent in instructing the Lodges. But in tracing the genealogy of our work, we are not so much concerned with what the Grand Lecturers did, as we are with what they knew and with what they taught on those occasions when they were called upon to do so. We therefore turn to the roll of Grand Lecturers and the roll of the Grand Masters who appointed them, from a ca~ual inspection of which there is only one inference to be drawn and that inference is that the mode of work as reported by Carnegy and Foster in October, 1843 (that of the Baltimore [62 ]

MISSOURI RITUAL-BALTIMORE WORK

. Convention), and then adopted by our Grand Lodge, was known by each and every Grand Lecturer. Colonel Carnegy, who was one of the two delegates to the Baltimore Convention, and who, with Joseph Foster, the other delegate, made the report to the Grand Lodge in October, 1843, and was at that time appointed by Judge McBride, was reappointed in October, 1844, and in October, 1845, by Dr. Mitchell. In October, 184,6, Colonel Ralls appointed the Reverend William Hurley, who was then a resident of Palmyra (the place of residence of Colonel Carnegy) and had been since 1834. It is entirely unlikely that a Grand Lecturer could reside in the same town with Colonel Carnegy and not know the Baltimore work. . In October, 1847, Joseph Foster appointed George H. C. Melody, who, as has been related, was the first 'Grand Lecturer our Grand Lodge ever had. As Joseph Foster was one of the two delegates to the Baltimore Convention, it is inconceivable that he would appoint anyone Grand Lecturer who did not know the work as he knew it. The same comment is applicable to the appointment made by Joseph Foster in May, 1848-that of Charles Levy of Saint Louis. It must also be noted that Levy was present at the Grand Lodge Communication of October, 1843, when the report from Baltimore was made and adopted; and that at the time of his appointment Levy was a member of Napthali Lodge No. 25, of which Foster was also a member. In May, 1849, Judge Ryland appointed Melody; and in May, 1850, he appointed Joseph Foster. In May, 1851, Melody was again appointed by Colonel Grover, who, in May, 1852, appointed Charles Levy. [63 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

In June, 1853, Joseph Foster was again called to the Grand Lectureship, this time by appointment of Wilson Brown; and he was reappointed the following May by Love S. Cornwell. ANTHONY O'SULLIVAN

This brings us to the time of Anthony O'Sullivan, who was appointed by Cornwell in May, 1855, and who served continuously until May, 1866. His brethren made Anthony O'Sullivan the first "professional" Freemason in Missouri-and the term "professional" is used in its dignified sense to describe one who devoted all of his time officially to the cause of Freemasonry, and who by virtue of the various offices held by him received a scant livelihood in return. O'Sullivan was said by his contemporaries to have regarded the work as Grand Lecturer as the great mission of his life. Undoubtedly this was true. In various ways he escaped the results of the law having to do with pay and expenses, and he travelled over the State, visited the Lodges, .and taught Freemasonry extensively and intensively. In May, 1858, for example, he recorded that in the preceding year he had been absent from his home in Saint Louis nearly six months, and had travelled over twenty-six hundred miles in the discharge of his duties as Grand Lecturer. As an illustration of the impression he made upon the minds and hearts of those he instructed, may be cited the fact that in The Builder, September, 1916, Vol. II, page 287, was published a communication from J. G. Anderson, then of California, in which he proclaimed, with evident pride, the fact that sixty years previously he had learned his Masonry from O'Sullivan, who had then informed him that the work he taught was the work of the Baltimore Convention. [64 ]

MISSOURI RITUAL-BALTIMORE WORK TWENTY YEARS AFTER

There is still more cogent proof that the work taught by O'Sullivan and his predecessors was the work of the Baltimore Convention, for at the Communication of May, 1863, the Grand Lodge of Missouri recorded the fact, in unanimously adopting the preamble and resolutions presented by Charles Levy on behalf of Joseph Foster, whose signature they bore. These are of such significance that they are quoted in full: Whereas, The Grand Lodge, at its session in 1842, appointed R. W. S. W. B. Carnegy and Joseph Foster to meet in Convention with representatives from other Grand Lodges, in the City of Baltimore, to agree upon and establish uniformity of work ,and lectures of the degrees under the control of Grand Lodges; and Whereas, the said Convention met in said City in May, 1843, and then and there adopted a system of work and lectures for the aforesaid degrees, and agreed to promulgate the said work and lectures, and none other, in their respective jurisdictions; and Whereas, the said Carnegy and Foster, in Grand Lodge assembled, in the City of Saint Louis, at the annual session in 1843, did frequently and fully exemplify the said work and lectures, and the Grand Lodge did formally and solemnly adopt the said work and lectures, and required all its constituent Lodges to teach and practice the same, to the exclusion of all other work and lectures, and also to exclude from their Lodges all itinerant lecturers of every grade, from wheresoever they may hail; and Whereas, the said work and lectures, for the past twenty years, have been annually exemplified in open Grand Lodge, and the present Grand Lecturer, R. W. A. O'Sullivan, has, at great cost of time; health and means traversed this jurisdiction to promulgate the same to the Lodges; and Whereas, the said work and lectures, as exemplified by him at the present session of the Grand Lodge, are the same, in every essential particular, as reported by Carnegy and Foster in 1843: Be it therefore resolved by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, in Grand

[65 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Annual Convocation assembled, That all the laws, resolutions and orders heretofore ordained in relation to the adoption, promulgation and perpetuation of the aforesaid work and lectures are hereby affirmed; And it is further resolved, That it is the high duty of the Masters and Wardens and members of the Lodges in this jurisdiction to perfect themselves in the aforesaid work and lectures, and teach and practice them faithfully, to the exclusion of all other systems by whomsoever promulgated; And be it further resolved, and enjoined upon the Masters and Wardens of the aforesaid constituent Lodges to see that section 30 of Article IV,84 of the by-laws of this Grand Lodge, is faithfully and fully obeyed, according to the true intent and spirit thereof. 85

Of course, because of the nature of the matter, it is impossible to determine when the Grand Lecturer in Missouri ceased to give instruction only in the official mode of work as a prescribed basis for working the degrees, and attempted . the larger task of teaching a formal ritual complete as to every word, syllable and letter. It is the opinion of the writer that this came about while O'Sullivan was Grand Lecturer, which opinion is based upon two reasons: First. It was during O'Sullivan's time that the trend of thought in the Fraternity was directed toward the idea of a complete, formal ritual. Rob Morris and his Conservators movement are responsible for this. It is during this period that the word "ritual" begins to appear in the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge. iii Revision of 1853, and word for word identical with Sec. 27, of Article V, revision of 1844, heretofore quoted. 8G The occasion of the introduction and adoption of these resolutions was the fact that the controversy over Rob Morris' Conservators was then at its height. Thomas E. Garrett, presently to be mentioned, was a member of the Conservators, and the most prominent Missouri Mason connected with the movement. Only seventeen Missourians are known to have been members. See list of members in Denslow's The Masonic Conservators, p. 125.

[66 ]

MISSOURI RITUAL-BALTIMORE WORK

Second. O'Sullivan was of the then younger generation, and was not bound, as were his predecessors, by the preconceived idea of "an official mode of work" permitting latitude and as distinguished from a formal ritual. The introduction of a formal ritual by a Grand Lecturer of the type of O'Sullivan would be just such a step as might be expected to be taken by a Freemason of his ability and learning. No matter when, by whom, or how the change was brought about from "official mode of work" to formal ritual, it must be admitted by anyone who will study the subject, that in the mode of work adopted by the Baltimore Convention and iri The Masonic Trestle Board are to be found all of the essentials of the present Missouri ritual. Recognition is as easy as the recognition of a child from its resemblance to a parent. On the retirement of O'Sullivan in May, 1866, John F. Houston, who had appointed him Grand Lecturer in May, 1865, was himself appointed by Dr. John D. Vincil. In October, 1867, Thomas E. Garrett was appointed by William E. Dunscomb, and was reappointed in October, 1868, by Dr. Vincil. Then J. A. H. Lampton served one year as Grand Lecturer through his appointment in October, 1869, by William D. Muir. ALLAN MCDOWELL

When in October, 1870, Garrett became Grand Master, he appointed Allan McDowell, who was reappointed from year to year thereafter, until he died in office, May 20, 1906. Once more, we may refer to official records to ascertain what the Grand Lecturer knew, and these records definitely link the teaching of Allan McDowell with that, of his mentor, Anthony [67 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

O'Sullivan, and with the Baltimore work. Our first quotation is from the official report of McDowell as D. D. G. M. published in the Proceedings of October, 1868, page 129: I cannot close this report without referring, with feelings of deep and lasting gratitude, to the support and encouragement I have received from my predecessor, R. W. Bro. Arch M. Long. A pupil, with me,86 of our lamented Bro. A. O'Sullivan, he has, with singular fidelity, retained his instructions, and with a jealous care watched over the interests of Masonry during the years he was District Deputy, and during the past year he has, by his unfailing kindness to me and his unselfish devotion to Masonry, enabled me to accomplish far more than I could otherwise have done. At a sacrifice of time and means and personal ease, he accompanied me during an extensive tour, in mid-winter, to assist me in the work of giving instruction to the Lodges, for which I, and for which the Lodges, owe him a debt of lasting gratitude. THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AFTER

Another quotation is from the memorial adopted by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, October, 1878, on the occasion of the death of Joseph Foster, and submitted by a Committee composed of Carnegy, Ralls, Saunders, Garrett and Luke. After reciting that Joseph Foster had received the Craft degrees in Virginia in 1823, and other facts, the memorial stated: In 1843, he was one of a Committee to represent Missouri in a convention of Masons that assembled in Baltimore to agree upon a uniform work, and subsequently assisted in establishing the present Masonic work and lectures of Missouri. He was a veteran in the Order of Masonry and had aO national reputation as such. . . . He was a master of the laws and rituals of Masonry and carried out their teachings in all his dealings with men. 88 McDowell resided at Greenfield, Missouri, near Springfield, which was O'Sullivan's place of residence 1860-63.

[68 ]

MISSOURI RITUAL-BALTIMORE WORK MCDOWELL'S PUPILS CARRY ON

The successor of Allan McDowell was our well beloved and Right Worshipful Brother James R. McLachlan, who, after twenty-eight years路 of most successful and zealous service, voluntarily retired in September, 1934, becoming Grand Lec'turer Emeritus, and who was succeeded by a Most Worshipful Brother, preeminently qualified to fill the position of Grand Lecturer and carry on the noble tradition left by his predecessors, Past Grand Master Anthony F. Ittner, whose term as Grand Master was 1927-28. As M. W. Brother Ittner was a pupil of R. W. Brother McDowell and of R. W. Brother McLachlan, and as the latter was a pupil of R. W. Brother McDowell, the links in the chain are complete, connecting the Missouri ritual of the present with the mode of work prescribed by the Baltimore Convention. THIRTEEN LINKS IN THE CHAIN

Only thirteen brethren have served the Grand Lodge of Missouri as Grand Lecturer. The writer reverently sets down their names and the periods of their service in recognition of the veneration in which each has held the sacred trust and the scrupulous care with which each has imparted his knowledge to his less-informed brethren: 1. George H. C. Melody, 1821-1839; October, 1847-May, 1848; May, 1849-May,1850; May, 18S1-May, 1852. 2. Joseph Foster, October, 1839-0ctober, 1840; May, 1850-May, 1851; June, 1853-May, 1855. 3. Stephen W. B. Carnegy, October, 1840-0ctober, 1841; October, 1843-0ctober, 1846. 4. Alexander T. Douglass, October, 1841-0ctober, 1843.

[69 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

5. William Hurley, October, 1846-0ctober, 1847. 6. Charles Levy, May, 1848-May, 1849; May, 1852-June, 1853. 7. Anthony O'Sullivan, May, 1855-May, 1866. 8. John F. Houston, May, 1866-0ctober, 1867. 9. Thomas E. Garrett, October, 1867-0ctober, 1869. 10. J. A. H. Lampton, October, 1869-0ctober, 1870. 11. Allan McDowell, October, 1870-May 20, 1906. 12. James R. McLachlan, 1906-September, 1934. 13. Anthony F. Ittner, September, 1934--.

[70 ]