FROM MOUTH TO EAR

FROM MOUTH TO EARTHE GENEALOGY OF OUR MISSOURI RITUAL

BY

HENRY C. CHILESJUNIOR 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, SaintJoseph, Missouri, September 23, 1935

1936

PUBLISHED BY THE GRAND LODGE

A. F. & A. M. OF MISSOURI

Copyright, 1936, byHENRY C. CHILES

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, representativesof Grand Lodges, held in the City of Baltimore, Maryland,May 8-17, 1843. The main objective of this Convention wasto agree upon a "mode of work" and recommend the adoption of the same to the various Grand Lodges of the UnitedStates, to the end that the "mode of work" might be uniformthroughout the Nation. This study attempts to answer, andwill be found to follow a general outline suggested by, fivequestions namely:

(1) What is the meaning of the phrase, "mode of work" ?(2) What was the "mode of work" prior to the Con-

vention? .(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 ofJune, the day of light and roses, marks the high noon of theyear, 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 modernhistory of Freemasonry may be said to begin, for, then, at theGoose and Gridiron Alehouse in Saint Paul's Churchyard, inLondon, Anthony Sayer, gentleman, was elected Grand Master of Masons. This election of a Grand Master made complete the organization of the premier Grand Lodge, whichhad been formed pro tempore at the Apple Tree Tavern,Charles Street, Covent Garden at an unknown date (probablyin 1716), by the members of four London Lodges,l and someold brethren there assembled.

On the twenty-eighth day of February, 1723, new style,2 abook was published by authority of this Grand Lodge, whichwas the first Masonic work ever officially published, and

1 These four Lodges took their designations from the taverns or alehouseswhere they met, and were: (1) The Lodge meeting at the Goose and GridironAlehouse; (2) The Lodge meeting at the Crown Alehouse; (3) The Lodgemeeting at the Apple Tree Tavern; and (4) The Lodge meeting at the Rummerand Grapes Tavern. These taverns and alehouses had signs above their doorscorresponding 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 thebeginning 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 JulianCalendar. The same Act adjusted an error of eleven days created by theJulian Calendar, by making the third day of September, 1752, the fourteenthday 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 aPresbyterian minister. The full title of this book was TheConstitution, History, Laws, Charges, Orders, Regulationsand Usages of the Right Worshipful Fraternity of AcceptedFree Masons; Collected from Their General Records andTheir Faithful Traditions of Many Ages. This title was followed by these words, "To be read at the admission of a newbrother when the Master or Warden shall begin, or ordersome other Brother to read as follows."

The work had three important parts: First, an historicalintroduction which purported to detail the history of Freemasonry beginning with Adam, who, it stated, "must have hadthe Liberal Sciences particularly Geometry, written on hisHeart"; second, the "Charges of aFree-Mason," six in numberand now usually called the "old" or "ancient charges," and,third, the "General Regulations" in thirty-nine articles, nowusually called the "old" or "ancient constitutions:' Presumably, these three parts were to be read on the admission of anew member, and were in that respect ritualistic in theirnature.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

But Anderson's Constitutions was not the ritual in the secretsense 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 anddedication, and was 9 by 11% inches in size. Benjamin Franklin republishedit at Philadelphia, in August, 1734, making it the first Masonic book· to beprinted and published in America. A facsimile (except as to size) was published in 1924 by The Masonic Service Association of the United States, asVolume 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]


which every word, syllable and letter is prescribed was notevolved until long afterward. The celebrated Albert G.Mackey, in his Lexicon of Freemasonry4 said that prior to thepublication of Anderson's Constitutions, Dr. Anderson andDr. Theophilus Desaguliers, F.R.S. (the third Grand Masterof the premier Grand Lodge), had arranged "the lectures"in the form of questions and answers, a catechism. And, aswill presently appear, a knowledge of the catechism became theprescribed basis for working the degrees. Of these "lectures"the noted Dr: George Oliver, in his Symbol of Glory,5 statedthere were three; and that the first lecture was lengthy, andthe second, not so long. In his Historical Landmarks of Freemasonry,6 he said, "The Master's part, as it was called, or inother words, the third lecture, consisted formerly of onlyseven questions, with very brief replies, exclusive of the Lodgeexamination on the principal points, which have the samereference as our present third degree . . ." 7

The point must be stressed that "the lectures" were a seriesof questions and answers, a catechism, a word, which, according to Webster, means "a form of instruction by question andanswer."

As a matter of fact, the term, "the lectures," continued tohave this significance (questions and answers) and had itat 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 Sol

omon's Temple, and a footnote at page 11 is devoted to an accomplishedworkman named Hiram sent to Solomon by the King of Tyre to assist inbuilding the Temple. It is interesting to note that in the very year (1723)Anderson's Constitutions was published, a model of Solomon's Temple wason 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 thatthe Committee had, after mature deliberation, decided on the Lectureof the First Degree, and proceeded to report-Br. Moore giving theanswers.8

Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon, made this clear, when he saidof the lectures:

These constitute the simple text of Masonry, while the extendedillustrations 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 byMartin Clare, F.R.S., who is said to have added moral andscriptural admonitions and to have introduced an allusion tothe human senses and an allusion to the theologicalladder.10

Subsequently, Thomas Dunckerly is said to have extendedand improved the lectures and he, it is stated, gave names tothree rounds of the ladder.11

The author (whose name is not given) of an article entitledthe "History of the Ritual," first published in 1863, stated thatin 1763 the Reverend William Hutchinson revised and im-

8 Page 8, Wednesday, May 10, 1843.9 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 ofthe planets by means of which souls ascended and descended," and that "thisis precisely the ladder in Jacob's vision," Vol. I, p. 131. A ladder depictedin Cross' Chart (16th ed.) has only three rounds visible.

(8)


proved the lectures and introduced references to the threegreat 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 Londonfor the purpose of spreading the light. After many years ofstudy and preparation, on May 21, 1772, he delivered the firstlecture "at a grand gala held at his own expense at the Crownand Anchor Tavern in the Strand." 14 In that same year hepublished his work entitled Illustrations of Masonry and inso doing became the "Father of the Masonic Monitor," forPreston'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 thatyear he became a member of and the Master of the Lodge ofAntiquity, then meeting at the Mitre Tavern in Fleet Street,and the same Lodge (then unnamed) which met at the Gooseand Gridiron in 1717. In 1787, his school of instruction became the "Grand Chapter of Harodim," and in 1796 heestablished a Lodge of Instruction.14

Under the provisions of Preston's last will and testament,Masonic charities benefited to the extent of one thousandpounds, 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 tothe system practiced in the Lodge of Antiquity during myMastership." 15

This provision of the will of Preston shows the importancehe attached to "the lectures." And, indeed, it was the custom,in his day, not to close the Lodge without giving a lecture or apart of a lecture if time and opportunity permitted.16 Thiscustom also obtained in America and no doubt was the sourcefrom which Thomas Smith Webb derived the theme of his"Master's Song," 17 the first verse and chorus of which arequoted:

I sing the Mason's glory,Whose prying mind doth burn,

Unto complete perfectionOur mysteries to learn;

Not those who visit LodgesTo eat and drink their fill,

Not those who at our meetingsHear 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.

15 The Builder, April, 1924.18 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.

[ 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 sectionsin the first lecture, the first section had five clauses; 19 the second, third and fourth sections had six clauses each; the fifthhad five, and the last, six. These divisions into sectionsand the subdivisions into clauses are said to have been moreor less arbitrary and to have been made more for the purposeof allotting a task to a pupil than for the purpose of makinga logical division of the subject matter.

In the Grand Chapter of Harodim, the sections were as-o signed each year, by the Chief Harod, to competent brethrenwho were called "Sectionists." These Sectionists assigned theclauses, in their respective sections of the lectures, to brethrenwho were called "Clause Holders," One who had committedto memory all the sections became a "Lecturer."20

PRESTON'S METHOD, PURPOSE AND PHILOSOPHY

The celebrated Rob Morris, in his Monitor, explainedPreston'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 arestated 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, orform 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, orceremony, of Masonry, which was made literally to conform to theLectures. Thus, no material innovation could be introduced withoutchanging the language and order of the Lectures. 21

Morris further explained that as a part of the answers to thequestions were considered to be exoteric in their nature, thatportion could be found in Preston's Illustrations. Esotericmatters were suggested by means of representations of varioussymbols and emblems. These representations were not illustrations printed in the book but were depicted upon whatwere called "floor cloths" or "carpets." 22 This explanation

21 Quoted by Ray V. Denslow in his The Masonic Conservators, publishedby the Grand Lodge of Missouri, 1931, page 33. The reader will note thatMorris used the phrase "method of work," which is synonymous with "modeof work," and his explanation answers our first question, "What is themeaning of the phrase 'mode of work'?"

22 W. W. Covey-Crump, in The Builder, May, 1925, Vol. XI, p. 151, statedthat "the designs originated in sundry crude geometrical diagrams, which, inthe Freemasonry prevailing in England during the early part of the eighteenthcentury were usually drawn (with chalk, charcoal or similar substances) uponthe 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 erasingthe diagram when the ceremony ended usually devolved upon the newlyentered Apprentice:' From this developed the delineation on canvas or othercloth, concerning which the same writer stated that, "the use of these floorcloths was primarily intended merely for the first degree, but emblems associated with superior degrees were soon added; and thus the diagram becamea pictorial design desirable for use upon all occasions of Masonic business,because it naturally added dignity to the proceedings. Various appellationswere given to the new appurtenance, especially when in many instances itdeveloped into a framed canvas or a wooden panel, but gradually the terms'tresselboard' and 'lodge board' predominated, and the latter became familiarlyabbreviated 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 theemblems of any particular degree are inscribed, for the assistance of the Masterin giving a lecture. It is so called because formerly it was the custom to

[ 12 ]


makes understandable the reference which may still be foundin monitors to the "Master's Carpet."

Another reason William Preston is of peculiar interest toFreemasons of the United States is that his Masonic philosophy is still expressed in the work today. Preston believedthat 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 toacquire learning, and, as he lived in a day when educationaladvantages were limited and restricted, he purposed to makeof each Masonic Lodge a school where a complete system of

inscribe these designs on the floor of the lodge room in chalk, which waswiped out when the lodge was closed. It is the same as the 'carpet' or 'tracingboard.''' •

The form of ceremony for constituting a new lodge adopted by the Balti·more Convention (Official Proceedings, p. 21) included in the division ofthe grand procession composed of the new lodge, "two brethren carrying thelodge." A footnote asterisked to the word "lodge" contains the single word,"flooring."

In Benoist's print which depicts the procession of the Scald MiserableMasons of April 17, 1742, (frontispiece, The Builder, October, 1917, Vol. III),are shown two persons carrying long poles which support high in the air alarge rectangular object, depicted on which is a coffin lid, on which are thecapital letters M B and above the top end of the lid is what appears to bea shrub. Marching behind is another person, also carrying a pole, whichbraces the rectangular object. An explanatory note on the print states that theobject is "A Master Mason's Lodge." Elsewhere in the procession is shownanother 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 itlost its original meaning, as is indicated by the fact that there appears in the16th edition of Cross' Chart (1853) a frontispiece, a full page plate on whichare depicted various symbols, entitled "Master's Carpet."

According to Dr. Mackey's Lexicon (2d ed., p. 287), the word "lodge" alsohad this meaning: "The lodge, technically speaking, is a piece of furniture,made in imitation of the Ark of the Covenant, which was constructed byBezaleel, according to the form prescribed by God Himself, and which, afterthe erection of the Temple was kept in the Holy of Holies. As it containedthe table of the law, the lodge contains the Book of Constitutions and thewarrant of constitution granted by the Grand Lodge."

[ 13 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

organized knowledge would be taught.23 This philosophyand this purpose are strongly evidenced when mention ismade of the seven liberal arts and sciences and when instruction is imparted concerning architecture, geometry, music,astronomy, etc. Monitors of today provide further evidencein that noble passage where we are told what to do in youthand what in manhood, that we may in old age «enjoy thehappy reflections consequent upon a well spent life."

EIGHTEENTH CENTURY WORK

Before transferring our study of «the lectures" from England to America, let us picture, so far as possible, the makingof 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 centurywere opened and closed and worked with the members seated about atable. A great variety of practice seems to have existed. Even in thesecond half of the century, it would appear that in some places candidates were initiated, the Lodge being so arranged. In other placesinitiation ceremonies were performed in another room, or another partof 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 thathe knows no more."-William Cowper; The Task, Book VI.

"Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom; and with all thygetting, get understanding."-Proverbs IV:7.

"Most of mankind's troubles are man-made, and arise from the compoundeffects of decisions taken without knowledge, ambitions uncontrolled bywisdom, and judgments that lack understanding. The blend of wisdom withknowledge would restrain men from contributing to this endless cycle of folly,but only understanding can guide them towards positive progress."-Hart, inColonel Lawrence.

[ 14 ]


habit prevailed, as we may surely call that in which the members remained at the table, it is probable that the diagrams that properlywere 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 inthe eighteenth century were very different to our present practice. Along table was extended from one end of the room to the other,covered with a green cloth, on which were placed duplicates of theornaments, furniture and jewels, intermixed with Masonic glasses forrefreshment. At one end of this table was placed the Master'spedestal, and at the other, that of the Senior Warden, while aboutthe middle of the table, in the South, the Junior Warden was placed,and the brethren sat around as at a common ordinary.24 When therewas a candidate to be initiated, the candidate was paraded outside thewhole; and on such occasions, after he had been safely deposited atthe Northeast angle of the Lodge, a very short explanation of the design of Freemasonry or a brief portion of the lecture was consideredsufficient before the Lodge was called from labor to refreshment.The song, the toast, the sentiment, went merrily round, and it wasnot until the brethren were tolerably satiated that the Lodge wasresumed and the routine business transacted before closing.

The proceedings of a Lodge in the early eighteenth centurywere 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 oneend is placed the table and chair of the R. W. M., the space betweenthe 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 theLodge, indeed he is the first person to appear, clad in serviceable clothand wearing a large white apron. 25 • • • Little can be described hereof the ceremony of making a Mason, save that the ritual of the periodwas closely followed, from the introduction of the candidate by theTyler to the concluding ceremony in which he was provided with amop a.nd pail. The candidate gradually progressed, receiving thecharge at the hands of the senior Entered Apprentice, followed bythe reading of the by-laws. The ritual throughout, strangely worded,fundamentally as today's, was delivered by the Master, Wardens andothers, as readily as though it were a matter of daily habit. Duringthe delivery of the lecture, which took the form of a dialogue betweenMaster and Wardens, the brethren were "called off" half a dozentimes when they refreshed themselves with good rye bread and cheese,Mine Host seeing to it that the punch flowed' freely. After the toastto His Majesty the King, the brethren loaded their church wardenpipes and thus created a truly friendly and Masonic atmosphere. Thecandidate was toasted by the Senior Warden, the brethren drank hishealth in the style peculiar to the times and the initiate was suitablyhesitant in his reply. The brethren sang together "The Enter'd'Prentice's Song"26 ... Then came a quartette "Guardian Geniusof Our Art Divine" . . . The closing of the Lodge was musical, too,when the brethren sang the catch, "Hark! The Hiram Sounds toClose." The brethren did not disperse, however, before drinking,at the behest of the jovial Tyler, to the health of "all poor and dis-

IS William Hogarth's engraving "Night" (1738) reproduced in The Builder,March, 1923, Vol. IX, p. 66, depicts a W. M. wearing a large apron reachingto 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 composedby Matthew Birkhead, who had departed this life prior to the publication ofAnderson'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 areAssembled on merry Occasion;Let's drink, laugh and sing;Our Wine has a SpringHere's a Health to an Accepted Mason.

[16 )


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

In commenting upon the work, the writer of the LodgeBulletin said, "The ritual proper is (or rather was) workedentirely by the Master and Wardens. It would thus call foronly three participants to commit much to memory. Thoughif 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 thetwo Wardens, the Junior has the larger share."

The description of "the lecture" as being in the form of adialogue is highly suggestive and will remind many of theconcluding portion of the degree of Mark Master as it wasconferred for many years. Unhappily, what was evidently asurvival of the ancient mode of working the degrees has beenheaved over among the rubbish, notwithstanding its peculiarform and beauty and the fact that it had the mark of ourancient Craft upon it.

2'1 It is said that the custom of drinking toasts was introduced into the GrandLodge upon the installation of Dr. John TheophiliIs Desaguliers, F.R.S., asGrand 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 ofAmerica. Prior to 1797, the Preston lectures were brought tothe United States and were acquired by Colonel Webb,28 thenof Albany, N ew York, who in that year published the firstedition 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 takenfrom Preston's Illustrations of Masonry, with some necessary alterations, Mr. Preston's distribution of the nrst lecture into six, thesecond into four, and the third into twelve sections, not being agreeable to the present mode of working, they are arranged in this workaccording to general practice.

It is said that Colonel Webb had the Preston lectures froma printer named John Hanmer, one of Preston's pupils, whohad come to Albany from London.28 In this connection itmust be noted that Webb's Monitor appeared in the sameyear the Convention was held which resulted in the formationof the General Grand Chapter, and in that Convention,Temple Chapter of Albany was repr~sented by Webb as HighPriest and by John Hanmer as Scribe.

In an article entitled "The Webb Ritual in the UnitedStates,"28 Silas H. Shepherd, of Wisconsin, said of the Prestonwork:

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

[ 18]


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

Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon, said that the Preston lectureswere

much modified by T. S. Webb, whose system has been the basis of allthose taught since his day in the Lodges of the United States. Nochanges of any importance have been made in the lectures, in thisCountry, since their first introduction.29

In the preface to his Monitor, Rob Morris said: "with thepublication of the Freemason's Monitor Webb commenced acareer of instructionwhich continued until his death in 1819,"and that "with the exception of Pennsylvania, every GrandLodge jurisdiction adopted his teachings."3o

Too much stress cannot be laid upon the profound influencewhich the publication of Webb's Monitor had upon Freemasonry in the United States, an influence which, as willpresently be developed, was continued and extended throughthe publication of Cross' Chart. Webb's Monitor was theworking 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 orreprint of Webb's Monitor 33 and compare it with the present

29 Second edition, page 276.80 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·

lisher's preface to which it is stated to be "a verbatim reprint of the fifth andmost approved edition of Webb's Freemason's Monitor, revised by himself andpublished in 1816; to which has been added many valuable symbolical illustra-

[ 19]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Missouri Manual, or with the monitors or manuals of otherjurisdictions, he will appreciate the force of this statement.

Among the followers of Webb; who were his pupils, or hispupils' pupils, were Benjamin Gleason, Henry Fowle, JohnSnow, John Barney, Samuel Willson, Samuel Cushman, DavidVinton, and Jeremy L. Cross. These brethren were professional Masonic lecturers, and, according to the custom of thetime, they received their pay from the brethren whom theyinstructed. When these teachers held commissions fromGrand Lodges or from Grand Masters they were called GrandLecturers. They did not set up schools, as did Preston inLondon, but they travelled about visiting one community afteranother. For this reason they were sometimes commissionedas Grand Visitors.

THE MODE OF WORK

They taught the lectures and when the pupil had learnedthe lectures he was, according to Rob Morris, "supposed topossess the method of work, that is the drill and drama, orceremony of Masonry, which was made literally to conform tothe Lectures."34 In the early days of which we write, the ideaof a ritual in which every word, syllable and letter is prescribed, had not yet been evolved. What was prescribed wasa series of questions and answers. What was permissible inputting on the degrees was revealed by Dr. Mackey in hisLexicon, when he said of the lectures: "These constitute thesimple text of Masonry, while the extended illustrations whichare given to them by an intelligent Master or· Lecturer . . .

tions." In consulting this reprint, the reader should bear in mind that theillustrations are "added" as Webb's Monitor was not an illustrated book.

34 Supra} note 21.

[20 ]


constitute the commentary, without which the simple textwould be comparatively barren and uninstructive." 35

A further conception of the latitude permissible may begathered from a joint committee report recommending theadoption of the Webb lectures to the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 1806 (which report wasadopted), in which it was set forth that

in the three degrees, every Master of a Lodge should be indulged withthe liberty of adopting historical details, and the personification of thepassing scene, as most agreeable to himself, his supporting officers .and assisting Lodge.86

Indeed, as late as 1916 there was one jurisdiction in theUnited States which had no uniform ritual, another where itwas uniform "only in essentials," and still another whereLodge No.1 did not use the uniform ritual prescribed for allother 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, JohnSnow, Henry Fowle and others, stating that he was "wellskilled and correct in the lectures and mode of working in thethree first degrees . . . and fully competent to teach." 39

Entries in his diary40 show that he was at Providence, Rhode

3D Supra, note 9.30 "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.

[21 ]

[22 J

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Island, from August 26 to September 5, 1817, and that hespent much of that time with Webb, who had removed to thatState about 1801, and who was then a Past Grand Master ofthe Grand Lodge of Rhode Island, having been elected in1813 and re-elected in 1814.41 One purpose of Cross' visitwas to assure himself that he had the Webb lectures correctly.He recorded in his diary, under date of September 1, "Lecturedthrough the day with Col. Webb." Another purpose of hisvisit, it seems to the writer, must have been to consult withWebb upon the subject of publishing a Masonic monitor. Heindicated 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 sometime he must have consulted with and obtained the permissionof Webb is almost inescapable. At any rate, during the year1818, according to entries in his diary, Cross was busy with theproject, and the second entry for the year 1819, that ofApril 4,42 reveals that the monitor had been published, for herecorded 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 orHieroglyphic Monitor. It is popularly known as Cross'Chart. The Chart differed in plan from the work of Prestonand that of Webb in that it was illustrated. In the book thereappeared, separate from the text, plates showing representations in due order of symbols and emblems, including, it hasbeen 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.


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" hadcome to be looked upon as a landmark (although it, in itsday, had been regarded as an innovation in causing a departurefrom the old practice of drawing designs upon the tavern flooror the tracing board) and met with violent criticism from theolder brethren.43 But the Chart proved to be very popular andpassed through at least sixteen editions during the lifetime ofits author. As its text followed the text of Webb's Monitorclosely, 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, saideditorially in his magazine, The Masonic Signet and LiteraryMirror:

Cross' Chart appeared, which was mainly a copy of Webb's Monitor, with the addition of such emblems as in the estimation of theauthor were i11ustrative of the work and lectures.44

43 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 aMaster'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 theright-hand corner of his apron tucked up. The corresponding plate in latereditions did not have this feature. In this connection, the reader is referredto Chapter XVIII of Masonic 5ymbo/ism, by Charles C. Hunt, Grand Secretaryof the Grand Lodge of Iowa, published at Cedar Rapids, 1930. See also, TheBuilder, 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 pioneerMasonic magazine of the West. It was a monthly; the subscription price was$2.50 per year, and the size of the page was 5¥2 by 8¥2 inches. VolumeI was for the year May, 1848-April, 1849, Volume II for the followingtwelve months. During this period there were forty or more pages in eachissue. 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. Itwas published from Saint Louis from May, 1848, to May, 1853, and fromMontgomery, Alabama, to May, 1854. The total number of volumes was ten.

[23 J

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 .Convocationof the General Grand Chapter held in the City of New York,June, 1816, and the organization of the Grand Encampmentof Knights Templar of the United States, which occurredthere that month, Cross spe':lt a year on a grand tour as anitinerant Masonic lecturer, visiting New Jersey, Pennsylvania,Delaware, Maryland, Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, andLouisiana. He related that while in Cincinnati, Ohio, Frankfort and Lexington, Kentucky, he was joined by Thomas SmithWebb (then Deputy General Grand High Priest) and JohnSnow (then General Grand King) and that while he was atCincinnati and Louisville, he (Cross) was visited by brethren"from Indiana and Missouri, who obtained and carried homewith them a correct knowledge of the Master Masons, RoyalArch, and Royal and Select Masters' Degrees." Thus wasthe W ebb system taught to Missourians in the very year inwhich the Grand Lodge of Tennessee chartered MissouriLodge No. 12, located at Saint Louis, now Missouri LodgeNo.1, on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Missouri. It is evenpossible, although Cross did not say so, that Webb himselfmay have taken part in or have been present at their instruction, although his primary purpose in visiting Kentucky wasto 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 ofgreat prosperity for Freemasonry in the United States and theestablishment of Lodges followed rapidly the onward marchof the pioneers. The Institution was extremely popular andthe end of the quarter found it in a preeminent position. Inits 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 theFraternity and were proud to hold office in the various bodies,grand and subordinate.46 For example, DeWitt Clinton waselected General Grand High Priest in June, 1816 (after Webb

.had declined the office in his favor). 47 Clinton also becameGrand Master of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templarof the United States upon its organization in the samembnth,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 thefirst 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·M.asonic Party, a Study of Political Anti-Masonry in the UnitedStates, 1827·1840, by Charles McCarthy, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin,1902, American Historical Association Rep. 1902, p. 365, et seq. This thesis ishereafter referred to, for brevity, as McCarthy.

47 Reprint General Grand Chapter, pp. 45·6.48 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, ripenedinto 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 anorganization and against its individual members because oftheir membership. An anti-Masonic political party wasformed, which actually nominated persons for the presidencyof the United States and other offices. In its most repugnantform, it became persecution, bitter and relentless.50 Theperiod has been aptly called the period of the "MorganWarfare."

NATURE OF ATTACKS ON THE FRATERNITY

Anti-Masonic newspapers were published; by 1832, therewere 141 of them.51 Orations were delivered. Collectionswere taken up for the support of Mrs. William Morgan.Anti-Masonic pamphlets, almanacs and addresses were printedand distributed in large quantities. Itinerant lecturers touredthe country, each striving to outdo the others in denunciationof an institution which was declared to be "repugnant to theChristian religion and inimical to the republican form ofgovernment.' ,

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, TheBuilder, September, 1926, Vol. XII, p. 257, et seq.

51. Gibbs, in The Builder, December, 1918, Vol. IV, p. 346.

[ 26]

THE EFFECTS OF ANTI·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 ofMissouri:

I have lived through a period made dark by the baseborn efforts ofthe political schemer and the cowardly desertion of the so-calledMason, uniting to bring derision and scorn and ruin upon an institution honored by long ages for its deeds of benevolence and charity andlove.52

In his study Dr. McCarthy related that

Ex-Masons opened Lodges, and disreputable characters, as poorblind candidates, were initiated as entered apprentices, passed to thedegree of fellowcraft, raised to the sublime degree of master mason,advanced to the honorary degree of mark master, installed in the chairas past master, received and acknowledged as most excellent master,and exalted to the degree of the holy royal arch, before delightedaudiences.

Herbert H. Hines, in his article "Three Dates in VermontMasonry" (note SO), recorded that in Vermont:

Caravans travelled from town to town giving exhibitions of. thedegrees. One day, in the Windsor County court house, 300 receivedthe 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. DistrictCourt for the Northern District of New York an applicationfor a copyright on a book to be written by him entitled trillustrations of Masonry by one of the Fraternity-God said letthere be light and there was light." A book with such a titlepurporting to be by William Morgan was published in 1827,

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

[27 J

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

after he disappeared. This book purported to be an exposeof Freemasonry and with some variations was a copy of awork entitled Jachin and Boaz, which had been publishedin England many years previously and editions of which hadappeared in the United States in 1798, 1803, 1812, 1817, and1818.53 Following the "Morgan" work, the Reverend DavidBernard, 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 PhiBeta Kappa, the Orange, and the Odd Fellows work. Thesebooks were sold in large numbers.

THADDEUS STEVENS

In the halls of the legislative assemblies of the various statesthe political solons made the welkin ring. This phase of antiMasonic activity is well illustrated by the resolutions54 introduced in Pennsylvania by one Thaddeus Stevens directedagainst "Extrajudicial Oaths." These resolutions called uponthe judicial committee to bring in a bill which when enactedinto law would effectually "suppress and prohibit the administration and reception of Masonic, Odd Fellows and all othersecret, extrajudicial oaths, obligations and promises in thenature of oaths." The lengthy preamble recited that in Masonry "the candidates are stripped nearly naked, and led tothe imposition of their awful oaths, hoodwinked, and with arope or cord around their necks, called a cable tow; that inthe Royal Arch degree, they affect to enact the sublime andsacred scene of God appearing to Moses in the burning bush

63 Palmer, Little Masoni& Library, Vol. VII, p. 29.54 McCarthy.

[28 ]


on Mount Horeb." In his study, Dr McCarthy condensedwhat followed by stating "here was a long statment accusingthem of intemperance, drinking wine out of a skull, etc." Thepreamble also recited that Freemasonry "is an anti-republicanand an insidious and dangerous enemy to our democratic formof government; that it creates and sustains secret orders ofnobility, in violation of the spirit of the Constitution," etc.,and that "the truth of all these things has been repeatedlyproclaimed to the world under the signatures of thousands ofhonest men by authentic documents procured from the lodgesthemselves, and by the testimony under oath of numerous adhering Masons of good character; and it has never yet beencontradicted 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 smellingcommittees, one to investigate Masonry and the other toinvestigate anti-Masonry. Then Mr. Stevens announced,among other things, that he proposed to call the variousJudges 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 ifso, what had been the result of the trial."

This well-organized, violent and widespread persecutioncould have but one result-about three-fourths of the Lodgesin the United States either gave up their charters or were"sunk without a trace." In Vermont, where anti-Masonrywas most violent, every Lodge succumbed; the legislature revoked the corporate charters of the Grand Lodge and of theGrand Chapter, and no meetings of these bodies were heldfor ten years, 1836-1846. In lesser and varying degrees theFraternity 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 centerof the violence, the opposition to our Institution became sostrong that in October, 1831,55 it was actually proposed to dissolve the Grand Lodge, and in October, 1833,55 that bodyadjourned to meet at Columbia in December, and continuedto meet there (except 1835,55 when no communication washeld) 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 inOctober,1837. Missouri Lodge No.1, located in Saint Louis,the premier subordinate Lodge in the State, surrendered itscharter to the Grand Lodge on October 5, 1833, and did notresume 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 thedays of the Morgan Warfare were Colonel Stephen W. B.Carnegy of Palmyra Lodge No. 18, who was elected GrandMaster at Columbia, in October, 1836, and who served toOctober, 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 Masterin the history of the Grand Lodge.

At the Grand Lodge Communication, October, 1841, heldin Saint Louis, a Past Grand Master's jewel was presented toColonel Carnegy by the Grand Lodge. The quotations whichfollow are from the address of Judge McBride in making thepresentation, and the response of Colonel Carnegy, as preserved in the official proceedings: 56

GG Reprint of Proceedings of Grand Lodge of Missouri.66 Proc., October, 1841, p. 25, et seq.

[30 ]


Said Judge McBride:

You labored in a period of travail, . . . at a time when the doudslowered and the storm of persecution beat most violently andfuriously, when the feelings of despondency were visible in everycountenance, and the stoutest hearts became faint and almost readyto yield our citadel to the ruthless hand of ignorance, blind fanaticismand unhallowed pollution-and what would have been the consequences had you not been a faithful sentinel at the post assigned youby ... the Grand Lodge, can only be a matter of conjecture....You enjoy that delightful state of feeling which invariably springsfrom a consciousness of having fought the good fight and kept thefaith....

In responding, Colonel Carnegy said:

When the government of the Grand .Lodge . . . was first confided to my hands, I found whatever of ancient Freemasonry thatbelonged to the Grand Lodge located far, far upon the confines ofour western population, just upon the line which separates civilizedfrom 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 triumphantlyled back to thisgoodly City.57 ••• And now that the douds havepassed away . . . I . . . delight to acknowledge that to others inan equal, if not a superior degree, is Masonry in Missouri indebted forthe happy issue.... Nor must I fail, sir, to remark in justice tomyself and you, that to no one is Masonry more indebted for the highand honorable station now occupied by her, than to yourself; for thatwhich was begun in weakness by me has been performed in strengthby you. . . . Bigotry, prejudice and irreligious fanaticism have, forthe last time we trust, usurped the place of reason. The reign oftyranny is past, and liberty, reason and true religion, so long troddendown, are once more, and we hope forever, restored to their rightful

67 He referred to the fact that the Grand Lodge, after having been drivenfrom Saint Louis to Columbia, had returned to its ancient seat and resumedits communications there in October, 1837. This occurred at the close of hisfirst 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 ourfellow citizens~ has slunk back into the covert darkness from whichit first came forth, and our peaceful institution is again standing forth,a guide to the wanderer, a beacon light to the tempest-tossed marineron the ocean of life, the shield of the oppressed, the succor of theweak, the solace of the distressed; to the orphan a parent, to the widowa friend, nay, to all a friend to teach and practice toward all "brotherlylove, 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 ardentlycontended....

CHAOTIC CONDITIONS

The long years of the Morgan Warfare were, of course, aperiod when very little, if any, Masonic work was done in theLodges which remained alive. The older and more skillfulmembers either passed away or lost their proficiency. Theold professional lecturers sought other means of livelihood.So, when the petitions commenced to come in to the Lodgesonce more, the younger generation received instruction onlyin an imperfect way.

Then, too, conditions which had arisen as a result of theMorgan Warfare obliged the Fraternity to guard very carefully against the approach of cowans and eavesdroppers, andevidence of membership had to be critically and severelytested. Examining committees were obliged to proceed on thetheory 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 fromthe door of a lodge, than that one cowan should be admitted.

G8 Second edition (1852). page 140.

[ 32 ]


Under conditions such as these, a lack of uniformity in thelectures among the several· Grand Lodges or even amongthe subordinate Lodges in the same State, was a formidableobstacle to fraternal intercourse.

It was only natural that a demand should have come forrelief 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 forworking the degrees would be established and identificationof members could be made more readily, and the Lodges coulddiscontinue turning away so many visitors, among whom musthave been large numbers who were members in good standing.

DEMAND FOR UNIFORMIlY

It must be here stated that while the demand for a uniformmode of work for the Lodges of the United States came as aresult of conditions brought about by the Morgan Warfare,the idea itself had an earlier origin. The concrete proposalfor action by the Grand Lodges at this time came from theGrand Lodge of Alabama, which adopted and circulatedamong the several Grand Lodges in 1840, the followingresolution:

Resolved that all Grand Lodges in correspondence with the GrandLodge of Alabama, be requested to elect one delegate to meet ingeneral convention on the first Monday in March, 1842, in the Cityof Washington, for the purpose of determining upon a uniformmode of work throughout all Lodges of the United States, and to makeother 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 often Grand Lodges assembled in Washington, D. C., viz:Alabama, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, 'Rhode Island, SouthCarolina 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 ofwork." 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 Lodgeswere unrepresented, recommended that "every Grand Lodgein the United States appoint one or more skillful brethren tobe styled Grand Lecturers, who shall meet and agree upon thecourse of instruction necessary and proper to be imparted tothe 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 themdetermine to adopt the recommendations contained in the report ofthe Committee, respecting the appointment of Grand Lecturers, thatit be further recommended by this Convention that the first meetingof said Grand Lecturers be held in the City of Baltimore, on thesecond Monday in May, 1843.61

00 Printed "Journa:I of a Convention of Delegates from the Grand Lodgesof 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 ofthe resolutions was received from the Grand Lodge of Alabama, and the matter only came to the attention of our GrandLodge through the report of its Correspondence Committee,which reported the resolutions as published in the Proceedingsof 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 wereadopted, which had been prepared by Joseph Foster, SeniorGrand Warden, and presented by Colonel Carnegy, making itthe duty of the Grand Master to appoint a representative toattend the Baltimore Convention and authorizing the paymentof expenses out of the treasury.63

THE MISSOURI DELEGATION

The Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, asprinted, do not show the appointment of delegates to theBaltimore Convention, but Colonel Carnegy and Joseph'Foster were appointed by Judge Priestley H. McBride, GrandMaster.64 They attended the Convention, and also in attendance from Missouri, as visitors, were Frederick L. Billon, Past

62 Reprint, page 274.63 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 Carnegyboth desired to go; they mutually agreed to divide the appropriation and eachman to pay his share of the balance."

[ 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, isthe reason he did not go to Baltimore.

As the reader should know something about these fourbrethren who composed the Missouri delegation in the Baltimore Convention, a brief biographical sketch of each is hereincluded.

STEPHEN WEBSTER BARNES CARNEGY

Colonel Carnegy was a Kentucky Mason. He was born inHarrison County, Kentucky, January 29, 1797, and receivedthe Craft degrees in Saint Andrew's Lodge No. 18, at Cynthiana. He was twice Master of that Lodge. He was a lawyerand served as Justice of the Harrison County Court. His titleowes its origin to the fact that he was Colonel of the 86thKentucky Regiment of Militia. In March, 1829, he removedto Palmyra, Missouri, and the following year assisted in organizing Palmyra Lodge No. 18, of which he was Master in1831 and subsequent years. His first appearance in the GrandLodge of Missouri was in 1832. He was elected GrandMaster at Columbia in October, 1836, and was reelected atSaint Louis in October, 1837, and in October, 1838. It waslargely through his efforts and those of his successor, JudgeMcBride, that the Grand Lodge was preserved during theanti-Masonic period and restored to its former activity. Heand Judge McBride were the prime movers in establishing theMasonic 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 ]


ures in the Grand Lodge throughout his active life. He wasappointed Grand Lecturer in October, 1840, and reappointedin October, 1843, 1844, and 1845. At the time he attendedthe Baltimore Convention, he was Past Grand Master andPast 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 inMathews County, Virginia, November 20, 1802, and receivedthe Craft degrees in Portsmouth Naval Lodge, No. 100, in1823. 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 amember of and one of the great figures in the Grand Lodge ofMissouri for thirty;-eight years and was absent from only threeannual communications during his membership. He waselected Senior Grand Warden in October, 1841, reelected1842, appointed Deputy Grand Master in October, 1843,elected Grand Master October, 1847, and reelected 1848. Hewas 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 atLexington, a duty which they faithfully performed. A contemporary and protege in Masonry, William R. Singleton, saidof him, "As a Mason he had no superior either in ritualism or

[ 37]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

jurisprudence. His wonderful memory served him in bothbranches, and no one was more happy in imparting instruction from the Orient than he was; and he well deserved thedesignation always given him of 'H. A: .. 65 He was PastGrand Lecturer at the time of the Baltimore Convention. Hisdeath occurred May 22, 1878, and his remains were at hisrequest, buried by the side of those of Anthony O'Sullivanin Bellefontaine Cemetery.

FREDERICK L. BILLON

Frederick L. Billon was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,April 23, 1801, and came to Saint Louis in 1822. He receivedthe 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 GrandMaster. 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 GrandSecretary. He represented the Grand Lodge of Missouri atthe Convention held in Winchester, Virginia, in 1846. ThatConvention did not muster enough delegates to transact business. His report of what transpired at Winchester is published in our Grand Lodge Proceedings, October, 1846, page47, and is the only known published minutes of that Convention, which was held pursuant to a resolution of the BaltimoreConvention and was intended to be a continuation of thework undertaken by it. R. W. Brother Billon rose to great

6G Appendix, Proc. G. L. of Mo., October, 1880, p. 16.

[38 ]


prominence in Saint Louis; he was Comptroller of the Cityand later its Auditor. At a still later day he was Secretaryand Treasurer of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Hewas a man of fine mental attainments and in historical circlesis celebrated for his Annals of Saint Louis which were published in 1886-88 in two large volumes. He departed thislife in Saint Louis, October 20, 1895, full of years and honors.The memorial prepared by Dr. John D. Vincil and adopted bythe Grand Lodge said of him, "I have never met with anyonewhose 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 pioneerministers of Missouri. In an early day, he was located at(old) Franklin, in Howard County. His first appearance inthe 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 andMemorials. Colonel Carnegy was reelected Grand Master atthis Communication and appointed him Grand Chaplain ofthe Grand Lodge. He was the first Grand Chaplain theGrand Lodge had had since the Communication of 1831, acircumstance that is understood when it is recalled that duringthe anti-Masonic period, many ministers, churches and evendenominations joined in the opposition to the Fraternity.He was reappointed by Judge McBride in October, 1839, andwas 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, wasReverend Albert Case of South Carolina, who was Secretaryof the Convention, Chairman of its Committee on FuneralService, to which Committee was also committed the subjectof "Prayers and Charges." Rev. W. E. Wyatt, D.D., ofMaryland, was Chaplain of the Convention, but the Proceedings do not indicate that he was regarded as a delegate. Thelast reference to R. W. Bro. Chamberlain in the Proceedingsof 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 onMonday, May 8, 1843, and was in session, excepting Sunday,to and including Wednesday, May 17, 1843. In attendanceupon 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 ]


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 arein order. First, it is to be noted that of the Committee of theWashington Convention which reported that among its members "there exists a satisfactory degree of uniformity," threewere present at Baltimore, John Dove, Charles W. Moore, andWilliam Field. Second, it must be mentioned that while noneof the old professional lecturers, contemporaries of ThomasSmith 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 toBoston and received the lectures from either Benjamin Gleason or HenryFowle, and in October of that year was examined by a Committee of thatGrand Lodge, "which reported that these lectures were according to the mostapproved method of work in the United States" and he was by the GrandLodge given a letter of recommendation. That in the year 1818 Barneyinstructed Samuel Willson, "now and for several years past Grand Lecturerof this State:' "Upon this occasion Bro. Barney wrote out a portion of themin private key, and Bro. Willson wrote out the remainder. Both were writtenin the same book, and that part written by Bro. Willson was examinedcarefully and approved by Bro. Barney." "These are the only lectures whichhav~, been sanctioned in this jurisdiction from October, 1817, to the presentd~. _

From The Masonic Conservators, by Ray V. Denslow, previously cited, welearn that in 1857, Rob Morris visited Samuel Willson in Vermont and madea copy of the cipher, which he published in 1858 as a sort of preliminary stepto publishing The Mnemonics. Afterwards, Willson said that Morris didnot copy the original cipher but a copy of it, which, by mistake, omitted partof the original, and that Morris also made mistakes in taking the copy. TheMnemonics was based upon this, and, according to Morris, the first degree,Section 1 had 56 questions and answers, Section 2, 18; Section 3, 44; thesecond 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 in1817.

ORGANIZATION AND AGENDA

The opening day of the Convention was given over toorganization.67 Dr. John Dove, Grand Secretary of the GrandLodge of Virginia, was elected President of the Convention,and in his address of acceptance stated that sixteen GrandLodges of the United States were represented, out of a possibletwenty-three. Reverend Albert Case, Grand Chaplain of theGrand Lodge of South Carolina, was chosen Secretary.

On the second day, May 9, agenda were adopted declaringthe 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 ap-pointed, 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 wereappointed, the first of which was charged with a duty whichrequires consideration in this study, viz.:

Section 2, 53. The total of these questions and answers is 301. It is to benoted 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 theLibrary of the Grand Lodge. of Iowa. The notes begin with the crypticletters "wcy."

f11 The facts about the Convention are, of course, derived from the officialprinted proceedings, "Proceedings of the National Masonic Convention,. heldat Baltimore, Maryland, May A. L. 5843-A. D. 1843. Printed at Baltimore,by Joseph Robinson, No. 110 Baltimore Street, 1843."

[42 ]


To report on the expediency of adopting a regularly authorizedMasonic Trestleboard; and further to report on the propriety ofpublishing a work of antiquarian research and learning on the originand 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 conferringthe degrees" consisted of Dr. Dove, as Chairman,Moore ofMassachusetts, Barney of Ohio, Wadsworth of New York,and Carnegy of Missouri.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEE ON WORK

There will now be detailed what the printed Proceedingsof the Convention show relative to the work and reports ofthis, its most important committee:

This committee was appointed on Tuesday, May 9, andmade its first report on Wednesday morning, May 10, whichis a strong indication that there existed a "satisfactory degreeof uniformity."

The Proceedings state:

The Chairman of the Standing Committee on Work stated that theCommittee had, after mature deliberation, decided on the Lecture ofthe first degree, and proceeded to report-Br. Moore giving thethe answers.

Herndon, Past Grand Master of Alabama, offered theresolution,

That the Lecture of the first degree of Masonry, as reported by theCommittee, be by this Convention now adopted, as the authorizedwork in that degree, to be recommended to the Fraternity throughoutthe 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 (Wadsworthof the Committee) dissenting."

On Thursday morning, May 11, "The Chairman of theCommittee on Work, reported on the opening and closingceremonies of the first degree," which was adopted.

Then, "The Chairman of the Committee on Work, assistedby Br. Moore, reported the Lecture of the second degree:'

"Br. Wadsworth moved an amendment to the report, whichwas rejected." The resolution to adopt the report was thenadopted.

Then, "The Chairman of the same Committee reported onthe 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 Workpresented 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 thethird degree," which was adopted, "after a slight amendment."

At the afternoon session, on the same day, "Br. Moore fromthe Committee on Work, reported the second section of thelecture in the third degree. Br. Case moved an amendment,which was adopted." The report as amended was thenadopted.

Then, "Br. Moore from the same Committee, reported thethird section of the Lecture in the third degree," which wasadopted.

At the afternoon session, Saturday, May 13, "The Commit-

[44 }


tee on Work reported another section of the work of thethird degree," which was adopted, "New York dissenting."

On Monday evening, May 15, "The Committee on Workexemplified the opening and closing of the Lodge in the thirddegree."

On Tuesday morning, May 16, "The lecture of the firstdegree was given and repeated." "The afternoon was spentin exemplification of work in the second degree." At theevening session, "The President repeated the first section ofthe F. C. and M. M. degrees; and Br. Moore, the second sections of the same degrees. The Committee then exemplifiedthe work in the third degree."

On Wednesday, May 17, "The Committee exemplified thework in the Master's degree."

THE BALTIMORE WORK DESCRIBED

As to what it was the Baltimore Convention adopted andrecommended to the various Grand Lodges of the UnitedStates for adoption by them, fortunately, we have the testimony of one of its most distinguished members, one of thefive members of the Committee on Work, Charles W. Mooreof Massachusetts. A letter written by Moore, in 1863, twentyyears after the Convention, and quoted by Silas H. Shepherdin his article, "The Webb Ritual in the United States,"68 towhich previous reference has been made, was as follows:

The work and lectures of the first three degrees, as adopted andauthorized by the Baltimore Convention in 1843, were, with a fewunimportant verbal exceptions, literally as they were originally compiled by Bro. Thos. S. Webb about the close of the last century and asthey 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 theyears 1801-2 until his death in 1847. In a note to me, under date ofNov. 25, 1843, Bro. Gleason says: "It was my privilege while atBrown University, Providence, R. I. (1801-2), to acquire a completeknowledge of the lectures in the first three degrees of Masonry,directly from our late much lamented brother Thos. S. Webb." In1805, Bro. Gleason was commissioned by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts as its Grand Lecturer and empowered to visit and instruct theLodges in the ritual, as he had received it from Bro. Webb. This dutyhe performed with great fidelity and to the entire satisfaction of theGrand Lodge; and this ritual is in use in the lodges of Massachusettsat the present time. There may be some verbal departures from theoriginal, but no material change has been made in it. In 1823-24, Bro.Gleason was my Masonic teacher. I learned the work and lectures ofhim. We were connected by family ties and close Masonic relationscontinued to exist between us until his death in 1847. I was associatedwith him in all the various branches of Masonry for nearly a quarterof a century, and enjoyed all the rare advantages of his extensive andaccurate knowledge of the various rituals of the different grades ofthe Order. In 1843, I was appointed by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts a delegate to the Baltimore Masonic Convention, called forthe purpose of revising the various modes of work then in use, andagreeing upon a uniform system for the country. Before leavinghome, and as a preparation for the better discharge of the duties ofthe appointment, I availed myself of the assistance of Bro. Gleason,69in a thorough and careful revision of the lectures, which I had originally received from him and which, on frequent occasions, I hadbeen called to deliver and work with him, both in and out of theLodge. 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 handof 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 entryin his diary, which may reveal professional jealousy, "rode Home calld onBr Smith was introduced to Br B Gleason found him a great talker & not somutch refind as I could wish."

[46 ]


the Convention. This I did without notes, but subsequently took theprecaution to minute down the alterations from the originals; andthese are now in my possession. They are mostly verbal, few innumber, and not material in their results. The only change of consequence was in the due guards of the second and third degrees, whichwere changed and made to conform to that of the first degree inposition 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 orsign." What are now the EA and FC DG's were unknown or at leastnot used as such. There was only one sign each in the EA and FCdegrees. Some time about 1800 (the date is indeterminate) it occurred to someone to incorporate one movement or action to be knownas 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 thesign and what is now the sign was called the due guard.

In the FC degree, the two were given almost as now, except theywere never given separately.

In the MM degree, the due guard was given with the right handonly.

In 1843, a convention was held at Baltimore, Md., to agree on auniform ritual. Among other things, they reversed the procedurein the EA degree. What was then the due guard they made ourpresent sign and vice versa. In the MM degree they adopted the useof both hands in giving the MM due guard.

70 This letter was written at the height (1863) of the controversy over RobMorris' Conservators, and was no doubt, although Bro. Shepherd did not sayso, a reply to circular letters issued by Morris. See Chapter IX of Denslow'sThe 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 indicatedby Dr. Mackey, in his Lexicon,72 where, under the title,"Immoveable Jewels," he said:

According to the old system in England, the immoveable jewels ofthe lodge are the Rough Ashlar, Perfect Ashlar and Trestle Board;but in this Country, by the decision of the Baltimore Convention, in1843, they are made to consist of the Square, Level and Plumb.

A third step taken by the Baltimore Convention may havebeen brought about by the following preamble and resolutionsadopted by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, October, 1839: 73

WHEREAS, it has been represented to this Grand Lodge that in manyStates, of these United States, a system has obtained among subordinate Lodges of merely opening in the degrees of Entered Apprenticeor Fellow Craft, and in those degrees performing the work of theLodge; ... and

WHEREAS, this Grand Lodge considers such system as conflictingwith the ancient landmarks. . . . Lodges, as such, cannot consistentlywork as Apprentices or Fellow Crafts, even provided none but Masters be present, and, in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, no businesscan legitimately be transacted in those degrees, other than lecturing,the examination of candidates for advancement, or the conferring ofthe degree. Many other reasons 14 why a change should be made ofthis mode of working suggest themselves, but which it would not beproper to record, . . . therefore

Resolved, that the several Grand Lodges in the United States andall other Grand Lodges in correspondence with the Grand Lodge, berespectfully requested to take this matter into consideration, and give

72 Second edition, p. 209.'l8 Reprint, pages 262-3.74 Undoubtedly, these were the reasons which moved the Baltimore Conven

tion to take this step, and to arrive at the decision and to make the changepreviously detailed.

[48 ]


to it such an expression of opinion as they may deem right andproper.

Resolved, That a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolution betransmitted to all Grand Lodges corresponding with this GrandLodge.

MISSOURI'S DELEGATES MAKE REPORT

The next communication of the Grand Lodge of Missourifollowing the Baltimore Convention opened in Saint Louis,Monday, October 9, 1843.7£' On Thursday afternoon, Theodore S. Parvin, representative of Iowa Lodge No. 42, laterGrand Master of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, and founder of itsgreat 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 andevening Saturday. The report was adopted without a dissenting vote and the work of the Baltimore Convention becameofficial in Missouri, as the subordinate Lodges were directedto observe it. In a single instance, there was a lack ofunanimity. When the vote was taken upon that portion ofthe report having to do with the second degree and the firstsection 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, whichprobably will never be solved. At this Communication, JudgeMcBride was reelected Grand Master and appointed ColonelCarnegy, Grand Visitor, that is, Grand Lecturer, than whomno 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 Missouriwill not be given hereafter, unless special considerations seem to requirethem.

[49 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

also presented at this Communication and were referred to aCommittee of which Dr. Mitchell was Chairman. The reportof 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 thosegaudy trappings introduced to make fame for the innovator, restoredour sacred institution to its primitive simplicity, and placed a markupon 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 ofwork adopted by the Baltimore Convention, for in his autobiography, after relating the circumstances surrounding hisentrance into the Fraternity in 1820, and that he travelledeighty miles to Lexington, Ky., in order to learn the work, hesaid:

Bro. Hunt (William Gibbs Hunt) had received the lectures fromBro. Cross,77 and J. M. Pike of Lexington had them word for wordfrom Hunt, and between Hunt and Pike, Bro. Mitchell's time, dayand night, was spent until he had the work and lectures of the threedegrees 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 thirdperson) said:he now solemnly declares that the work and lectures reported to thisGrand Lodge by its delegates to the Baltimore Convention are sub-

16 This report does not appear in the Proceedings of October, 1843, but inthose of the adjourned Communication of April, 1844, p. 90.

17 In his autobiography, p. 348, Cross said: "The author would mention oneCompanion, 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 upto and including the Royal and Select Masters', with the view of impartingthe knowledge to his Companions, wherever he might sojourn. The authorwas introduced to the Hon. Henry Clay, at that time a zealous Mason, andmember of the Lodge in Lexington."

[50 ]

THE MASONIC TRESTLE BOARD

stantially, yea, almost word for word, the work and lectures which hereceived as above in 1820.... the Baltimore work and lectures, asreported to this Grand lodge, contain less extraneous matter and lessmodern Masonry than any we have heard. We know it is said, andwith much truth, that it is difficult to know what is the Baltimorework, 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 mattersconnected 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 beappointed to report on a Masonic Trestle Board. Referred toBrs. 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 earlydate, a text book, to be called The Masonic Trestle Board-to embracethree distinct, full and complete Masonic Carpets, illustrative of thethree degrees of ancient Craft Masonry; together with the ceremoniesof consecrations, dedications and installations; the laying of cornerstones of public edifices; the funeral service, and order of processions.To which shall be added the Charges, Prayers and Exhortations, andthe selections from Scripture, appropriate and proper for lodgeservice.

The Committee further report, that they deem it expedient that awork be published to contain archaeological research into the historyof the Fraternity in the various nations of the world.

The report of the Committee was adopted, and on Tuesdaymorning, 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 andCarnegy."

The Masonic Trestle Board was published as the act of amajority of the Committee (Moore and Carnegy) , as the thirdmember 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 theendorsement of Benjamin Gleason, to whom references havebeen made.

A copy of this book was presented at the adjourned Communication of our Grand Lodge held April 1, 1844, in SaintLouis, and referred to a Committee consisting of HiramChamberlain, 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 adjournedCommunication. 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 andThomas S. Miller, offered, as a minority report, this resolution:

[52 ]


Resolved, That while this Grand Lodge does not enjoin its use onany of the subordinate Lodges under its jurisdiction, some of whomprefer other guides, to which they have been long accustomed, yetshe does recommend this as a suitable text book, and approves of itsgeneral use and adoption, whenever in the opinion of the subordinateLodges, it may be profitably introduced.

These majority and minority reports were presented onWednesday afternoon, October 16. At the evening sessionon Saturday, October 19, the majority report was by theGrand Lodge rejected, and the resolution submitted by theminority adopted.

On the face of the record as printed in our Grand LodgeProceedings, this result appears to have been anomalous aswell as unfortunate. The mode of work recommended by theBaltimore Convention had been unanimously adopted a yearpreviously. Colonel Carnegy, one of the delegates, had beenmade Grand Visitor (Lecturer), thus assuring the correctteaching of that mode of work. And yet, the text book ormonitor, The Masonic Trestle Board (of which ColonelCarnegy was one of the editors), intended to be an aid in thedissemination of that mode of work, was not adopted, its usewas not enjoined, and it could be utilized or ignored as thesubordinate Lodges might see fit.

OBJECTIONABLE FEATURES

But an examination of The Masonic Trestle Board itselfreveals the fact that at least three objections of a serious nature are apparent.

First. The Baltimore Convention adopted the report of aCommittee, 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," bythe way, are, for all practical purposes, the charges appearingin Webb's Monitor, and in our official Missouri Manual nowin use. The "charge" published in The Masonic TrestleBoard for use in the first degree, and the one for use in thesecond degree, while very good, are not the ones adopted bythe Convention.

Second. At the beginning of Chapter IV of The MasonicTrestle Board are published paragraphs entitled "On theQualifications and Duties of Candidates for Freemasonry,"and these paragraphs are followed by paragraphs generallyentitled "Ancient Charges," with the following subtitles,"The Private Duties of Masons," "Duties as Citizens,""Duties in the Lodge," "Duties as Neighbors," and "DutiesTowards a Brother." These paragraphs are not taken fromthe "Charges of a Free-Mason," that is from the true "ancientcharges," published in Anderson's Constitutions, 1723, byauthority of the premier Grand Lodge. They appear to havebeen taken from a book entitled "Ahiman Rezon," edited byLaurence Dermott, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge,which was a rival of the premier Grand Lodge, and publishedin London in 1756.78

J

18 The premier Grand Lodge was established in 1717; by 1751, as a resultof a movement commenced as early as 1739, a rival Grand Lodge had beenset up in London. This rival organization has often been called a schismaticGrand Lodge, but it is now thought fairer to describe it as a rival. Thisyounger Grand Lodge claimed that it maintained unchanged the ancient usagesand customs, and it charged that the premier or older Grand Lodge hadmodernized Masonry by departing from certain of those usages and customs.Hence there arose the anomaly that the premier or older organization came tobe known as the Modern Grand Lodge and its members as The Moderns,while the rival or younger organization came to be known as the AncientGrand Lodge and its members as The Ancients. Each of these Grand Lodgeschartered Lodges in America. The rivalry, in England, did not come to anend until the adoption of the Act of Union, December 27, 1813.

Laurence Dermott who became Grand Secretary of the Ancient Grand

[54 ]


Third. Under the title, "Opening of the Lodge," Dr.Mackey, in his Lexicon, said,

In the English system, which seems, according to the Trestle Boardpublished under the sanction of the late Baltimore Convention, tohave been adopted by that body, the lodge is opened in the first degree"in the name of God and Universal Benevolence" ; in the second, rronthe square, in the name of the Great Geometrician of the Universe" ;and in the third, rron the centre, in the name of the Most High."

That this met with serious objection is indicated by the factthat, 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, highlyintelligent, aggressive, witty and resourceful. A quotation from his writings(Ahiman Rezon, 2d ed., 1764, p. xxxii) will serve to illustrate the kind ofwarfare he waged against the 'premier Grand Lodge:

"Nor is it uncommon for a tyler to receive ten or twelve shillings for drawingtwo sign posts with chalk &c and writing Jamaica (rum) upon one, andBarbadoes (rum) upon the other, and all this (I suppose) for no other reasonthan to distinguish where these Liquors are to be placed in the Lodge."

But Dermott was willing to admit good points in his adversaries, as isevidenced in the same edition of his book (p. xxiv):

"I have not the least antipathy against the gentlemen members of the modernsociety, but on the contrary, love and respect them, because I have found thegenerality of them to be hearty cocks and good fellows (as the bacchanalianphrase is) and many of them I believe to be worthy of receiving every blessingthat good men can ask or heaven bestow...."

For further particulars regarding The Moderns and The Ancients, the readeris 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, TheBuilder, 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 usewere found desirable, and not with the idea of making theiruse mandatory."

DR. MITCHELL'S OBJECTIONS

In his autobiography (1869), Dr. Mitchell detailed fourobjections, which, he related, were raised by him to the reportof 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 in1844 when The Masonic Trestle Board was under consideration, and not in 1843, and inasmuch as Dr. Mitchell is shownby the record to have sided'with the majority of the Committee

derived from three Hebrew words, ahim, manah, ratzon, and meant "the lawof chosen brothers." This book was introduced into America at an early dayand 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 TrestleBoard gave rise to the enquiry in the Grand Lodge of Missouri as to whatwere the ancient landmarks, etc. (October, 1846). In May, 1850, a Committeeof which Dr. Mitchell was chairman, reported that the ancient charges published in Anderson's Constitutions contained "all or nearly all the ancientlandmarks and usages of Masonry proper to be published." Prior to thisCommittee report, Dr. Mitchell had published these ancient charges in hismagazine, The Masonic Signet (December, 1848, Vol. I, p. 298, et seq).Editorially, in the same issue (pp. 315-316). he explained that he had visitedthe Grand Lodge of Illinois, October, 1848, and

"We noticed in the Grand Lodge procession, a large old-fashioned-shapedBook, and having observed the place of its deposit, at the conclusion of theservices, we lost no time in looking at its title page, and to our great joy, foundit to be a copy of Anderson's Constitutions, edition of 1756. On enquiry wefound the work belonged to Brother Souther of Alton, to whom we and ourreaders are greatly indebted for his liberality, in permitting us the use of itlong 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 invain to see a copy of this work ever since we knew anything of Masonry; weknow the work is scarce-having gone out of print-and if we judge fromthe 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, £6-4 L.M: "

[56 ]


in recommending a rejection of the textbook, it seems probable that his objections were made in 1844, and not at the timeCarnegy and Foster reported to the Grand Lodge. In hisautobiography, 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 noLodge 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 aLodge might be born at a future period, viz., when it exchanged itslimited charter for a permanent one, and yet aU this time this thingcould make Masons ; third, so much as taught that the business of aLodge should be transacted in a Masters' Lodge; fourth, so much astaught that the Lodge should be opened on the third degree, and theLodges 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 thecommittee in recommending its rejection by the Grand Lodgeof Missouri. Aside from those features which unfortunatelybrought criticism upon it, as comparison will show, it wasa lineal descendant of Webb's Monitor, as was Cross' Chart.A comparison of the present Missouri Manual with all threeof 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 BALTIMOREWORK

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 ofMasonry. And in furtherance of this desirable object it shall be theduty of the Grand Master, by himself or some well informed brotherby him appointed, at least once in every year, to visit every subordinateLodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, to lecture andinstruct the brethren, and to correct such errors as may have obtainedamong 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 morelikely to appoint some one to perform these functions than toundertake them himself; and, that is what actually happened.As a natural consequence of the use of the phrase "to visit" thebrother so appointed came to be known as the "GrandVisitor."

No provision having been made for the payment of eithercompensation or expenses, it is likewise apparent that theconstitutional provision was not a workable one; consequently

19 Mo. reprint, pp. 16, 17.80 Paragraph (3), Section I, of Article V, of the present Constitution reads:

"To establish and preserve a uniform mode of Work and Lectures within theancient landmarks and customs of Masonry."

[58 ]

MISSOURI RITU AL-BA LTIMOR EWORK

the first amendment to the constitution proposed was one, atthe semi-annual Communication of April, 1822, providingthat another office be created, that of Grand Lecturer, suchofficer to be charged with the duty of visiting all the subordinate Lodges once a year, "of establishing an uniform modeof working," correcting errors, etc.

The original Constitution could only be amended by referendum to the subordinate Lodges, and upon favorableaction being taken by a majority of them. No such action wasever had upon the proposal. In this connection, it is to benoted that in this proposed amendment we have the first useof 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, andone of the organizers of the Grand Lodge. We only knowof his appointment by the inference arising from the fact thatat the Communication of October, 1822, Melody brought in abill showing that he had been engaged 56 days in visiting andlecturing Lodges numbered 1 to 10,81 except No.8, at $3 perday, making a total of $168, which he had credited with $64.32collected from Lodges, leaving a balance of $103.68 still duehim. The Grand Lodge ordered this balance paid out ofits treasury and directed its Grand Treasurer to charge it tothe nine Lodges in question, according to their respectiveliability 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, OliveBranch, 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., charteredOctober, 1822; No. 12, Tyro, Caledonia, Mo., chartered April 6, 1825.

[59 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

Lodge treasury was ever reimbursed cannot be ascertainedfrom the printed record.

The next mention of the subject occurs in the Proceedingsof October, 1826, where it is recorded that Melody was appointed Grand Lecturer by Edward Bates, Grand Master. Sofar as the printed record shows, Melody82 is the only personwho acted as Grand Visitor or Grand Lecturer up to October,' .1839, when Joseph Foster was appointed Grand Visitor, byJudge McBride.

In October, 1840, Colonel Carnegy was appointed GrandVisitor by Judge McBride, who in October, 1841, appointedAlexander T. Douglass, and reappointed him in October,1842. As has already been stated, Colonel Carnegy wasappointed Grand Visitor by Judge McBride in October, 1843,following the Baltimore Convention.

THE REVISION OF 1844

At the Communication of April, 1843, complying with aresolution 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 wassubmitted at the Communication of October, 1844, and afterbeing read a third time was unanimously adopted, October 17,1844. .

Let us review these briefly in the light of the subject matterof this study:

Article II of the Constitution created the office of GrandLecturer, which officer, under the provisions of Article IIIwas to be appointed annually by the Grand Master.

82 In Ray V. Denslow's History of Royal Arch Masonry, page 150, it is statedthat Melody "is said to have received his lectures and ritual from no less ateacher 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 Lodgewas declared to have the power, "To establish and preserve auniform 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 severaldegrees 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 thework and degrees of Masonry, by anyone who is not a member of theGrand Lodge of Missouri, or of some Lodge under its jurisdiction, orby some one duly authorized by the Grand Lodge. Nor shall anyLodge permit the delivery of any lectures except such as have beensanctioned 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 thoroughlywith the work and lectures of the four 8S first degrees. He shall attendthe meetings of the Grand Lodge and exemplify the work and lectureswhen required.

Section 2. He shall visit the several Lodges, if necessary, and instruct them in the work, lectures and ceremonies, and also, in everydepartment of the duty and business of Masonry.

Section 3. He shall be entitled to his travelling expenses, and areasonable compensation for his services, to be paid by the Lodgesrespectively, to which services are rendered. Provided, however, thathe 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 Lodgesto confer the degree of Past Master upon the Wardens, which section wasrepealed October, 1845.

[61 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

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

GRAND LECTURERS, 1843-1855

Having adopted the mode of work recommended by theBaltimore Convention and having enacted the provisions ofConstitution and law just mentioned, our Grand Lodge was inpossession of a standard or official mode of work; the samewas in the custody of a constitutional official of the GrandLodge, namely, the Grand Lecturer. It is apparent that officialcould not be a very active one, however, for the reason thathis pay and expenses came from the Lodges which were instructed, and he could not officially visit and instruct a Lodgewithout being invited to do so. The actual result was thatonly those Lodges were instructed who thought they couldafford it, or where the expense was negligible. As a matterof fact, the Grand Lecturer's chief function was to exemplifythe work at the annual Communications of the Grand Lodge.It was not until the period of service of Anthony O'Sullivanas 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 somuch concerned with what the Grand Lecturers did, as weare with what they knew and with what they taught on thoseoccasions when they were called upon to do so.

We therefore turn to the roll of Grand Lecturers and theroll of the Grand Masters who appointed them, from aca~ual inspection of which there is only one inference to bedrawn and that inference is that the mode of work as reportedby Carnegy and Foster in October, 1843 (that of the Baltimore

[62 ]


. Convention), and then adopted by our Grand Lodge, wasknown by each and every Grand Lecturer.

Colonel Carnegy, who was one of the two delegates to theBaltimore Convention, and who, with Joseph Foster, the otherdelegate, made the report to the Grand Lodge in October,1843, and was at that time appointed by Judge McBride, wasreappointed in October, 1844, and in October, 1845, by Dr.Mitchell.

In October, 184,6, Colonel Ralls appointed the ReverendWilliam Hurley, who was then a resident of Palmyra (theplace of residence of Colonel Carnegy) and had been since1834. It is entirely unlikely that a Grand Lecturer couldreside in the same town with Colonel Carnegy and not knowthe Baltimore work. .

In October, 1847, Joseph Foster appointed George H. C.Melody, who, as has been related, was the first 'Grand Lecturerour Grand Lodge ever had. As Joseph Foster was one of thetwo delegates to the Baltimore Convention, it is inconceivablethat he would appoint anyone Grand Lecturer who did notknow the work as he knew it.

The same comment is applicable to the appointment madeby Joseph Foster in May, 1848-that of Charles Levy of SaintLouis. It must also be noted that Levy was present at theGrand Lodge Communication of October, 1843, when the report from Baltimore was made and adopted; and that at thetime of his appointment Levy was a member of NapthaliLodge No. 25, of which Foster was also a member.

In May, 1849, Judge Ryland appointed Melody; and inMay, 1850, he appointed Joseph Foster. In May, 1851,Melody was again appointed by Colonel Grover, who, inMay, 1852, appointed Charles Levy.

[63 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

In June, 1853, Joseph Foster was again called to the GrandLectureship, this time by appointment of Wilson Brown; andhe was reappointed the following May by Love S. Cornwell.

ANTHONY O'SULLIVAN

This brings us to the time of Anthony O'Sullivan, who wasappointed 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 allof his time officially to the cause of Freemasonry, and whoby virtue of the various offices held by him received a scantlivelihood in return.

O'Sullivan was said by his contemporaries to have regardedthe work as Grand Lecturer as the great mission of his life.Undoubtedly this was true. In various ways he escaped theresults of the law having to do with pay and expenses, and hetravelled over the State, visited the Lodges, .and taught Freemasonry extensively and intensively. In May, 1858, forexample, he recorded that in the preceding year he had beenabsent from his home in Saint Louis nearly six months, andhad travelled over twenty-six hundred miles in the dischargeof 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 fromJ. G. Anderson, then of California, in which he proclaimed,with evident pride, the fact that sixty years previously he hadlearned his Masonry from O'Sullivan, who had then informedhim that the work he taught was the work of the BaltimoreConvention.

[64 ]


TWENTY YEARS AFTER

There is still more cogent proof that the work taught byO'Sullivan and his predecessors was the work of the BaltimoreConvention, for at the Communication of May, 1863, theGrand Lodge of Missouri recorded the fact, in unanimouslyadopting the preamble and resolutions presented by CharlesLevy 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, appointedR. W. S. W. B. Carnegy and Joseph Foster to meet in Conventionwith representatives from other Grand Lodges, in the City of Baltimore, to agree upon and establish uniformity of work ,and lecturesof the degrees under the control of Grand Lodges; and

Whereas, the said Convention met in said City in May, 1843, andthen and there adopted a system of work and lectures for the aforesaid degrees, and agreed to promulgate the said work and lectures, andnone 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 frequentlyand fully exemplify the said work and lectures, and the Grand Lodgedid formally and solemnly adopt the said work and lectures, and required all its constituent Lodges to teach and practice the same, tothe exclusion of all other work and lectures, and also to exclude fromtheir Lodges all itinerant lecturers of every grade, from wheresoeverthey may hail; and

Whereas, the said work and lectures, for the past twenty years, havebeen annually exemplified in open Grand Lodge, and the presentGrand Lecturer, R. W. A. O'Sullivan, has, at great cost of time; healthand means traversed this jurisdiction to promulgate the same to theLodges; and

Whereas, the said work and lectures, as exemplified by him at thepresent session of the Grand Lodge, are the same, in every essentialparticular, 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 andorders heretofore ordained in relation to the adoption, promulgationand perpetuation of the aforesaid work and lectures are herebyaffirmed;

And it is further resolved, That it is the high duty of the Mastersand Wardens and members of the Lodges in this jurisdiction to perfect themselves in the aforesaid work and lectures, and teach andpractice them faithfully, to the exclusion of all other systems bywhomsoever promulgated;

And be it further resolved, and enjoined upon the Masters andWardens of the aforesaid constituent Lodges to see that section 30 ofArticle IV,84 of the by-laws of this Grand Lodge, is faithfully andfully 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 Missouriceased to give instruction only in the official mode of workas a prescribed basis for working the degrees, and attempted .the larger task of teaching a formal ritual complete as to everyword, syllable and letter. It is the opinion of the writer thatthis came about while O'Sullivan was Grand Lecturer, whichopinion is based upon two reasons:

First. It was during O'Sullivan's time that the trend ofthought in the Fraternity was directed toward the idea of acomplete, formal ritual. Rob Morris and his Conservatorsmovement are responsible for this. It is during this periodthat the word "ritual" begins to appear in the Proceedings ofthe 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 wasthe fact that the controversy over Rob Morris' Conservators was then at itsheight. Thomas E. Garrett, presently to be mentioned, was a member of theConservators, and the most prominent Missouri Mason connected with themovement. Only seventeen Missourians are known to have been members.See list of members in Denslow's The Masonic Conservators, p. 125.

[66 ]


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 ofO'Sullivan would be just such a step as might be expectedto be taken by a Freemason of his ability and learning.

No matter when, by whom, or how the change was broughtabout from "official mode of work" to formal ritual, it mustbe admitted by anyone who will study the subject, that in themode of work adopted by the Baltimore Convention and iriThe Masonic Trestle Board are to be found all of the essentials of the present Missouri ritual. Recognition is as easy asthe 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 byWilliam E. Dunscomb, and was reappointed in October, 1868,by Dr. Vincil.

Then J. A. H. Lampton served one year as Grand Lecturerthrough his appointment in October, 1869, by William D.Muir.

ALLAN MCDOWELL

When in October, 1870, Garrett became Grand Master, heappointed Allan McDowell, who was reappointed from yearto year thereafter, until he died in office, May 20, 1906.

Once more, we may refer to official records to ascertain whatthe Grand Lecturer knew, and these records definitely link theteaching of Allan McDowell with that, of his mentor, Anthony

[67 ]

FROM MOUTH TO EAR

O'Sullivan, and with the Baltimore work. Our first quotationis 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 deepand 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 singularfidelity, retained his instructions, and with a jealous care watched overthe interests of Masonry during the years he was District Deputy, andduring the past year he has, by his unfailing kindness to me and hisunselfish devotion to Masonry, enabled me to accomplish far morethan I could otherwise have done. At a sacrifice of time and meansand personal ease, he accompanied me during an extensive tour, inmid-winter, to assist me in the work of giving instruction to theLodges, for which I, and for which the Lodges, owe him a debt oflasting gratitude.

THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AFTER

Another quotation is from the memorial adopted by theGrand Lodge of Missouri, October, 1878, on the occasion ofthe death of Joseph Foster, and submitted by a Committeecomposed 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 memorialstated:

In 1843, he was one of a Committee to represent Missouri in aconvention of Masons that assembled in Baltimore to agree upon auniform work, and subsequently assisted in establishing the presentMasonic work and lectures of Missouri. He was a veteran in theOrder of Masonry and had aO national reputation as such. . . . He wasa 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 wasO'Sullivan's place of residence 1860-63.

[68 ]


MCDOWELL'S PUPILS CARRY ON

The successor of Allan McDowell was our well beloved andRight Worshipful Brother James R. McLachlan, who, aftertwenty-eight years· of most successful and zealous service,voluntarily retired in September, 1934, becoming Grand Lec'turer Emeritus, and who was succeeded by a Most WorshipfulBrother, preeminently qualified to fill the position of GrandLecturer and carry on the noble tradition left by his predecessors, Past Grand Master Anthony F. Ittner, whose term asGrand Master was 1927-28.

As M. W. Brother Ittner was a pupil of R. W. BrotherMcDowell and of R. W. Brother McLachlan, and as the latterwas a pupil of R. W. Brother McDowell, the links in thechain are complete, connecting the Missouri ritual of the present with the mode of work prescribed by the BaltimoreConvention.

THIRTEEN LINKS IN THE CHAIN

Only thirteen brethren have served the Grand Lodge ofMissouri as Grand Lecturer. The writer reverently sets downtheir names and the periods of their service in recognition ofthe veneration in which each has held the sacred trust andthe 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 ]

Documents

FROM MOUTH TO EAR