USA > Washington DC > History of the Grand lodge and of freemasonry in the District of Columbia : with biographical appendix > Part 24
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41
Just on the border-land between the centuries the R. A. became a separate organization, and gradually settled into the form of four degrees: the Mark Master, an offshoot and
FREDERICK G. ALEXANDER, GRAND MASTER, 1892.
273
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
originally in its essentials a part of the Fellow-craft; the Past Masters, already referred to; the Most Excellent, a piece chopped off of the R. A., and expanded, and the Royal Arch.
The Past Masters degree separated from the lodge very slowly and reluctantly in this jurisdiction. For many years after the divorce of symbolic and capitular Masonry the Grand Lodge as well as the subordinate lodges opened in this degree for installation, and it was not until 1848 that it was finally given over to the capitular system by vote of the Grand Lodge, the right to hold an emergent Past Masters lodge, of course, being retained and exercised to this day.
Thus out of small communicated degrees have grown all the degrees of symbolic and capitular Masonry above the Entered Apprentice, which, as we have seen, has only lost its character as the parent trunk in comparatively recent years.
So much for the subject in a general way. Before entering upon more specific details it may be well, in the interest of a clear conception of the situation, to say a word in reference to the much misused term "rite." As generally understood the word in connection with a symbolic lodge denotes the source of its origin and the work it follows, " York rite" being applied to lodges claiming descent from the so-called Grand Lodge held at York, etc. This is incorrect. The term " rite" has no connection whatever with symbolic Masonry. Origin- ally consisting of but three degrees-in fact, but one-there were afterward appended what purported to be higher degrees, and as these were classified or reduced to systems those systems were called " rites." Each retained the original three degrees, and these were erroneously included in the term. The whole of ancient craft Masonry is to be found within the symbolic and Capitular systems.
The term " York rite" (using the phrase in its perverted sense ), as applied to any ritualism practiced in this country, is a misnomer, and arose from the fact that the Athol Grand Lodge, or " Ancients," claimed a connection with the York Grand Lodge, which it never had, and while it chartered many lodges in the Colonies, no American lodge ever sprang from
18
274
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
the true York grand body; and while the ritual of the former may, and probably did, coincide with that of the latter, yet the direct descent is clearly disproven, and the right to the term therefore plainly a usurped one.
To William Preston, who began a reformation of rituals in London, England, about the year 1775, we may properly trace the ceremonial of this jurisdiction. He collected the fragments of old rituals then accessible, assembled them in order, and taught them to the lodges. Within twenty years nearly all the lodges in England, Ireland, and Scotland adopt- ed his work and secured practical uniformity. Thomas Smith Webb, a pupil of Preston's, and well versed in the work, came to the United States about the year 1795, and immediately be- gan to disseminate it. He published the first edition of his Monitor in Albany in 1797, and all publications of a similar character since then have been but reprints of Webb, with such alterations and amendments as the caprice of the authors led them to make. Through his pupils this work was carried into every jurisdiction but that of Pennsylvania, and after his death the innovations and changes fathered by these pupils led to great confusion. One of them, Jeremy L. Cross, has, more than any other, left his impress on our ritual. Appointed Grand Lecturer of the General Grand R. A. Chapter of the United States in 1817, he spent many years traveling over the country, and promulgated his variations of the work in all branches of Masonry wherever he went.
Pennsylvania, alone, resisted all blandishments of the re- formers and adhered to the original McDermott work, and, as we trace our ancestry legitimately through Maryland to Penn- sylvania, it may be surmised that we had a strain of that blood in our veins at birth. Indeed this is evidenced by the fact that for a number of years after the formation of our Grand Lodge here the term " York Masons" clung to us in spots, and before its final disappearance was on several occasions a mat- ter of discussion in the Grand Lodge.
Considerable diversity of expression and form among the several lodges forming the Grand Lodge of the District was
275
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
the necessary result of the various origins. Potomac, while deriving its charter from Maryland, really, through its pre- decessors, antedated that jurisdiction, and may therefore be supposed to have been more or less of a free lance as to its ritual. Naval, Federal, and Columbia probably followed closely the work of Maryland, altho the former shows to this day a slight variation that has been said to owe its parentage to the Scottish rite. Brooke Lodge, of Alex- andria, coming to us from Virginia, must also have had its peculiarities, and thus it will be seen that at the beginning of the last century our first fathers had no small task before them in the adjustment of the warring ritualistic elements and the production of some degree of uniformity, and the immensity and difficulty of the undertaking may be inferred from the fact that a half century of earnest effort was needed to bring about the result as we have it today.
The first movement was inaugurated January 14, 1812, by the adoption of a resolution by the Grand Lodge to appoint a committee of delegates from the several lodges for the pur- pose of devising a uniform system of work, but the desirability of such a result does not seem to have appealed to the com- mittee, who on July 14 of the same year reported and suc- ceeded in having adopted the following resolution :
Resolved, In the opinion of the Grand Lodge that it is now unnecessary to make any change in the long-established usages of each lodge, and that each lodge be at liberty to use such rules and ceremonies as they shall see fit : Provided, That they do not infringe any of the ancient land- marks of the Craft.
A little reflection makes this action easily understandable. The lodges were scattered, the distances great, and transporta- tion facilities of the most primitive character, and as a result there was little interchange of visits. Each lodge was in a sense a close corporation, jealous of its rights and traditions, and unwilling to jeopardize its individuality for the sake of a uniformity which promised no adequate compensating results.
July 13, 1813, the matter came up again in the offering of
276
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
a resolution to have the Prestonian lectures " delivered in such a manner as to make them known to every lodge under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge;" but, no action being taken, a hiatus appears until January 10, 1815, when, by resolution, a committee was authorized to hear the Prestonian lectures and report as to the advisability of adopting the same. A com- mittee was appointed, but seems never to have reported. Oc- tober 20, 1818, another committee, for the same purpose, was appointed, which duly reported in April of the following year, and the subject was debated at length in the Grand Lodge in June, but again the project fell through. The time was not yet.
Evidence is not wanting, however, that the desire for im- provement was still active for in 1821 a proposition to appoint a Grand Visitor and Lecturer was brought before the Grand Lodge, and, while temporarily lost sight of, was revived No- vember 4, 1823, when the first Grand Visitor and Lecturer, Jeremiah Elkins, was chosen, since which time there has been an unbroken line of faithful, capable instructors, to whom the jurisdiction is largely indebted for the world-wide reputation it has enjoyed for years as second to none in its impressive rendition of the symbolic degrees.
At the session of the Grand Lodge May 3, 1825, the usual resolution was again introduced and resulted in an elaborate report by the committee at the meeting of November 1, 1825, in which, after a lengthy introduction, five resolutions were offered and adopted. These resolutions were singularly prolix and visionary, instructing the " Masters, Wardens, and other officers, together with such other members as have made the greatest advance in Masonic knowledge," to meet and confer on the subject and adopt a uniform mode of work; also recommending the delivering of lectures "upon the prin- ciples, forms, and symbols of Masonry at every stated meet- ing when the business of the lodge would permit," and ad- vising consultation with well-informed brethren from other jurisdictions when suitable opportunity occurred. While of such a general and therefore ineffectual character, these res- olutions mark, perhaps, the first real step in the direction of
L. CABELL WILLIAMSON, GRAND MASTER, 1893.
277
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
uniformity, and while such a plan could not possibly accom- plish the object supposed to be sought, yet it constituted a trial of one of the many methods, the gradual elimination of which finally led to the proper course. Its ineffectiveness was brought to the attention of the Grand Lodge November 4, 1828, by the then Grand Visitor and Lecturer, John B. Hammalt, who stated that in his "humble opinion" the sys- tem being pursued by the Grand Lodge would not produce that most desirable effect of uniformity, and suggested that " lodges have special meetings for the purpose, or that the Masters and Wardens of the different lodges meet for the same purpose, and that the deacons be invited to unite, and all Master Masons invited as visitors."
These strictures having been referred to a committee, said committee, May 5, 1829, reported, holding the Grand Lecturer's arraignment of the method adopted November 1, 1825, as disrespectful to the Grand Lodge, deplored the fact that the paucity of funds made it impossible to pay one or more lec- turers well to insure their attention to their duty, salved the sting, however, by complimenting the Grand Visitor and Lecturer on his Masonic ability, etc., and concluded, com- fortably, that " there is no more, if as much, lack of uni- formity here than in other jurisdictions."
The years 1837, 1841, 1842, and 1843 witnessed spasmodic but ineffectual attempts to bring the lodges together in the work. June 24, 1843, the G. V. and L., Bro. N. Seevers, who had attended a national convention in Baltimore the previous month, with the main object of uniformity of work, reported on the same, and at a special in July explained the work and lectures adopted by the convention, and exemplified two sections of the E. A. degree, " when, the hour being late, the Grand Lodge adjourned," and with the adjournment this attempt disappears from the records.
A resolution adopted November 6, 1849, having for its ob- ject the appointment of delegates from the various lodges to meet and adopt a uniform system, bore fruit and resulted in the exemplification, December 21, 1852, by the G. V. and L.,
278
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
Horatio N. Steele, of the three degrees before the Grand Lodge, and at a special meeting held January 20, 1853, for the purpose of passing upon the same, the work of the first two degrees was adopted without comment. The work of the M. M. degree, however, provoked elaborate discussion, pre- cipitated, there is every reason to believe, by the defense of certain portions of the work of Naval Lodge, No. 4, by Broth- er John W. McKim, S. W. of that lodge, a communiation to the author from this brother, but lately deceased, and at the time of his death an honored judge of the Probate Court and Court of Insolvency for Suffolk County, Mass., clearly proving this. After a variety of resolutions were discussed and defeated, the Grand Lodge adopted one to the effect that the " Grand Lodge would not interfere with any lodge in the use of different instruments with which the work of the degree is performed and in the different manner of the arrangement of the room where the language corresponds with that fixed by the Grand Lodge," and the work as a whole was then ap- proved with but one dissenting voice.
This work, with a few amendments and alterations, is sub- stantially the work of today. Two of the more important amendments were the introduction of the present prayers of the F. C. and M. M. degrees, which were taken from the work of Great Britain by a committee of which the late B. B. French was chairman, and adopted May 4, 1858.
This brilliant Mason, to whom, perhaps, more than any other one man the Fraternity in this jurisdiction is indebted, also proposed and had adopted the resolution requiring pro- ficiency before advancement, which he introduced May 18, 1859, and which really marks the first practical step towards uniformity, which can only be had by the general dissemina- tion of the ritual by competent instructors.
In a decade the revolutionary spirit broke out afresh, and on January 29 and 30, 1864, the three degrees were exempli- fied by the Grand Visitor and Lecturer without action, but on February 20 of the same year a committee, previously ap- pointed for the purpose, reported that they had restricted them- selves to the restoration of the work as exemplified by Brother
279
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Steele and adopted in 1852. They had only departed from it by correcting the grammar and rendering more intelligible certain portions. The first degree was then exemplified and approved, and the present resolution making it obligatory on the lodges to give the lecture on the same evening as the degree was also adopted. On March 16, 1864, and January 21, 1865, the second and third degrees, respectively, were exemplified and adopted.
The increasing number of petitioners also led, in May of this latter year, to the adoption of the resolution to omit all the usual ceremonies of the second section of the third degree except the manual instruction with all except the last candidate whenever " there is more than one to receive the degree the same evening."
Four years only elapsed before the impulse again became irresistible to tinker with the ritual, and a committee having been appointed in the spring of 1869 to revise the lecture of the third degree, reported recommending some minor changes, and their recommendations having been adopted, our ritual, with the exception of several slight and wholly unimportant changes, has remained to this day a model for all jurisdic- tions, and no better confirmation of this is needed than the testimony of Earl de Gray and Ripon and Lord Tenderden, the former then Grand Master of Masons of England, and the latter a Past Master of that jurisdiction, who, accom- panied by other distinguished British Masons, visited Wash- ington in 1871. While here they were the recipients of many social honors and visited a number of the lodges, and not only witnessed the work, but by dispensation assumed the stations in Pentalpha and National Lodges and conferred the first and third degrees according to the English system. Their opinion was voiced by Lord Tenderden, who declared emphatically, after full opportunity to make the comparison, that he liked our work much better than theirs, and that the ceremony of the third degree was the most beautiful of anything he had ever seen.
And this is the simple story of our " work," as far as it is proper to be written.
280
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
CHAPTER XVIII.
CAPITULAR MASONRY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
"He that humbleth himself shall be exalted."
THE DATE of the origin of the Royal Arch degree has long been the subject of research and speculation by Masonic writers but while the various theories advanced show some natural differences of opinion, yet the general fact stands out with reasonable clearness that the separation of an essential part of the Master Mason's degree and its elaboration into a fourth degree occurred in England about 1740, several years prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of Ancients. While the circumstances surrounding its birth lie buried in the past, it is a matter of record that it was first cultivated and propagated by the above mentioned Grand Lodge, and, as most of the early American lodges derived their charters from this source, it is a fair presumption that the Royal Arch Degree, with or without express authority, was a part of the system at the time of their constitution.
At the first the degree was conferred in and by the lodge, later in a body styled encampment or chapter, which was ap- pendant to a lodge, and had no other authority than that derived from the lodge. Still later the dependent chapters organized Grand Chapters, these also being dependent upon Grand Lodges.
The evolution of the degree and, indeed, of the entire series that now constitute our American system, distinctly different from all others, is a subject of more than passing interest, and
AVAL LODGE
NAVAL LODGE HALL, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND FOURTH STREET, S. E. Home of No. 4 since 1895.
281
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
is touched upon in the chapter on "Work," but cannot be pursued in the limits of this strictly historical sketch, and, after pausing for a moment for a glance at its earliest intro- duction in America, we must find our true point of departure at the date of its first appearance in the District of Columbia.
To the Fredericksburg, Va., Lodge belongs the distinction of the earliest record touching the Royal Arch in this country, or indeed anywhere, the degree being conferred in that lodge December 22, 1753; and it is worthy of note that said lodge was at the time an " inherent right" lodge, and did not obtain its charter until five years later. Athol Lodge, of Philadel- phia, Pa., may justly lay claim to the second record, occurring in 1768, and St. Andrew's Lodge (also called a "R. A. Lodge"), of Boston, Mass., the third, in 1769. While these are the earliest records, it must not be assumed from that fact that the degree was not conferred at an even earlier period, the Masonic custom of the period being averse to documentary evidence, the remains of this sentiment even reaching far into the last century, and making historical research surprisingly difficult and unsatisfactory.
The first evidence of Capitular Masonry in the District of Columbia is contained in the records of a "Royal Arch En- campment" held in Washington City, 1795 to 1799, in which it is shown that on December 14, 1795, eight members were congregated in Federal Lodge, No. 15, for the purpose of forming such an encampment, and at a subsequent meeting, on the 16th of the same month, a committee, previously ap- pointed, reported as to ways and means, among other things venturing the opinion that the "sum of 23 pounds and 1 shilling was indispensably necessary to provide the material to prepare them and to arrange the lodge room previous to the forming of a R. A. Encampment," and, to the honor of the Craft, recommended the immediate formation of a fund for the relief of distressed brethren and the widows and children of deceased members.
The report being agreed to, the encampment appears to have met with some degree of regularity until February, 1799,
282
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
when it was " resolved, that the R. A. Encampment be broke up," and a committee was appointed to settle up its affairs, " and everyone to receive his dividend."
The record shows the officers and members at this time to have been as follows: M. W. Comp. James Hoban, High Priest; R. W. Comps. John Carter, Captain General; Robt. Brown, 1st Grand Master; Redmond Purcell, 2d G. M .; Peter Lenox, 3d G. M .; John Hamley, Treasurer; Patrick Hearly, Secretary ; John Lenox, Tyler ; and Comps. Alex. McCormick, Samuel Elliott, Wm. O'Neal, Jeremiah Galligher, Daniel Cum- ming, Benj. Moore, Jas. Sweeny, Clotworthy Stephenson, Rev. Geo. Ralph, Owen Donlevey, Jas. Hodgson, Pierce Pur- nell, and Richard Gridley.
Subsequently, tho not of record, the Royal Arch " Chapter," now so-called, appears to have been revived, and under date of December 1, 1804, a meeting was held at which several brethren received the " Excellent Super Excellent Royal Arch," $10 being charged for the same.
In 1806 Concordia R. A. Chapter, of Baltimore, Md., is- sued a circular to the various chapters in that city and the District of Columbia, requesting them to send delegates to a grand convention to be held in the City of Washington the third Wednesday in January, 1807, and in the preamble we find these significant words: "The Grand Chapter to which we were tributary has for a long time lain dormant."
In answer to this circular on Sunday, December 14, 1806, the appointment of such a committee was authorized by the only local chapter (that appendant to Federal Lodge) of which we have record, and the convention being held January 21, 1807, three Maryland chapters, Washington, Concordia, and St. John's, and three local chapters, Federal and Washington Naval, of Washington, and Potomac, of Georgetown, were represented, which constitutes the only available evidence of the existence at the time of the two latter chapters, which were undoubtedly made up largely from the membership of and dependent upon the two lodges of similar names, and prob- ably had received charters from the Grand Chapter of Mary-
283
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
land, which there appears to be incontrovertible evidence was formed in 1797.
At this convention the first Grand Chapter of the State of Maryland and the District of Columbia was formed, with the following roster of officers, in which list, it will be observed, two of our subsequent Grand Masters found place : Comp. John Crawford, Grand High Priest; Oliver B. Hayes, Dep. G. H. P .; Valentine Reintzel, G. King; Robert Rankin, G. Scribe; Alexander McCormick, G. Treasurer; Robert Elliott, G. Chaplain ; Philip P. Eckel, 1st Captain of the Vails; Charles Jones, 2d Capt. of the Vails; William Smith, 3d Capt. of the Vails; Adam Denmead, 4th Capt. of the Vails; Benj. King, Grand Marshal, or Master of Ceremonies; Nicholas Quinn, Grand Conductor ; William O'Neale and Joseph Cassin, G. Purveyors; Nathaniel Knight, G. Pursuivant, and William Cook and - Brown, G. Janitors.
The constitution adopted by the convention prescribed a fee of $35 for a charter for a new R. A. chapter, and for a charter to hold a Mark Master lodge separate from a chapter, $18. While the separation made possible by the last clause does not seem ever to have been practiced here, it may be stated for the benefit of the general reader that in England the Mark Master's degree is, and always has been, an entirely separate degree conferred in lodges of that designation and giving allegiance to their own Grand body.
While the earlier chapters in this section conferred but one degree-the " Excellent Super Excellent Royal Arch"- the system as we have it today was commencing to find favor about this time, and was recognized in the constitution referred to and has obtained ever since, viz : Mark Master, Past Master, Most Excellent Master, and Royal Arch.
After 1807 there is no available record of the above Grand Chapter until 1814, with the exception that there is evidence that our local chapters appointed delegates thereto in 1808.
In 1814 a reorganization was effected by the action of Washington, No. 1, and Chapter No. 2, of Baltimore, and Federal, No. 1, of Washington, which became Nos. 1, 2, and
284
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
3, respectively, and a few years later the old chapters, Con- cordia, of Baltimore, and Washington Naval, of Washington, received charters as Nos. 4 and 5, while Phoenix, of Balti- more, Brooke, of Alexandria, and Potomac, of Georgetown, were subsequently gathered into the fold and assigned Nos. 6, 7, and 8, in the order named.
Federal Chapter, No. 3, was undoubtedly the direct de- scendant of the Royal Arch Encampment organized by Clot- worthy Stephenson in 1795, and therefore, perhaps the earliest Royal Arch organization in the District, altho Potomac Chap- ter claims this distinction, not only because of the earlier date of the charter of its parent lodge, Potomac, in 1789, and the probable activity of its R. A. members, but also by reason of the existence of an old seal bearing date of 2310, or A. D. 1780, which appears to indicate the existence of a chapter appendant to the so-called " St. Andrew's Lodge," which tra- dition insists existed at a very early period in Georgetown, either under that name or the more popular one of " Auld Scotch Lodge."
The seal alluded to, which is the only tangible evidence in support of the date, 1780, was, according to the best author- ities on seals, certainly manufactured not over fifty years ago, and therefore the appearance of the early date must have been predicated upon evidence which is at present unavailable. It is, perhaps, proper to state in this connection that the late Bro. C. F. Shekell, of Georgetown, a Masonic antiquarian of wide reputation, insisted upon the acceptance of this date, but the unfortunate scattering and loss of many of his papers after his demise, has thus far prevented the uncovering of any evi- dence which may have been in his possession.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.