USA > Indiana > A history of freemasonry in Indiana from 1806 to 1898 > Part 18
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
217
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
evening, owing to the absence of necessary papers and other circumstances; that on the subsequent evening (the 16th), it being the evening for the regular meeting of the lodge, a large number of the members were present, the Master in the chair, and the Grand Master at his right; the prelim- inary business being gone through with, the Master called up the trial of the pending case, when the Grand Master in- terposed, and, learning from the Master that the trial would then proceed on the charges previously pronounced insuffi- cient by the Grand Master, he took the insignia of office from the Master, and the chair, and, finding an evident de- termination on the part of the lodge to prosecute the trial, he demanded, through his Deputy, its charter, which being refused, he announced the suspension of the functions of the lodge and closed it in due form. On this statement of the case the minority came to the conclusion that the Grand Master exercised the functions of his office in good faith, and in accordance with his convictions of duty, but with less forbearance and of a spirit of conciliation than might have been desirable; that in consequence of long delay on the part of the Grand Master to meet his engagements, the dis- appointment of the reasonable expectations of the lodge, the current reports in the community that he designed to shield the brother accused, even at the expense of the constitu- tional existence of the lodge, and the apprehension and ex- citement growing out of those reports, and fostered by the failure of the Grand Master to meet his engagements, the lodge put itself in the posture of opposition and resistance to his authority, and at the time, and subsequently, mani- fested insubordination and disregard of his edicts, and were thus guilty of flagrant violations of Masonic obligation.
The minority report of the committee concluded by rec- ommending the restoration of the charter. The majority report was, however, adopted, the charter restored, and the case sent back for a re-trial.
It was not long after these proceedings until the lodge again preferred charges against the brother, and, after "a fair and impartial trial," he was found guilty and expelled fram all the rights and privileges of Masonry.
216
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
brother against whom the charges had been made. Your committee are of the opinion, without very special and urgent reasons, the Grand Master cannot interfere with or arrest the proceedings of a subordinate lodge in the trial of an accused member. We think, with great deference to and respect for the opinions of the Grand Master, that he ought not to have prevented Tipton Lodge from proceeding with the trial of the accused brother, and that the refusal of that lodge to allow him to do so did not furnish good reason for suspending its functions, and that they ought to be re- stored. We are of opinion, however, that as the determina- tion of the Grand Master was a settlement of the question till the meeting of the Grand Lodge, that the action of the brethren in disobeying the order of the Grand Master was unmasonic, and that the proceedings of Tipton Lodge in trying and suspending the brother charged, after the func- tions of the lodge had been suspended, are void."
The committee recommended, therefore, that the func- tions of the lodge be restored; that the trial and suspension of the brother was void, and that it was the duty of the lodge to give a new notice and again proceed to try and dis- pose of said case.
A minority of the committee also submitted a report, which throws some additional light on the subject. The minority found the following facts: That said lodge, on December 4, 1855, preferred charges against one of its members; that the Grand Master was subsequently ad- dressed by letter from one of the members of the lodge, en- closing also a copy of the charges, requesting his presence and aid in conducting the case to an equitable issue, in which many members of the lodge, at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, acquiesced, evincing an almost unanimous desire that he should have charge of the case; that the Grand Master gave due notice to the lodge that he would be present as desired, but failed in fulfilling several successive appointments to meet the lodge, through sickness and death in his family: that on February 15, 1855, he dispatched an order by telegraph for the lodge to meet on that evening, with the assurance that he would be present to conduct the case: but that no action was taken in the premises on said
217
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
evening, owing to the absence of necessary papers and other circumstances; that on the subsequent evening (the 16th), it being the evening for the regular meeting of the lodge, a large number of the members were present, the Master in the chair, and the Grand Master at his right; the prelim- inary business being gone through with, the Master called up the trial of the pending case, when the Grand Master in- terposed, and, learning from the Master that the trial would then proceed on the charges previously pronounced insuffi- cient by the Grand Master, he took the insignia of office from the Master, and the chair, and, finding an evident de- termination on the part of the lodge to prosecute the trial, he demanded, through his Deputy, its charter, which being refused, he announced the suspension of the functions of the lodge and closed it in due form. On this statement of the case the minority came to the conclusion that the Grand Master exercised the functions of his office in good faith, and in accordance with his convictions of duty, but with less forbearance and of a spirit of conciliation than might have been desirable; that in consequence of long delay on the part of the Grand Master to meet his engagements, the dis- appointment of the reasonable expectations of the lodge, the current reports in the community that he designed to shield the brother accused, even at the expense of the constitu- tional existence of the lodge, and the apprehension and ex- citement growing out of those reports, and fostered by the failure of the Grand Master to meet his engagements, the lodge put itself in the posture of opposition and resistance to his authority, and at the time, and subsequently, mani- fested insubordination and disregard of his edicts, and were thus guilty of flagrant violations of Masonic obligation.
The minority report of the committee concluded by rec- ommending the restoration of the charter. The majority report was, however, adopted, the charter restored, and the case sent back for a re-trial.
It was not long after these proceedings until the lodge again preferred charges against the brother, and, after "a fair and impartial trial," he was found guilty and expelled fram all the rights and privileges of Masonry.
21S
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
This occurred in June, about the time of the semi-annual election of officers, which then were held twice a year-in June and December. The brethren were feeling exceed- ingly happy over the great victory they had finally gained, and so they determined to have a public installation of offi- cers and a general time of rejoicing on the 24th of June, the anniversary of St. John the Baptist. The court house was secured and everything made ready for the grand jubi- lee. In addition to the usual programme on such occa- sions, such as a banquet, music, speeches, etc., it was decided to remember the Worshipful Master with some token of appreciation. Chauncey Carter, one of the oldest members of the lodge, was the Worshipful Master during the excit- ing controversy, and had just been re-elected. He had nobly sustained the lodge in what most of the members con- sidered an unconstitutional act of the Grand Master, and had, therefore, more than ever endeared himself to the members. To testify their regards for him personally, and their high appreciation of his services, an elegant silver pitcher and goblets were procured, and, through the chap- lain of the lodge, Rev. John Trimble, Jr., were presented to Brother Carter, accompanied by an able address. Brother Carter received the gift with deep emotions of grat- itude, to be preserved as an heirloom in his family, highly to be valued as an enduring evidence of the confidence and esteem of his brethren, with whom he had been connected ever since the organization of the lodge.
From the decision of the lodge in expelling him the ac- cused brother took an appeal to the Grand Lodge, which was considered at the meeting held in May, 1856. The case was referred to a special committee consisting of such distinguished brethren as the late Elijah Newland, Past Grand Master Philip Mason, Grand Lecturer D. K. Hays and others, who, after a careful consideration of the case, recommended that the action of the lodge expelling the ac- cused be affirmed, which was concurred in.
Grand Master Lawrence and the accused, a Past Grand Master, were warm personal and Masonic friends, and as the charges, as Grand Master Lawrence thought, were in-
219
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
definite and not susceptible of positive proof, it was the general opinion among the members of Tipton Lodge that on that pretext he determined to shield him and prevent the lodge from trying him. His theory, although not so ex- pressed, was that a Grand Master or Past Grand Master could not be tried for a Masonic offense except by those who had attained to a like exalted position. His actions, as shown by the records, indicate that, at least. A few years after these occurrences a feeling of brotherly love and char- ity came over the membership, and in 1865 the accused was restored to all the rights and privileges of Masonry, and when he died, in 1867, a large concourse of the breth- ren followed his remains to the grave, where they were ten- derly consigned to the earth from whence they came with the usual honors of the Ancient Craft.
GENERAL GRAND LODGE UNITED STATES.
T HE question of organizing a General Grand Lodge for the United States was early brought to the attention of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. At the annual meeting held at Corydon in October, 1822, a document drafted by the distinguished statesman, Henry Clay, was presented for consideration. The "National Intelligencer," of Washing- ton City, of the date of March 9, 1822, contained the fol- lowing:
"Masonic Notice .- Those members of Congress who be- long to the Masonic Fraternity, and those visitors of the city who are or have been members of any State Grand Lodge, are respectfully invited to attend a meeting to be held in the Senate Chamber this evening, at seven o'clock, to take into consideration matters of general interest to the Masonic Institution."
Pursuant to the above notice, a number of members of the Society of Freemasons from various parts of the United States, composed of members of Congress and strangers, assembled at the time and place stated and selected Thomas R. Ross, M. C., chairman, and William Darlington, M. C., secretary. Much conversation took place on the expedi- ency of the general objects of the meeting. Several prop- ositions were presented, when finally the following resolu- tions, offered by Brother Henry Clay, were adopted unani- mously :
"Resolved, That, in the opinion of this meeting, it is expedient for the general interests of Freemasonry to con- stitute a General Grand Lodge of the United States.
"Resolved, That it be proposed to the several Grand Lodges of the United States to take the subject into their serions consideration at their next annual communications, and that, if they approve of the formation of a General
(220)
221
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
Grand Lodge, it be recommended to them to appoint one or more delegates to assemble in the city of Washington on the second Monday of February next, to agree on the or- ganization of such Grand Lodge.
"Resolved, That if two-thirds of the Grand Lodges within the United States concur in the propriety of establishing a General Grand Lodge, it be recommended to them to in- struct their representatives to proceed to the formation of a Constitution of a General Grand Lodge, to be subsequently submitted to the several Grand Lodges in the Union for their ratification, and which, being ratified by a majority of them, shall be considered as thenceforth binding on all the Grand Lodges assenting thereto.
"Resolved, That the M. W. John Marshall, of Virginia; Henry Clay, of Kentucky; William H. Winder, of Mary- land; William S. Cordell, of New York; Joel Abbott, of Georgia; John Holmes, of Maine; Henry Baldwin, of Pennsylvania; John H. Eaton, of Tennessee: Thomas R. Ross, of Ohio; H. G. Burton, of North Carolina; and the Rev. Thaddeus Mason Harris, D. D., of Massachusetts, be and they are hereby appointed a committee to open up a correspondence with the respective Grand Lodges within the United States, and to take such measures therein as they may deem expedient to carry the aforesaid resolutions into effect."
Accompanying these resolutions the committee sent out a lengthy circular stating further reasons for the action taken. They favored the organization of a General Grand Lodge for two especial reasons: first, to acquire in a corre- spondence with foreign nations an elevated stand for the Masonry of this country, and secondly, to preserve between our own States that uniformity in work and that active in- terchange of good offices which would be difficult, if not im- possible, by other means.
"From causes which need no explanation," the circular continued, "the Masonic jurisdiction in this country has taken its form from the political divisions. The modifica- tion which it has undergone, from the spirit of our civil in- stitutions, has its benefits and its defects. Each of our State jurisdictions is supreme within itself. Whatever col- lisions may exist; whatever departures from the correct
222
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
standard in principle or in rites; whatever injury to the common cause, there is no mode assigned to obviate the wrongs which it is the interest of all to prevent. There is no provision for a systematic interchange of Masonic intel- ligence. In one or two instances there are already two or more Grand Lodges in the same State, each claiming su- perior jurisdiction, and with no acknowledged boundaries between them. Will not these evils increase as our popu- lation becomes more dense, unless means be seasonably used to guard against them? Is the difference now prevailing between different States an evil which calls for remedy? Every good Mason must wish chiefly for the harmony of the general Institution; for the society is so formed that no particular part, however meritorious by itself, can continue to prosper if the body at large is brought into disgrace. Is the Masonry of our country at present a great arch without a keystone? Is it not in danger of falling? Are not many of the books which are published in the name of the Ma- sonic Institution derogatory to its character and interest?"
The Grand Lodge of Kentucky, of which Henry Clay was a member, had considered the question, and resolved that it was inexpedient to recommend the formation of a General Grand Lodge. The report accompanying the res- olution was carefully and elaborately drawn, and was prob- ably the ablest document on the subject that was formu- lated during the period of the agitation of the question. This report was spread in full on the records of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. It is too lengthy for insertion here, and only bare references to the salient points can be made.
The committee believed that the essence of the Order- its noble precepts of benevolence and charity, at once the protection and glory of the brothers of the mystic tie- are to be found in the lodge, emphatically so called, untram- melled by any other governmental connection or municipal machinery whatever, independent of the existence of Grand Lodges, and before they were ever thought of by the Fra- ternity. What, then, the committee asked, is the necessity of even a Grand Lodge? Principally, they answered, as a convenient appellate body from the decisions of the subor-
223
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
dinate bodies affecting personal feeling and character. It las. no doubt, other valuable effects in congregating Ma- sonic characters to a considerable extent, as all social assem- blies have; but this is the essential feature which endears it to the Craft. It is our city of refuge in distress, -- it is our asylum from oppression or mistake. But does any neces- sity of this kind extend to a General Grand Lodge? The committee thought not. It could scarcely touch us in a single point of affection: it could afford no remedy in dis- tress: it could hardly cultivate any social sympathies be- vond the present system of Masonic intercourse; and so far from coming home to the domestic circle with its charities and good offices, it would soar at almost a sightless and heartless distance from us all. The committee were afraid the project would tend to its perversion to political pur- poses, and they dreaded the slightest approximation, the re- motest prospect of so unhallowed a perversion of the Order! "We want," the committee concluded, "no more govern- ment than that we have so long enjoyed with increasing felicity and prosperity. What could compensate this Grand Lodge or the society at large if this new project should excite so large a schism as a third of the Grand Lodges of the United States? Yet the proposed General Grand Lodge may go into existence, upon its very face of proposal, with a minority, so fearful to every good Mason."
The Grand Lodge of Indiana, in view of serious objec- tions to the formation of a General Grand Lodge by several of the most respectable Grand Lodges, postponed the fur- ther consideration of the subject until the next annual meeting. At that meeting (1823) the special committee made the following report :
"Your committee, with a due degree of deference and re- spect for the opinion of the congregated bodies of the Fra- ternity who have expressed themselves favorable to the formation of a General Grand Lodge, are unable to per- ceive any advantages which would result to Masonry from its establishment. and they therefore recommend the adop- tion of the following resolution :
"Resolved, By the Grand Lodge, that it is inexpedient and unnecessary that a General Grand Lodge should be
224
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
formed, as they view State Grand Lodges entirely sufficient for the good government of the Craft.'
1 vote by lodges was called for, and the resolution was adopted-ayes, 12; noes, S. This ended the question, so far as the Grand Lodge of Indiana was concerned, for nearly a quarter of a century.
In 1843 a Masonic convention was held in the city of Baltimore, Md., composed of distinguished Masons from several of the Grand Lodges of the United States. That meeting, which was the most important of any that had been held previously, or has been since held, adopted a code of "rules for the organization and establishing a Grand Convention of Ancient Free and Accepted York Masons." As a matter of general interest to the Craft in this jurisdic- tion, said rules are hereto appended :
"Section 1. A Grand Masonic Convention is hereby established for the United States, and shall consist and be composed of representatives from the several Grand Lodges of the United States, one from each, to be chosen, elected or appointed, in such manner as the Grand Lodges respec- tively may think proper to employ.
"Sec. 2. The convention, when duly established, shall have power and authority-
"First-To decide upon and settle a uniform mode and form of Masonic work, lectures and ceremonies, so as to re- tain the ancient customs, ceremonies and forms, and to pro- vide for the necessary instruction therein.
"Second-To prescribe for the Fraternity a uniform mode and form for issuing certificates of good standing and the effect thereof.
"Third-To hear and decide all questions of difference which may be submitted to them in convention by two or more Grand Lodges: Provided, however, That such a de- cision shall bind no Grand Lodge not a party to such refer- ence.
"Fourth-To adopt and enforce a set of rules for the government of the deliberations of the convention.
"Fifth-At each meeting of the convention, to deter- mine and fix the time and place of each succeeding triennial meeting of the convention.
"Sec. 3. The several Grand Lodges which may adopt the foregoing rules shall, at their annual communication
1
225
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
next before the last of March in the year 1846, and at cor- responding meetings every third year thereafter, elect or appoint, in such manner as they each respectively may think proper, one trusty, well-skilled brother Master Mason (a resident of the State within which the Grand Lodge is held of which he is a representative) a representative of said convention.
"Sec. 4. The convention shall meet for business once every three years, at such day and place as may be ordered as herein provided.
"Sec. 5. Whenever any Grand Lodge may so order that they will no longer remain a member of the convention, such Grand Lodge shall not be represented in the conven- tion, nor be bound by its acts.
"Sec. 6. The foregoing rules and grant of power shall not be altered or enlarged except by recommendation of the convention and the consent of two-thirds of the Grand Lodges belonging to the convention.
"Sec. 7. Whenever thirteen or more Grand Lodges, by resolution or otherwise, shall adopt the foregoing rules, the same shall be established, and the convention taken as duly organized as to such Grand Lodges as may so adopt them."
In 1846 Grand Master Bartlett brought the matter be- fore the Grand Lodge by saying in his address:
"I am in favor of establishing a General Grand Lodge for the purpose of protecting the ancient landmarks and usages of the Order, and of settling all questions that may arise in reference thereto, in preference to any other trib- unal that may be set up, whose acts may be broken at will. The difference in work and proceedings of all Grand Lodges call for such an institution. Practices are indulged in by some Grand Lodges which are denounced by others, and the question naturally arises, who shall decide?"
The committee reported that, not having had sufficient time to deliberate upon a matter of so much importance, they had made no report, and recommended that further consideration be postponed until the following year, which was agreed to.
Nothing was done in 1847, but in 1848 the Grand Mas- ter again presented the question, and the committee to
2:26
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
whom the same was referred reported in favor of the propo- sition. Among other things, the committee said:
"It will be sufficient for the committee to say that, for the purpose of settling all disputes and differences that at times may unfortunately arise between State Grand Lodges, for the purpose of providing a suitable tribunal to hear and try appeals that may be taken from the same, to secure uni- formity in the mode of work in the symbolic degrees throughout the United States-in a word, for the purpose of constructing an intelligent, enduring, active, capable and governing head for the body of Masonry in the United States, they have arrived at the conclusion that the time has come when a Supreme Grand Lodge is not only expedi- ent but indispensably requisite."
A resolution ratifying the Baltimore Constitution of the Supreme Grand Lodge, which had been adopted at Balti- more on the 23d of September, 1847, and one that the Grand Lodge of Indiana would be represented in a subse- quent meeting to be held in Baltimore the second Tuesday of July, 1848, were presented. The resolutions were adopted; and thus Indiana placed herself on record in favor of a Supreme Grand Lodge of the United States.
The Constitution of "The Supreme Grand Lodge" is printed in full in the printed proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Indiana for the year 1848, pages 103-4-5-6-7.
The question was presented again in 1849 and 1850, but nothing was done. The Grand Lodge had ratified the Con- stitution of the Supreme Grand Lodge, and nothing further was necessary for it to do until sixteen Grand Lodges-the number made necessary in the Constitution for its adoption -had given their consent. At that time but thirteen Grand Lodges had taken action-seven were in favor and six opposed to the proposition. The question was, how- ever, referred to a special committee, with instructions to report at the session of 1851. At that session Past Grand Master Philip Mason, chairman of the committee, made an elaborate and interesting report, in which he took strong grounds against the formation of a Supreme Grand Lodge. He went into the history of the establishment of Grand
227
HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.
Lodges, which, being of historical interest, is hereto ap- pended. On this branch of the subject he said :
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.