USA > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > The history of the Masonic fund society for the county of Allegheny from the year 1847 to 1923; with biographical sketches of deceased members of the Board of trustees By Hiram Schock. > Part 21
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
Thus came to a triumphant end the productive war work in our home of Masonry. The great Temple had been a Soldiers Home, not indeed for maimed and aged veterans,
224
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
but for thousands of the gallant youth of the land, many of them brethren of our world-wide Masonic Craft, who were to stand, a living and unbending bulwark across all of France. And many of these dear boys who departed from the halls of our Masonic Temple with laughter on their lips and high purpose in their young souls were carried into the very vortex of that awful conflict in France, to battle and to fall in glorious death, where the old stone homes of St. Miheil crumbled beneath the thunders of the German guns, or on the wooded slopes of the Argonne, torn by wars for a thousand years past, or along the marshy heights of the placid Meuse, giving for all time to come beautiful examples of devotion to a holy cause. On the hillsides and in the rocky valleys they buried these dear forms, and as they laid them down upon Mother Earth, each young hero sank to his eternal rest with only a muttered prayer from his living comrades and a little word of farewell, and with no solemn roll of drum :-
And no useless coffin enclosed his breast, Nor in sheet nor in shroud we wound him; For he lay like a warrior taking his rest, With his martial cloak around him.
Sadly and slowly we laid him down, From the field of his fame fresh and gory. We carved not a line, we raised not a stone, But left him-alone in his glory.
CHAPTER VII.
OLD FIFTH DISTRICT AND D. D. GRAND MASTERS.
Creators of the M. F. S. Take Notable Part in Early Masonic Activi- ties-Establishment of the Ancient Fifth (Allegheny) District- Dismemberment of the District and the Historical Negotiations for its Reestablishment-30 Years of Agitation for the Appoint- ment of D. D. G. Masters-Origin and Designations of the First Districts in Pennsylvania and Selection of First Deputies-Pitts- burgh Masons Take Up Matter with Grand Lodge-Onward March of the Fraternity.
T HE long and careful research among old publications, records and documents, which was necessary to pro- cure material for a true and complete narrative of the origin and achievements of the Masonic Fund Society for the County of Allegheny, led to very important discoveries. It developed the fact, as shown in the preceding chapters, that not only have the successive Boards of Trustees of the Society been great factors in the promotion of the growth of the Masonic Order in Western Pennsylvania, but also that the originators of the Society and figured largely in a re- markable historical movement. The early leaders of Mason- ry in Allegheny county, and particularly those enterprising Pittsburgh brethren who were the builders of the Masonic Fund Society, had always concerned themselves with the different phases of the Masonic organization and had taken a personal interest in all its various activities. They were loyal and powerful supporters of the Grand Lodge and they . were always at the front when the interests of Masonry in Western Pennsylvania were at stake. And so it came about that through their firm stand and intelligent aid the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania was enabled to establish, more than three-quarters of a century ago, a fixed policy for the loca- tion and designation of Districts, the appointment of D. D. Grand Masters and the settlement of the extent and limita- tions of their duties and powers. It is an interesting and historically valuable chapter in the development of Masonry in the Keystone State and one that has heretofore received scant attention.
226
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
There had come a day in the year 1846 when the breth- ren of Pittsburgh reached the conclusion that the Grand Lodge was not altogether mindful of their necessities and of their importance. For a period of nearly 25 years their county of Allegheny had had a District Deputy Grand Mas- ter in what was known as the Fifth District. But in 1846, by a decree of the Grand Master, that arrangement had been ended. That is to say, there was to be no longer a Dis- trict Deputy Grand Master resident of Allegheny county. It was a deprivation that brought chagrin, as well as in- convenience. For in those pioneer days of sparse popula- tion, remote lodge locations and difficult means of communi- cating with the Grand Lodge, a District Deputy Grand Mas- ter, while perhaps not of more importance, was really of greater necessity than in our days of speedy travel and easy postal communication.
But there was a big phase of this subject that went far deeper into the Masonic interests and destinies of those early brethren than merely the continued appointment of a resident Allegheny county Mason for District Deputy. The very existence of their entire Fifth District was at stake. In fact, it was on the verge of annihilation; for it had been in the mind for some time past of the then R. W. Grand Master, Brother William Barger, that not only should Allegheny county be annexed to the district comprising the counties of Fayette and Greene, but that the ancient Fifth District itself, with its center in Pittsburgh, should be ren- dered non-existent. The Allegheny county brethren took a firm, united, yet wholly respectful, stand against this action. They felt that having built up, upheld and rendered eminent, through good and evil days, the Order in their vast and remote county, not only its progress, but its very Masonic life depended upon a close working connection with the Grand Lodge-a connection which could be maintained only by the existence of a District that would have their county as its center and be directed by a District Deputy whose residence should be in Pittsburgh.
It is to be remembered that already during a period of nearly a quarter of a century Allegheny county had been the chief territory in the Fifth District and the District
227
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
Deputy had been regularly appointed from the city of Pitts- burgh. The first District Deputy in Allegheny county had been named as far back as 1823. In the minutes of the Quarterly Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge at Philadelphia, January 5, 1824, an entry was made of the appointment of Morgan Neville, as D. D. Grand Master.
The creation of these Districts and the appoint- ment of D. D. Grand Masters are in our days such ordi- nary matters of Masonic administration within the juris- diction of Pennsylvania that we are apt to think that not much interest could attach to the establishment of the first Districts and the appointment of the first District Deputies . But an examination of the old records will thoroughly disabuse the mind of that impression. It was a big and perplexing question, and many years had to elapse before it was finally and satisfactorily settled. In that settlement Pittsburgh Masons of the early days figured very prominently. We therefore propose here to trace the successive developments by which Allegheny county gained her first District and her first District Deputy, then lost the office, and finally the entire district; and then regained both (never again to lose them), through the energetic action of three of the subsequent creators of the Masonic Fund Society, Brothers Alexander Tindle, George Layng and William W. Wilson. They were, of course, earnestly supported by other brethren of their community.
Apparently the first D. D. Grand Masters within the jurisdiction of Pennsylvania were appointed in the year 1822. But long prior to that date, as is evident from min- utes of Grand Lodge proceedings, the need for these officers had become insistent. Even back so far as the year 1789 the accurate discernment of the Grand Lodge officers and of the then R. W. Grand Master, Brother Jonathan B. Smith, noted the growing necessity for the establishment of the office of District Deputy. For we find at least the germ of the idea embodied in the new "Rules and Regulations for the Government of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania," adopted by that Body December 27, 1789, in these words:
The Grand Master, with his deputy, the Grand Wardens, and Grand Secretary, shall go around and visit all the lodges under his
228
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
jurisdiction, or when this duty becomes impracticable, he shall, as often as necessary, appoint visitors of different districts, composed of his Grand Officers, or such other brethren as he may think proper, who shall faithfully report their proceedings to the Grand Lodge, according to instructions given them.
The phrase, "such other brethren as he may think proper," seems to imply that designations might be made outside of Grand Lodge officers of brethren "to go around and visit all the lodges." However, down through a period of twenty years from 1789 no definite action, certainly no official steps were taken towards the actual creation of the office of D. D. Grand Master. Yet it could have been done, for by the year 1789 the Pennsylvania Masons were living and progressing under the sovereignty of the new Republic of the United States. With the triumph of the Revolution- ary War the old Provincial Grand Lodge, acting by virtue of Warrant from the Grand Lodge of England, had gone out of existence in 1786. The Pennsylvania Grand Body was therefore free to start, as it did start, on that sun-lit highway of progress and of influence which her stately steps have followed to this day.
But it was not until the year 1811 that another prac- tical move was made toward the appointment of regular official district deputies. In his address before the Grand Quarterly Communication held October 21, 1811, that very notable brother, the R. W. Grand Master James Milnor, made this important declaration:
I would earnestly recommend it to you to consider, as soon as possible, whether it would not be expedient to nominate some res- pectable brethren to act as District Deputy Grand Masters or Inspec- tors over the alloted portions of our Masonic jurisdiction. This plan, though new to us, has long prevailed in the Eastern States and has redounded greatly to the spread of Masonry, and the good order and discipline of lodges placed by their local situation beyond the immedi- ate observation of the parent Grand Lodge.
This recommendation and argument from so high and trusted a source brought about practical results the next year. At an adjourned Quarterly Grand Communication, January 6, 1812, a committee was appointed by the R. W. Grand Master to examine and report on the state of the country lodges (those outside of Philadelphia), and upon the advisability of naming D. D. Grand Masters. The
229
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
Report of this Committee was referred to another commit- tee comprising Brothers Peter Le Barbier Duplessis and Samuel F. Bradford. Brother Bradford was a prominent citizen and Mason of Philadelphia and Brother Duplessis, who had been the R. W. Deputy Grand Master in 1811, was now in 1812 the R. W. Grand Master. He had been elected Grand Secretary in 1789 and was active in the Grand Lodge through the long period of thirty years. In their report Brothers Duplessis and Bradford say:
They find that many of the country lodges have been very dila- tory in making returns and remitting annual dues. That several lodges have been vacated whose jewels, warrants, etc., could not be obtained. That several have discontinued their meetings and several were in arrears with the Grand Lodge at the time the said Reports were made, and are so now, though a few have settled their accounts of dues, or in part since that time: That all the delinquent lodges have been notified by Bro. Grand Secretary.
Your Committee are convinced that many of the lodges have neglected their duties towards the Grand Lodge through ignorance, and for want of having received that incitement which is generally the result of Grand Visitations, where the wrongs are pointed out, duties are explained, and the consequence is a reviving of zeal and determination to comply with everything that is required by the Constitution.
Your Committee do perfectly agree with the R. W. Grand Master in the propriety and even the necessity of appointing District Deputy Grand Masters or Inspectors, but they cannot pretend to say how many should be appointed and are of opinion that it would be better to leave it to the discretion of the R. W. Grand Master.
Your Committee begs leave to submit the following resolution:
"Resolved, that the R. W. Grand Master be respectfully requested to appoint such number of District Deputies or Inspectors, as in his wisdom he shall think proper and sufficient, to visit the country lodges, whose duties shall be to make Grand Visitations to the Lodges in their several Districts as soon as possible, then and there to examine into the state of said lodges, their manner of working, correct their errors, to comply with all further directions which shall from time to time be given to them by the R. W. Grand Master or the Grand Lodge, and to make report of their proceedings at the Grand Com- munications in June and December in each and every year.
Here indeed was ground for immediate action, but even the emphatic recommendations of the committee back- ed by the favor of the R. W. Grand Master was not suffici- ent to bring practical advancement in the matter of appoint- ing D. D. Grand Masters, and the question was again left
230
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
in abeyance. There is one probable reason for this inaction. It is very likely that the Grand Master was finding it next to impossible to secure the assent of experienced Masons to accept the appointment of District Deputy in the interior of the State, with the lodges so widely apart and so difficult to reach. But five years later Lodge No. 1 at Harrisburg furnished an impulse towards a prompt settlement of the matter. They sent a communication to the Grand Lodge calling attention to the lack of uniformity in the ritual work of subordinate lodges, and at the Grand Lodge Quarterly Communication in October, 1817, a resolution was adopted, in which was this provision:
That the Grand Master be requested to divide the country Lodges under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, into separate districts, to appoint suitable brethren to visit the different lodges, inspect their labors, and to report annually their proceedings to the Grand Lodge.
But for some reason, these resolutions were indefinitely postponed. Then three years later there came a respectful push from Pittsburgh. In the minutes of the adjourned Quarterly Communication of the Grand Body, February 7, 1820, is the following :
A communication was received and read from Ohio Lodge, No. 113, held at Pittsburgh, relative to the establishment of a General Grand Lodge, the appointment of Lecture Masters, &c. Which was referred to the Committee appointed on St. John's Day, on the subject of the establishment of a General Grand Lodge, &c.
The movement for a "General Grand Lodge" is now only of historical importance, interesting as one of the passing Masonic episodes of the time, and the communica- tion from the brethren of the Pittsburgh lodge brought no practical action. But the Order throughout Pennsylvania continued to grow numerically and the lodges took on addi- tional strength and influence. Visitations between these subordinate bodies began to be more frequent, and it was seen that the dissimilarity in localities in the way of ritual- istic phraseology and ceremonies was becoming more pro- nounced. It became urgent that closer connections with and more direct guidance by the Grand Lodge be establish- ed. The Grand Lodge was very remote from the country lodges in those days. A feeling of discontent developed, and finally came troublous times. It was a hardship for the country brethren to travel to Philadelphia; they were
231
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
out of touch with the influence of the Grand Lodge; they felt themselves to be too much alone, and finally, an un- welcome but fully justified increase in Grand Lodge dues, brought about a situation which for a time threatened dis- astrous consequences. The troubles, at first rather wide- spread, were at length centralized by the action of Lodge No. 43 at Lancaster in 1822. They sent out a circular letter to other subordinate bodies setting forth certain grievances complained of. This circular had among its signers Brother James Buchanan, afterwards President of the United States, and Brother George B. Porter, later Governor of Michigan, both Past Masters of the Lancaster Lodge. With respect to this circular, the Grand Lodge soon took emphatic and con- demnatory action. The Warrants of Lodge No. 43 and of some other lodges which had acted in unison with the Lan- caster brethren were called in. But the controversy went on, assuming more threatening aspects. Finally at a Quar- terly Communication of the Grand Lodge held December 16, 1822, a "Grand Committee" was named, composed of three members of each subordinate body in the State, "to take into consideration the alleged grievances of the subordinate lodges and report what measures ought to be adopted by the Grand Lodge." This committee sat in Philadelphia from the 25th to the 28th of February, 1823, inclusive, and among its recommendations was the following:
That once in every two years each subordinate lodge, beyond the City and County of Philadelphia, and within the Commonwealth, shall be visited by a Grand Lecturer, to be appointed in such manner as the Grand Lodge may hereafter from time to time direct; that his expenses while attending the Lodges shall be defrayed by them, and his compensation shall be paid out of the funds of the Grand Lodge, and that the first visitation shall commence in the course of the present year.
This arrangement, which was carried into effect, did not then establish the office of D. D. Grand Master, but it was soon followed by the actual creation of that office. This Report of the "Grand Committee" was so practical in its recommendations and so conciliatory in its treatment of the troubles among the subordinate lodges that within a short time peace and harmony again prevailed throughout the entire jurisdiction. And finally as a welcome result of
232
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
efforts extending over a period of thirty-five years the recommendations of Grand Masters and the requests of the country lodges were acceded to, and the office of District Deputy Grand Master was created in Pennsylvania in the year 1822. The first official mention of the office made in the Grand Lodge records is to be found in the minutes of a communication held February 3, 1825, as follows :
A letter dated Shesequin, December, 1822, from Brother Joseph Kingsbery, District Deputy Grand Master of the 4th Masonic Dis- trict, presented and read.
He represented the counties of Bradford and Tioga. The next mention made is that in the minutes of the Grand Lodge Communication, December 27, 1823, where it is an- nounced that Brother James Buchanan, then a leading lawyer at Lancaster, and later President of the United States, had been appointed D. D. Grand Master for the coun- ties of Lancaster, Lebanon and York. It was not until Janu- ary 5, 1824, that the R. W. Grand Master announced an ap- pointment for Allegheny county. The deputy so named was Brother Morgan Neville, a resident of Pittsburgh, his Dis- trict was No. 5, and it embraced an enormous stretch of Western Pennsylvania, including no less than fifteen coun- ties. The exact words of the minutes of the Grand Lodge in recording this action are these:
The following appointments of District Deputy Grand Master, made by the R. W. Grand Master on St. John's Day last, was ordered to be entered on the minutes, viz:
Brother Morgan Neville, Esquire, of the City of Pittsburgh, for the District composed of the Counties of Westmoreland, Allegheny, Fayette, Greene, Washington, Butler, Beaver, Venango, Warren, Crawford, Mercer, Erie, Armstrong, Jefferson and Indiana.
The other appointment announced at this time was that of Brother Garrick Mallory, Esq., of Wilkes-Barre for the counties of Luzerne, Pike, Wayne and Susquehanna.
Brother Morgan Neville, the first D. D. Grand Master appointed for the Fifth district, came from a notable family. He was a member of Ohio Lodge, No. 113, at Pittsburgh, and was Worshipful Master in that Body in 1819. He was born in Pittsburgh December 25, 1785, and was admitted to practice law in the courts of Allegheny county in 1808. In later years he removed to Cincinnati, Ohio, where he died
.
233
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
March 1, 1840. He was the son of Gen. Pressly Neville and the grandson of Gen. John Neville, an intimate friend of Washington, and who held command of Fort Pitt in 1774, and was later a member of the Supreme Council which was then the governing power of Pennsylvania. Brother Mor- gan Neville filled the office of D. D. Grand Master for only one year, and was succeeded April 7, 1825, by Brother Mag- nus Murray, who was also a member of Ohio Lodge, No. 113. He was a leading citizen of Pittsburgh, his father being Commander Alexander Murray of the United States Navy. He was born in Pittsburgh, February 22, 1787, and at the time of his selection as District Deputy was a promi- nent lawyer, having been admitted to the Bar in 1809. He was mayor of Pittsburgh in 1828-29 and in 1831. He was W. M. of Ohio Lodge, No. 113, in 1815, and was First Chief, as it was then designated, of the Chapter, H. R. A. M. in 1815. The minutes of a meeting of Lodge 45, March 31, 1824, have this entry:
The R. W. Deputy G. M., M. Murray, Esq., was received with the grand honors in ancient form.
It is evident from Grand Lodge records that it was found difficult not only to secure efficient brethren for the positions of District Deputy; but also when they were found, the time required and inconveniences endured in reaching the lodges scattered over so wide a territory brought early resignations. Pointing out this difficulty, R. W. Grand Master James Harper in an address at a Grand Communication held December 5, 1825, said:
Much good may be attributed to the appointment of District Deputy Grand Masters; but considerable difficulty has occurred in making these appointments, owing to the very few persons who could be found that would accept of the appointment, who were capable of discharging the duties of the situation with advantage to all concerned.
It is not surprising, then, to note that both Brothers Neville and Murray were unable to continue in an office which required so much of their time and a good deal of absence from home. Brother Murray was succeeded as District Deputy in 1826 by Brother Charles Shaler, who was then, at the age of 34 years, very prominent in Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania as a lawyer, jurist and orator.
234
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
He had been in 1822-23 W. M. of Lodge 45 and in 1824 had become a member of Chapter No. 113, R. A. M., held in Pittsburgh. There is no official announcement in the pub- lished records of the Grand Lodge as to the appointment of Brother Shaler, but there is this first record of May 7, 1827: Fifth District: Annual Report of Bro. Chas. Shaler, D. D. G. M., date 20 December, 1826. Return of Dispensations issued by the same in 1826.
A press of professional duties compelled Brother Shaler to refuse reappointment at the end of the year 1828, and on March 2, 1829, Brother Samuel Pettigrew, of Pittsburgh, was named, the Fifth District then having been reduced so as to comprise the counties of Allegheny, Westmoreland, Butler, Beaver, Armstrong, Jefferson and Indiana. He also was a member of old Ohio Lodge, No. 113, and had been chosen its treasurer back in the year 1815. He served as District Deputy through 1829-30, and was succeeded by Brother Shepley R. Holmes to serve for the year 1831. This Brother was an eminent Pittsburgh physician, and the father of that popular brother, Americus V. Holmes, 33ยบ, Past Master of Dallas Lodge, No. 508. Dr. Holmes belonged to Ohio Lodge, No. 113. He served as District Deputy through the year 1832 and was succeeded by Brother Char- les Shaler, who had been again prevailed upon to give his services to the Masonic cause. He relinquished the office at the end of the year 1834. The Grand Lodge records show no appointment of District Deputy for the Fifth Dis- trict through the years 1835-36 and until September, 1837. It was during these years that the antimasonic persecution was at the height of its virulence and was causing the dis- appearance of numerous lodges. But on September 7, 1837, the Grand Master announced the appointment of Brother John Birmingham as District Deputy for the Fifth District and he continued in office until the end of 1844. By this time the antimasonic fury had brought disastrous results in the Fifth district. Nearly all the lodges in the territory originally embraced in it had gone down in the storm, so that for several years prior to 1844 the Fifth district had dwindled down to only Allegheny county, and in that county there was now only one lodge, No. 45.
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.