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 22
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
235
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
That was the situation when the disturbing news reached the brethren at Pittsburgh that the R. W. Grand Master had decided not only to abolish the old Fifth Ma- sonic District, but also to attach Allegheny county to the district comprising Greene and Fayette counties, with a deputy not a resident of Allegheny county. Early in the year 1845 Brother Birmingham resigned the office of Dis- trict Deputy, and the Pittsburgh brethren, notwithstanding the threatened annihilation of their District, set about securing the appointment of another Allegheny county Mason. They proposed the name of Brother Samuel McKin- ley, later one of the first Trustees of the Masonic Fund So- ciety. He was then finishing his term as Worshipful Master of Lodge 45, and in the minutes of a meeting of that body November 26, 1845, is this entry:
A resolution was offered by Brother H. M. Smith, recommending Bro. Past Master S. Mckinley as a suitable person for D. D. G. Mas- ter in the room of Bro. John Birmingham, resigned. The W. Master appointed Bros. H. M. Smith, J. D. White and John Bigler a Com- mittee to carry into effect the foregoing resolution.
Some months prior to this endorsement of Brother Mckinley letters had been forwarded by Pittsburgh breth- ren to the R. W. Grand Master not only requesting the appointment of a District Deputy from their county to succeed Brother John Birmingham, but also respectfully remonstrating against the dismemberment of the Fifth Ma- sonic District and the incorporation of Allegheny county in- to the district made up of Fayette and Greene counties. These communications apparently caused no change in the plans of the Grand Master. Then early in the spring of 1846 a largely attended meeting of Pittsburgh Masons was held, whereat the matter was earnestly discussed and a unanimous sentiment of opposition to the change was registered. A committee of five brethren was named to draft a letter to the Grand Master, which letter, as the meager records of that transaction show, "met with the approbation of all the brethren present." This communica- tion was drafted and forwarded to the R. W. Grand Master, and he seems to have sent a reply, refusing to change his plans with reference to the Fifth District. But unfortun- ately for the precise historical connection of this narrative,
236
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
neither the communication of the Pittsburgh Masons nor the answer of the Grand Master has been found.
In the meantime, the blow fell. The Fifth District was no longer recognized. At the annual Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge the R. W. Grand Master on December 27, 1845, announced the reappointment of Brother Christian P. Gummert as District Deputy for the counties of Fayette and Greene. No deputy was named from Allegheny county, and a few days later word was received in Pittsburgh that the Fifth District had been definitely dissolved and that the great county of Allegheny and the important city of Pitts- burgh had been connected with the inland District repre- sented by Brother Gummert. There was of course no ob- jection to this brother, either as a citizen or as a member of the Craft. He had been a popular and successful deputy in his district since his first appointment, January 1, 1840, and he was Past Master of Lodge No. 60 at Brownsville.
Tremendously perturbed and troubled by the annihi- lation of their ancient Fifth District, and their relegation, as they claimed, to an unimportant position within the Pennsylvania Jurisdiction, and apprehensive that this set- back would hinder the growth of the lodges in their county, the Pittsburgh Masons determined to take the momentous step of appealing not only to the Grand Lodge itself, but also to the brethren throughout the Pennsylvania jurisdic- tion. It seems evident that on or about May 25, 1846, they held another meeting in Pittsburgh, but whether it was a Convocation as the result of a formal call is not known. At this gathering a lengthy communication was read and adopted. This document is remarkable for the dignity of its phraseology, the strength of its arguments, and the emphasis of its expression. It was signed by five well known Masons, who were evidently the brethren who had signed former communications to the Grand Lodge on this subject. These signers were Brothers George W. Layng, a charter member of St. John's Lodge, No. 219, which lodge was then just about one month old; John Bigler, of Lodge 45; Richard Cowan and Alexander Tindle, both charter members of St. John's Lodge, and William W. Wilson, also of Lodge 45. Of these brethren three were later
237
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
to be among the earliest members of the Board of Trustees of the Masonic Fund Society. These were Brothers Layng, who originally belonged to Lodge No. 61, at Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, where he had formerly resided; Brother Tindle, who was made a Mason in old Milnor Lodge, No. 165, and Brother Wilson, who had become a member of Lodge 45 in 1844, having belonged to one of the other old lodges, which had gone out of existence, but to which par- ticular one is not known. The notable and historically im- portant communication which they signed and which was received by the Grand Lodge, was in full as follows:
To the R. Worshipful the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania and Masonic Jurisdiction thereunto belonging.
Friends and Brethren,
It is no doubt known to most of you that several applications have been made by the fraternity in this district to the Right Wor- shipful the Grand Master, asking for the appointment of a deputy Grand Master for this district and that these applications have been followed by his refusal to grant us what we thought a reasonable and proper request and his annexing this district to that composed of of the counties of Fayette & Greene. It was then thought expedient to call a meeting of the brethren that such notice should be had upon the subject as might lead to a satisfactory result. That meeting was well attended, much interest in the matter submitted to it was manifested and great unanimity prevailed. After Mature deliberation a committee of five of the brethren was appointed and instructed again to address the Grand Master asking him respectfully but at the same time firmly to grant our request. The committee thus Appoint- ed drew up the letter to the Grand Master and presented it to the brethren at a meeting called for that purpose, when it met with the approbation of all the brethren present. In that letter the Com- mittee endeavored to lay before the Grand Master such reasons as in their Judgement were best calculated to convince him of the Justice and propriety of our request, and was transmitted by a brother well acquainted with our feelings and who would be able to answer any reasonable enquirey. The answer of the Grand Master called from us this address to you.
It may perhaps seem somewhat Irregular to address the Grand Lodge upon a subject that properly belongs to the Grand Master alone and is under his direction and controul, but we do so because in a conversation had with a brother of Lodge No. 45, some days since, the Grand Master said, that Altho he was of opinion that there should be no more than four Districts in the State, he would forgo his own opinion if the Grand Lodge thought otherwise, and also be- cause we knew that no one (certainly no Mason) should set up his
238
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
own judgement in opposition to that of a number of his brethren understandingly and honestly expressed.
For nearly Forty Years the County of Allegheny has had within her borders a resident D. D. G. M. The expiration of the term for which the last appointment was made having left the office vacant, this Ancient district is dismembered and without, nay, against the consent and under the remonstrance of its members is annexed to the district composed of the Counties of Fayette and Greene. That this district in which is placed the Second City in the Commonwealth with its teeming thousands, its commanding position, its influence, its con- nections with the Vallies of the Ohio and Mississippi and the Great West, should be thought too insignificant to deserve even a deputy G. M. is scarcely credible, and not that alone, it is annexed to another district, younger by many years, inferior in population and influence in the cause of Masonry. We are told by the Grand Master that he "does not consider the appointment we ask for either proper or at all necessary, every purpose in regard to such an officer being easily effected through the D. D. G. M. at Brownsville." Now, let us not be understood as entertaining any the least disrespect for that dis- trict or the brother who holds the appointment of D. D. G. M. there; any and every such feeling we utterly disclaim, but we think we would be wanting in self respect did we not under the circum- stances of the case refuse an assent to such a Measure.
For may Years this district has laboured under difficulties of various kinds; no district in the State has suffered more from anti- masonic wickedness than this, and now when it is beginning to revive, where a true Masonic Spirit is found to prevail, when we are struggilng to regain our strength and recover our lost influence, to be cast off by the very Arm on which we hoped to lean, by the very hand from which we expected encouragement and aid, causes us no little doubt and apprehension. We are told by the Grand Master that "the importance of D. D. G. M. is not apparent to him," and he thinks the appointment a matter of small moment. If it be of small moment, why not grant it? If its importance is not apparent to him, it is to us, and it is on that account we require it. Indeed we have thought that if there were to be but two D. D. G. Masters in the State, the district of which the City of Pittsburgh is the head is entitled to one of them.
The determination of the Craft here is, we believe, without ex- ception, not to recognize our annexation to any other district, but to maintain our own dignity by submitting to the inconvenience resulting from the want of a D. Grand Master, rather than accede to the terms that are offered us. Some would go much further, but the majority of us are anxious, exceedingly anxious, for such a settle- ment of this question as may restore full confidence and esteem; that from the East to the West of our beloved Country brotherly love may abound and true Masonic harmony may prevail.
.
239
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
We now ask you, friends and brethren, to interpose between us and the decision of the Grand Master, and by your kindly interference you may effect such an arrangement of this matter, as may comport with the dignity of that office, and the duty we owe ourselves. We ask for no new thing, no special advantage, nothing but what we have always had and what, in all justice, we should be permitted to retain; we think we ask for nothing of doubtful utility or that may tend in any way to the injury of Masonry; but we believe it is useful, profitable and necessary that such an officer should reside in the City of Pittsburg, and that thereby the good of Masonry will be promoted, the influence of its members increased and a general & wholesome spirit more extensively diffused.
Very respect'y, &c.
Signed.
Geo. W. Layng, John Bigler,
Rich'd Cowan,
· A. Tindle, W. W. Wilson, Committee.
May 25/46.
It may well be supposed that the Pittsburgh brethren did not forward that strong and earnest protest to the Grand Lodge and the brethren throughout the Jurisdiction without a feeling of sincere regret over the circumstances which they firmly felt justified their action.
The Grand Lodge received the communication, but with evidences of the utmost dissatisfaction. Probably had it been worded with less emphasis of protest, it might have been passed over in silence, or at least quietly discussed and laid aside. It is evident, however, that the former letters of protest sent to the R. W. Grand Master by the Pittsburgh brethren had been seriously considered by him and the Grand Lodge officers. Already, before the receipt of the communication quoted above, R. W. Grand Master Page had prepared a reply, in the form of an address, to the protests of the Masons in Allegheny county. He had intended to deliver this address in the Quarterly Communication of March 2, 1846, but had not done so. But later he made the address at the very meeting of the Grand Lodge at which the above quoted communication was considered. According to the tenor of the minutes of this communication, held June 1, 1846, whatever the Pittsburgh brethren had gained by the arguments in their letter, they certainly were not the recipients from Grand Lodge of any commendation of its language. In the mind of the R. W. Grand Master the
240
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
matter of the ending of the Fifth district and the annex- ation of Allegheny county to another district were now things quite settled. This is apparent by the declarations in his address, which will be referred to later on. Doubtless in the former letters from the Pittsburgh Masons much the same line of argument had been followed as in the com- munication signed by the five brethren, with Brother Layng at their head. It was then not so much the substance as the phraseology of this last document of May 25 that brought about condemnatory action by the Grand Lodge at the Grand Communication of June 1, 1846. The following from the minutes of that session furnish this interesting information :
On motion of Bro. Jos. S. Riley the Communication from Pitts- burg in relation to the Appointment of D. D. G. M. was called up for consideration, when Bro. Jos. S. Riley offered the following Reso- lution, viz:
"Resolved, That the Communication from Pittsburg be referred to the Grand Officers with power to act."
Bro. Richard Vaux moved an amendment, but withdrew it when the following amendment was made by Bro. George Griscom and adopted, viz:
"Resolved, That this Grand Lodge entirely approve of the course of the Grand Master in his action in regard to the Communication from our brethren of Pittsburg.
"Resolved, That this Grand Lodge feel profound regret at the disrespectful, uncourteous and unmasonic language of Said Com- munication, and that therefore it be laid on the Table.
"Resolved, That the Grand Secretary be instructed to transmit to our brethren of Lodge 45 copies of these Resolutions."
On motion of Bro. Jos. S. Riley the further consideration of the subject was postponed until our next Quarterly Communication.
In that Quarterly Communication, held September 7, 1846,Brother Richard Vaux, already prominent as a citizen of Philadelphia, and later to become a great and beloved exemplar of Masonry, put the finishing touches to the ex- pressions of disapprobation with which the Grand Lodge had received the Pittsburgh document. Even then, and more so in after years, Brother Vaux, to whom the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry were as eternally invulnerable as are the gray old cliffs of the ocean, found it impossible to regard with indifference any act or declaration on the part of Masons which in his belief was not in strict accord
241
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
with the fundamental principles and practices of the Craft. So, in his large interpretation of the power and dignity of the Grand Lodge, the Pittsburgh letter, as it was worded, was little less than sacrilege, a veritable profanation of sacred things. He therefore led the discussion over the letter, and when he had finished the business, the Pitts- burgh brethren had been told that their communication was "calculated to pervert some of the fundamental principles of the Masonic Order." The story of the final disposition of this disturbing document is told in these minutes of the Grand Lodge proceedings of September 7:
The resolutions which were offered in relation to the Communica- tion from the brethren at Pittsburg by Bro. Griscom at last quarterly communication were called up & on motion, duly made and seconded, the second & third resolutions were withdrawn.
Bro. Richard Vaux offered the following Substitute for Bro. Griscom's first resolution, viz: "Resolved, That the Grand Lodge view with Surprise and deep regret the language of the Brethren of Pittsburg used in their communication to this Grand Lodge May 25th, 1848, as calculated to pervert some of the fundamental prin- ciples of the Masonic Order."
Bro. J. A. Phillips moved to amend the above resolution by sub- stituting Bro. Griscom's original resolution, which amendment was lost. When on motion duly made and seconded, Bro. Vaux's Resolu- tion was adopted.
Grand Lodge closed in peace at 20 Minutes past Ten o'clock, P. M.
And so with the original condemnation of the Grand Lodge boiled down to Brother Vaux's stern criticism and with the ancient formula, "closed in peace," the protesting document of the Pittsburg brethren was forever laid aside.
But the real big question remained unsettled. True, for the time-being, it had been settled by R. W. Grand Master Page, and he gave his reasons for so doing in the address which he delivered in the Grand Lodge session, September 7, the same meeting at which the Pittsburgh letter was considered and condemned. Following are por- tions of the address which have reference to the question of D. D. Grand Masters and their appointment:
The utility of so many districts is to me extremely doubtful. Practically no good has resulted to the Order or the Grand Lodge from their existence. According to my view of the subject, our Juris- diction should not, at most, have more than four districts, with a
242
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
deputy located centrally as to each. It might be prudent to assume, as a rule, that a district should never be composed of a less number of Lodges than is required for the opening of the Grand Lodge.
I had, shortly after the commencement of the Masonic year, ap- plications from various counties for these appointments. Washington and Allegheny applied separately, and an appointment was asked for Adams, Cumberland, Franklin and Bedford counties as a District, and Lycoming and Clinton; but for the reason assigned, I declined making them, attaching the Lodges in these counties to existing districts. This course seems not to be acceptable to the brethren in Pittsburg, and they applied to me in language not of the most courteous or Ma- sonic kind, to rescind what I had done, and give them a deputy for that county alone. After a careful review of my decision, and satis- fied that the precedent they asked for would lead to innovations of a pernicious tendency, I positively but respectfully declined to do so.
To concede this point to one county, is to concede it as to the whole. In the absence of all evidence of the good which is to spring from this multiplication of officers, merely nominal, I am not dis- posed to encounter the evil which is likely to spring from the example.
In Pittsburgh, (until very recently) but a single lodge has existed for years past; within the last few months a second lodge has been established. If a District Deputy Grand Master is necessary there, then as Washington county has a lodge, such an appointment being asked for, must be made as to it. Instead, therefore, of making two new deputies I attached these counties to the district composed of Fayette and Greene, under the care of Bro. Gummert, in each of which counties there is a lodge, and the residence of Bro. Gummert is nearly central as to the district.
Right Worshipful Grand Master James Page seems to have been, as far as the records show, the only head of the Grand Lodge in the Pennsylvania Jurisdiction who has not attached great importance to the office of D. D. Grand Master. However, although he stood so rigidly against the request of the Masons at Pittsburgh and so persistently minimized the value of the plan for districts and deputies, he went no further in his opposition to them than to insist that the number of districts should be decreased. Then, as he continued his address, he pointed out that up to his time, there had been no settled rule as to the appointment of D. D. Grand Masters, and declared that "this is certainly a state of things it is most desirable to correct," and he added that he had "taken the first steps to that end." The great ques- tion in his mind was the number of lodges necessary to
243
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
form a district, and he argued that when once that point is settled, "there can be no further difficulty." And this, he said, "should be done by resolution of the Grand Lodge." This suggestion was at once accepted by the Grand Lodge at that same session, by the unanimous adoption of the following important resolution :
"Resolved, That the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania recognize the propriety and establish as a principle, for her future government, the necessity of having at least Five Subordinate Lodges to constitute a District and be entitled to the privilege of a Deputy Grand Master.
This fundamental principle having been so established by the supreme power in the Jurisdiction, it had to be ad- hered to, and in consequence at the Communication held the 28th of the following December, 1846, the reappoint- ment of D. D. Grand Master Gummert was announced, for the counties of Fayette, Greene, Allegheny and Washington. They no longer had a deputy from Pittsburgh and the ancient Fifth District was abolished.
But as all things are said to come to those who wait, and especially when they get into effective action, within a year triumph came to the brethren in Pittsburgh. They had started to organize new lodges and they kept on organizing them. St. John's Lodge, No. 219, came into existence April 8, 1846. Franklin Lodge, No. 221, was constituted September 7, 1846, and Allegheny Lodge, No. 223, chose as its birthday May 13, 1847, while on May 13, 1847, a dispensation was granted by the General Grand Encampment, as it was then designated, to form Pittsburgh Commandery, No. 1, follow- ed by a charter, September 16, 1847. Also an application was put in for the Warrant for another Lodge, Solomon Lodge, No. 231, which was organized March 6, 1848. So by the end of the year 1847 four lodges were actually in existence in Pittsburgh and another was soon to be formed. That was sufficient, and as a result we read in the proceed- ings of the Grand Communication held December 27, 1847, this brief announcement, under the head of "District Dep- uty Grand Masters:"
Bro. Samuel Mckinley, of Pittsburgh, for Allegheny, Beaver & Westmoreland.
Thus the old Fifth district was revived and Pittsburgh had its D. D. Grand Master. The work of Brothers Layng,
244
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
Tindle and Wilson, later Masonic Fund Society Trustees, and the other brethren had brought about most important and lasting results. Their work evolved a precedent that be- came a conclusion and a conclusion that became a Masonic principle. The contest, emphatic as it was, left no scars and created no antagonisms. The gain was large and per- manent. Henceforth there were guiding lines, almost as firmly established as land-marks, for the creation of Ma- sonic Districts, the appointment of deputies and the duties pertaining to the office. This precedent was emphatically recognized ten years later by R. W. Grand Master John K. Mitchell, when he said in his address before the Grand Body, December 28, 1857:
As the District Deputy Grand Masters are to be sought for among the brethren who live beyond the limits to which the Grand Master has ready access, great difficulty is felt in making a judicious selection of such dignitaries. * * By a decision of the Grand Lodge in June, 1846, it was decreed that not less than five lodges shall constitute a district, and by the Ahiman Rezon it is ordained, that from time to time the Masonic Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge shall be divided into districts.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF DECEASED MEMBERS OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY FOR THE COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY
247
HISTORY OF THE MASONIC FUND SOCIETY
JAMES W. HAILMAN, 32°
In the resolutions adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Masonic Fund Society at a meeting held August 7, 1860, expressive of sorrow over the death of Brother James W. Hailman are these words: "To him we are greatly indebted for the noble edifice in which we have this night assembled." Brother Hailman was raised to the sublime degree of a Master Mason in Lodge 45 on January 9, 1846. On Decem- ber 25, 1847, he was one of the original committee of seven (afterwards made Trustees) appointed at the convocation of Pittsburgh Masons convened to consider "the propriety of purchasing a lot of ground and the erection of a Masonic Hall." With him on that committee were Brothers Samuel Mckinley, Alexander McCammon, George W. Layng, Wil- liam W. Wilson, James S. Hoon and John Sargent. This progressive step of the brethren of those days was an under- taking that suited Brother Hailman. Not only was it in accord with the profound admiration which he entertained for the Order, but also the practical proposition of purchas- ing land in Pittsburgh and the erection thereon of a Masonic building was in full accord with the bent of his enterprising mind. Hence it was that his business and financial ex- perience naturally placed him at the head of the Board of Trustees and made him so conspicuously effective in realiz- ing the plan to build a Hall for the Craft. He knew how to push affairs to successsful termination, and in after years this became recognized as one of his great characteristics. The Pittsburgh "Gazette," in its announcement of his de- mise on July 3, 1860, 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.