The Builder Magazine 

October 1925 - Volume XI - Number 10 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Idealism of Masonry - By BRO. H.C. DE LAFONTAINE, P.G.D., England 

Paul Jones, Scottish Mason, American Patriot - By. BRO. WILLIAM M. STUART 

WHAT WAS FREEMASONRY DESIGNED TO BE? - By BRO. SILAS H. 
SHEPHERD, Wisconsin 

What Masonry Is Not - BY BRO. GEORGE H. DERN, Governor of Utah, P.G.M. 

Links Between Lodge and Chapter - By BRO. N.W.J. HAYDON, Toronto 

The Story of Freemasonry in Colorado - By BRO. GEORGE B. CLARK, Colorado 
PART II (Concluded) 

THE ATTACKS ON FREEMASONRY IN AUSTRIA BY BRO. THEODOR HILM, 
AUSTRIA 

EDITORIAL. 

WHY? 

WHAT DOES IT STAND FOR? 

LEADERS OF THE BLIND 
ALANSON B. SKINNER 


What Is Symbolism? - By BRO. R. J. MEEKREN 



THE LIBRARY 


THE KEYS OF FREEMASONRY 

THE STORY OF SAMSON AND ITS PLACE IN THE RELIGIOUS 
DEVELOPMENT OF MANKIND 

THE QUESTION BOX and CORRESPONDENCE 

REGULATING THE INTERVAL BETWEEN DEGREES 

THE EVOLUTION OF THE LODGE 

GENERAL GRAND LODGE 

THOMAS R. MARSHALL 

ORIGIN OF THE EASTERN STAR 

PRESIDENT HAYES A BAPTIST? 

WHO SHOULD GIVE INSTRUCTION? 

ANOTHER PATRIARCH 

YE EDITOR'S CORNER 


— o — 


Idealism of Masonry 


By BRO. H.C. DE LAFONTAINE, P.G.D., England 



THE main purpose of this article is sufficiently indicated by the title, and the author 
has set forth what in his opinion Masonry should be and what it might be. But there is 
an additional interest to American readers, in that it will help them in forming a 
picture of some of the many differences in usage and custom between Masonry as it 
has developed on the two sides of the Atlantic, though, as the article demonstrates, 
the spirit is the same. 


DR. JOSEPH FORT NEWTON, in his admirable and much-to-be-recommended 
book entitled The Builders, when discoursing on the subject, "What Is Masonry?" 
says: "Masonry is the activity of closely united men who, employing symbolical 
forms borrowed principally from the masons' trade and from architecture, work for 
the welfare of mankind, striving morally to ennoble themselves and others, and 
thereby to bring about a universal league of mankind, which they aspire to exhibit 
even now on a small scale." This is a quotation from a German Handbuch on 
Masonry, and you might say with some reason that these noble sentiments come from 
a tainted source; but, as a Mason, I cannot render myself so bigoted a person as to 
refuse to employ a definition which so aptly expresses the high aims and intentions of 
our system. Had our own Masonic intellectuality evolved a similarly expressive 
statement, I should not need to have borrowed from a foreign source. 


There has been much talk about the League of Nations; indeed, there already seems to 
be a Wilsonian directness about the phrase. We, as non-political brethren, cannot deal 
with the question. We can only make large eyes and meditate on the disingenuous 
method of securing in the future universal and permanent peace by constituting a vast 
continent to be the arbiter of world decisions. A League of Nations is an idealism that 
is beyond the bound of possibility or probability; but, on the other hand, a League of 
Mankind, though again an idealism, is something that can be brought down to earth, 
that, indeed, is actually here, though men know it not and go on inventing impossible 
schemes, when they have already to hand in the inner teaching and the foremost 
principles of Masonry the greatest panacea for the softening and obliterating of this 
world's troubles that people have ever known. 



"Amidst bitterness and strife Masonry brings men of every rank and walk of life 
together as men, and nothing else, at an altar where they can talk and not fight, 
discuss and not dispute, and each may learn the point of view of his fellow." 


One sometimes hears the sentiment voiced, "Masonry is my religion," and one can 
sympathize entirely with such an expression of opinion. For Masonry in its highest 
essence "is Religion, a worship in which all good men may unite, that each may share 
the faith of all." "No part of the ministry of Masonry is more beautiful and wise than 
its appeal, not for tolerance, but for fraternity; not for uniformity, but for unity of 
spirit amidst varieties of outlook and opinion." 


Masonry imposes no dogma, invents no shibboleth, imprints no creed. In its vast 
idealism, it embraces all peoples, tolerates all world-wide religions and narrow sects, 
holds out its hand to all who are groping in darkness for a way to light, and says 
benignly ill words, not strange to our ears, "Come, I will show you a more excellent 
way." I quite believe that many Masons do find in the higher teachings of Masonic 
science that which more nearly satisfies their spiritual yearnings than any carefully 
elaborated system of religious thought which, encrusted into rigidity by tradition, has 
come to be known as all that is necessary to the soul's health. One of the great powers 
of Masonry, and one of the chief factors in its stability is that it "seeks to free men 
from a limiting conception of religion, and thus to remove one of the chief causes of 
sectarianism." 


I cannot, in leaving this ideal aspect of the Craft, forbear quoting a few sentences 
from The Builders, and if you know them already, I must apologize, but for myself I 
think we can never hear them too often. They come upon us like a rush of sweet, 
clean, invigorating air, fresh from the Atlantic, permeating all the recesses of our 
somewhat effete civilization. 


"When is a man a Mason ? When he knows that deep down in his heart every man is 
noble, as vile, as divine, as diabolic, and as lonely as himself. When he knows how to 
sympathize with men in their sorrows, yea even in their sins. When he has learned 
how to make friends and to keep them, and above all how to keep friends with 



himself. When he can be happy and high-minded amid the meaner drudgeries of life. 
When no voice of distress reaches his ears in vain, and no hand seeks his aid without 
response. When he finds good in every faith that helps any man to lay hold of divine 
things, and sees majestic meanings in life, whatever the name of that faith may be. 
When he has kept faith with himself, with his fellow man, with his God; in his hand a 
sword for evil, in his heart a bit of a song, glad to live, but not afraid to die." 


"If Masons often fall far below their high ideal, it is because they share in their degree 
the infirmity of mankind. He is a poor craftsman who glibly recites the teachings of 
the Order and quickly forgets the lessons they convey; who wears the honourable 
dress to conceal a self-seeking spirit; or to whom its great and simple symbols bring 
only an outward thrill, and no inward urge toward the highest of all good. Apart from 
what they symbolize, all symbols are empty; they speak only to such as have ears to 
hear." 


THERE IS A CHASM BETWEEN PRACTICE AND PRECEPT 


It cannot be denied by anyone who has any power of observation that there is a wide 
divergence between practice and profession in Masonry. But this is common to every 
human institution, and must always be so, according to the nature of things. And 
nowhere is this more vividly illustrated than in the history of religion. The teaching is 
sublime, but the disciple, overburdened by human weaknesses, drags it down and 
endeavors to fit it to his own earthly ends. It is prone to all of us to make the most 
solemn professions with our lips, and to go away and belie the spirit of what we have 
said. And then men blame the teaching, and not the feeble human instrument. 
Masonry is founded on those two principles which go to make up the whole of 
religion, independent of any accretions which may have hidden them from immediate 
view or endeavored to strangle them out of existence, and these principles are, as you 
well know, love of God, and love of man, both reacting and interacting on each other. 
One is the complement of the other; you cannot separate them; they stand or fall 
together. We all respectably declare ourselves God-lovers, though in some instances, 
if the love that we show to a fellow man exemplifies our love to the Divine Being, the 
Divine Being must be a very neglected and solitary person. 



The selfishness of humanity is the great hindrance to the realization of the inner 
strength of Masonry. Remember the five points of fellowship! They bind together 
brother Masons in the strongest bond of charity that can be imagined. You greet your 
fellow man as a brother, and in doing so you become his ally for life; your further 
actions touch every point in his life, domestic, civil, and religious. And yet who has 
not known many who have faller from grace, who have endeavored to interpret their 
vows and obligations in the manner in which people interpret the Bible, squaring 
precepts and texts to their own advantage, sheltering themselves under the much 
abused maxim "Autre temps, autres moeurs!" But these reflections need not make us 
despondent or reduce us to a condition of hopelessness— the lesson for us is to show a 
bright example, to make others see by our own lives and conduct that Masonry is not 
a simple medium for convivial entertainment, that it is not a benefit society, and that 
it is not an association for the enticement and beguilement of hoary headed veterans 
and down-cheeked youngsters from homestead or from amorous dalliance, but that it 
affords to all, if properly understood and consistently practiced, the right means for 
living an upright life, a life which may be said to be passed in the shadow of God's 
smile. 


Having directed your thoughts to the ideals of Masonry, I now turn to mundane 
considerations, and proceed to note some details in the working and practice of 
Masonry. As to the forms in which our present Masonry is enshrined, opinion has 
varied from time to time as to the expediency of uniformity. From a general survey of 
the question I think anyone must see that any endeavor in this direction would be 
rather like an attempt to revise the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of 
England. And the result would be the same— many historical landmarks would be lost 
for all time, and a somewhat emasculated version of our ceremonies would have to 
pass muster. At a Quarterly Communication of the Grand Lodge of England, you may 
remember that a brother once brought forward a resolution advocating uniformity 
ritual. It met with no approval, and no one could be found to act as seconder. You 
cannot deduce from this too much, as possibly the same resolution at some other 
meeting of Grand Lodge, attended by another contingent of Masons, might have met 
with some support. Yet I do not hesitate to say that 1 believe that the majority of 
really working Masons are opposed to any attempt to reduce our ritual to one 
monotonous level of sameness. 


I would suggest, however, to all private lodges such a measure of uniformity as 
enables the officers to work in harmony conjointly with the Master. To take only one 



instance to illustrate what I mean— a candidate, if he is paying due attention to the 
ceremony, must be somewhat mystified to be told by the Master that it was in this 
position that Moses prayed fervently, etc., and then to be told, when conducted to the 
Senior Warden's pedestal, that it was really Joshua who so prayed, and not Moses at 
all. It would be well that a Master should state the working he intends to adopt, and 
should suggest to his officers the practice of uniformity in working. But in the case of 
long standing oral traditions, the Past Masters of a lodge have much to say as to the 
regulation of the ritual so that the poor Master's constitutional authority vanishes into 
thin air. However, if Masters will be so weak as to come in danger of being snuffed 
out, they must blame their own supineness. 


ANACHRONISMS ARE NOTED 


Every candidate who takes a lively interest in Masonry will notice in the Craft 
degrees many anachronisms, many redundancies of speech, many misquotations, and 
not a few grammatical errors, and will he correspondingly shocked or astonished; but 
the way can be made smooth in this respect, and we cannot argue from this that a 
brand new ritual should be evolved which should endeavor to satisfy all parties. There 
is no doubt that Emulation (1) working has made great and astonishing strides, and is 
much in favor. Personally, I have always considered that, whatever the ritual, the 
question of paramount importance is to interest, to teach, to instruct the candidate. 
Avoid all parrot-like utterances, and do not say things like a machine, even if you do 
lose a match-box. Be natural, be easy, have your ritual at your fingers' ends, be able to 
play with it as you like, pause for effect at the proper moments, and never let the 
candidate see that you are at a loss for a word, quickly substitute another, if it is in a 
nonessential part of the ceremony. The candidate, the candidate, that is all you have 
to think of; not yourself; you must throw away every shred of selfconsciousness when 
you begin your work. Then you may succeed in doing justice to yourself, but not 
otherwise. A most unfortunate effect is sometimes produced by a Master suddenly 
stopping and again repeating what he has previously said, under the impression that 
he has not used the actual words. This breaks the continuity of the ceremony, jars on 
the candidate, and produces a feeling of nervous insecurity in the lodge. The 
intonations and inflections of the voice also have much to do with the effective 
rendering of the ritual. A persistence in one hard, dry, rasping note not only fatigues 
the listeners, but is wearisome to the speaker. But it is so easy to give advice. I think I 
might now fitly say, as was said to one of old, "Physician, heal thyself." 



I have been speaking about the candidate, and this leads me to the consideration of a 
point on which I have always felt very strongly, and which I think deserves serious 
thought, and that is the training of young Masons. If I may speak from my own 
experience, my initiation meant nothing to me. The ceremony was shuffled over in a 
very perfunctory sort of way, with the result that I went away thoroughly unedified. 
You will, therefore, not be surprised to hear that it was two years before I presented 
myself for my Master Mason's Degree. It was then indelibly imprinted on my mind 
how different my entrance into Masonry might have been under other circumstances. 
According to the present method, it seems to me that you hatch your chickens, you 
then hide away the mother-hen, and the only nutriment you provide for the callow 
brood is a few scattered grains pressed down into the cracks of the earth by the greedy 
struggles of the fully fledged birds. The retort may be made that there are lodges of 
instruction for all Masons both young and old, (2) and I would not for one moment 
gainsay the usefulness of these organizations, nor decry the valuable work that they 
have done. Here the newly-made Mason may begin to take part in the purely ritual 
part of Masonry; his mind may also be further trained and enlightened by hearing the 
working of the various sections of the lectures. But, when all is said and done, this is 
only the fringe of the great enveloping vestment; the threshold, as it were, of that 
mighty temple not made with hands; the tiny candle which attempts to hold a light to 
the sun. Dr. Newton, in the preface to his book, has these words: 


"Fourteen years ago the writer of this volume entered the temple of Freemasonry, and 
that date stands out in memory as one of the most significant days in his life. There 
was a little spread on the night of his raising, and, as is the custom, the candidate was 
asked to give his impressions of the Order. Among other things, he made the request 
to know if there was any little book which would tell a young man the things he 
would most like to know about Masonry. What it was, whence it came, what it 
teaches, and what it is trying to do in the world. No one knew of such a book at the 
time, nor has any been found to meet a need which many must have felt before and 
since. By an odd coincidence, it has fallen to the lot of the author to write the little 
book for which he made request fourteen years ago." 


You will now see an additional reason for my having recommended this work to your 
notice at the beginning of my remarks. But even this book, admirable as it is in itself, 
does not altogether satisfy me. It seems to want directness, and it lacks practicality, a 



point I always judge to be of supreme importance. It has also the characteristic of 
being what I should call "high falutin". I say this not unkindly, but only as a 
concession to the beginner in Masonry. I therefore am still waiting for the manual 
which will be an adequate vade mecum to the neophyte in Masonry. 


I ought here, however, to mention that a little work, excellent in its way, has during 
the past two years been published and put in circulation. What Is Freemasonry? is the 
title of this brochure, and the well known name attached to it, that of Bro. Crowe, 
vouches for its correctness and usefulness. I have many times given it to Entered 
Apprentices, and I hope they have profited by the information it contains. Lord 
Ampthill, in the preface that he wrote for the book, says: 


"I seize this opportunity of repeating a suggestion which I have often made, namely, 
that there should be some brief discourse on Masonic history, Masonic principles, or 
on the administration and activity of the Craft at every lodge meeting. Let the Past 
Masters take it in turn to speak for five minutes and tell the junior members of the 
lodge something about these matters, or advise them what to read. Let the younger 
brethren be examined in their knowledge of these subjects after they have had a 
chance of reading." Also, "The precepts which have been handed down to us from the 
days when everything depended upon oral tradition, repeatedly emphasize the duty of 
imparting instruction over and above that contained in the fixed ceremonies." 


This manual is really a step in the right direction; I cannot say it is all sufficing, but a 
notable point in its favor is that it contains a copy of a letter which is sent to every 
candidate for initiation in the old lodge. "Union des Coeurs," at Geneva. I have never 
read anything more suitable in tone and more felicitously expressed, and as Bro. 
Crowe points out, "it is suited both to candidates and newly-made brethren of every 
country." Lord Ampthill thinks that our own lodges should send out a similar letter. 


I nevertheless abide by my previous statement— that I am still waiting for an adequate 
Masonic vade mecum; the book I have mentioned goes part of the way; Dr. Joseph 
Fort Newton's book goes a long part of the way; but there is still a longer journey. 



MASONIC EDUCATION DESIDERATED 


I have for some time thought that, besides lodges of instruction, there ought to be 
classes for those Masons who are disposed to take an interest in the science. And here 
we enter on the educational side of Masonry. These classes should be held weekly, or 
fortnightly, if possible, and should be presided over by experienced Masons. 
Occasionally an examination might be held to test the growth of knowledge on the 
part of the students. Some well-known Masonic textbook, if such a thing exists, might 
be made the basis of instruction, and a catechism might even be devised as a useful 
adjunct. You will be thinking that I am now plunging into a sea of utopian 
impossibilities, and that I am addressing Masons who have no business avocations to 
engage the most part of their time and attention. It is truly said, however, that the 
busiest people can always make time for further labors, and I honestly believe that 
such a course as I am suggesting would come as a positive refreshment to the 
continued poring over the hard arid facts of life, and would serve to recreate and 
enliven a sometimes jaded mind and body. At all events, let trial be made before the 
notion is swept into the dust-heap of wild-cat schemes. 


As a proof of Masonry being an educational science, I may once more revert to words 
from Dr. Newton's book, which, I perceive, is fast obsessing my mind as being a 
useful foundation on which to build. He is quoting from Albert Pike's MS. Lessons in 
Masonry and the subject is the inner meaning of the three grips which occur in the 
ritual of Craft Masonry. The first the Entered Apprentice's grip, may be likened to the 
power and function of science. "Science, so far from proving the immortality of the 
soul, lays aside its instruments, unable to prove that there is a soul. Not by that grip 
can man be raised from a dead level to a living perpendicular. Logic," as personified 
by the Fellow Craft's grip, "then tries to demonstrate that the soul in its nature, is 
indivisible, indestructible so immortal." But not even "by that grip can man be raised 
to walk in newness of life. There remains," in the Master Mason's grip, "the strong 
grip of Faith"; "once we know that the soul is akin to God .... we have a reach and 
grasp and power of faith whereby we are lifted out of shadow into the light." 


GRAND OFFICERS SHOULD NOT OVER MEDDLE 



As to the conduct of private lodges, one must speak with a becoming discretion, as I 
have no eyes of admiration for the newly-appointed Grand Officer who thinks he has 
a mandate from the Grand Master to oversee and correct what he judges to be 
irregularities and departures from the usual ritual. He blusters with a newly-acquired 
importance, and often through his own imperfect knowledge makes confusion worse 
confounded. At the same time I have always declared that Grand Lodge does not 
make a sufficient use of those whom it appoints to office. They might, those of them 
who have leisure for the same, be sent to visit Provinces and to collect information as 
to the work and progress of lodges, which, when tabulated, might be of great 
assistance to those working in the office at Freemasons' Hall. This is only one 
direction in which work might be done. Naturally, such visitation must be in no sense 
inquisitorial; that would be fatal; it must be in the nature of kindly friendship, 
sympathetic guidance, and counsel. Therein, I suppose, is the danger, that if such a 
system were instituted, square pegs might not fit into round holes. 


There is one practice which even in the mildness of my nature I cannot avoid 
condemning, and that is the practice, seen in so many lodges, of saluting every officer 
after his investiture by the Master. I can find no authority for this, and I see no 
meaning in it. And strange to say, it is only too often a Grand Officer, who as 
Director of Ceremonies, shouts, "To older, brethren." Such a practice seems to me to 
harmonize but ill with the dignity of the ritual, and Grand Officers ought to know 
better than to give it countenance. 


DIVISION OF LABOUR RECOMMENDED 


I think a Master, if he presides over an actively working lodge, should endeavor to 
distribute the as widely as possible, and not to keep the lion's share for himself. He 
may be the best of Masters, but he imposes on himself a needless strain when in one 
evening he makes himself responsible for the three degrees, and he is not giving the 
Past Masters that opportunity of pleasant reminiscence which they sometimes so 
ardently desire. 



After the lodge, in most instances, follows the meal, the pleasant symposium, where 
all can meet on a thorough basis of equality as at a common table, and exchange 
confidences, and make acquaintances which strengthen the Masonic bond. A pleasant 
and useful function, but by no means to be looked on as an integral factor in Masonry. 
To talk of it as the Fourth Degree is to lower oneself into an abyss of Masonic 
ignorance, appalling in its height, depth, and breadth ! To hurry over work in lodge, 
in order to get to the dinner table, is to prove that for some Masonry means little else 
than a private feeding club! But, now as to the Fourth Degree ! How can one discover 
a Fourth Degree, when, as Royal Arch Masons will know, and as others will come to 
know, we are expressly told that there is no Fourth Degree in Craft Masonry, but only 
a ceremony which is a completion of the Third, or Master Mason's Degree ? I venture 
therefore to plead that this utter misnomer be once and for all abolished from periods 
of refreshment in any lodge. If, during its working, any lodge is called off, the 
brethren are called "from labor to refreshment", not "to attend to the work of the 
Fourth Degree". 


I find in an old Masonic work, published in 1769, the following suggested by-law for 
lodges, and I quote it as containing a perhaps useful admonition for all, though the 
convivial side of Masonry is not now the mad carouse which in some instances it 
used to be. It runs: 


"As nothing has a greater tendency to bring the Craft into disrepute than keeping late 
hours on lodge nights; the Master shall be acquainted by the S.W. when it is Nth 
o'clock, and shall immediately proceed to close the lodge; either of them failing 
herein shall forfeit the sum of . . . and any member who is in the lodge (and not being 
a traveller or lodger in the house) remaining in the same house after Nth o'clock, shall 
also forfeit the sum of ... It is hoped and expected that no member will offend 
against this law, calculated to secure the honor and harmony of the lodge, to prevent 
uneasiness to our relatives at home, and to preserve the economy of our families." 


GOOD MUSIC IS NEEDED IN LODGES 



And lastly, as to music in lodges. I note that in Anderson's Constitutions there is, at 
the end of the book, an appendix, containing "Some of the Usual Freemason Songs." 
Amongst these may be found the Master's Song and the Warden's Song, both by Bro. 
Armstrong, as also the Fellowcraffs Song, by Bro. Charles de la Fay, and the Entered 
'Prentice's Song, by Bro. Matthew Birkhead. Above the song is written "to be sung 
after grave Business is over." Then follows a collection of songs under this heading: 
"The following songs are not in the first book, but being usually sung, they are now 
printed." These comprise the Deputy Grand Master's Song; the Grand Warden's Song, 
by Bro. Oates; the Treasurer's Song; the Secretary's Song, and the Swordbearer's 
Song. It may be interesting to note, under this heading, that Mozart owed many of his 
impulses as a composer to his connection with Freemasonry. Indeed a short Masonic 
cantata, which was composed on Nov. 15, 1791, and performed a few days afterwards 
at the consecration of a new Masonic temple, is the last work which Mozart 
completed. I suppose it is not generally known that in the overture to Mozart's famous 
opera, "The Magic Flute," there occur three chords, three times repeated, with pauses 
between, given out by the wind instruments alone, and the rhythm of these chords is a 
musical expression of the knocks in the Third Degree. They occur again in the opera 
in the scene of the Temple assembly as a sign that Tamino, the hero, is accepted and 
appointed to undergo the tests. But this by the way of parenthesis. 


All that I have spoken about, you will see, goes to prove, except in one or two 
instances, that music has been more especially prominent in connection with the 
convivial side of Masonry than with actual ceremonies in the lodge itself. I dare say I 
am somewhat hypercritical as to music, but I do say unhesitatingly that rather no 
music at all than music inefficiently performed. There is but little scope for music in 
the Three Degrees of our Craft ritual, though a skillful organist can by a well chosen 
and well modulated accompaniment considerably enhance the beauty of the Master 
Mason ceremony. The greatest scope for music is afforded by the consecration of a 
lodge. I have attended numberless consecrations, and I can only say that I have 
thought both the music then given and its general rendering pitiful and beneath 
contempt. I am afraid music is taken but little notice of by the ruling authorities in the 
Craft. It is curious to me that no Grand Organist has compiled or collected a selection 
of music worthy of the dignity of our Order. The only music I ever remember hearing 
in connection with Masonry which at all impressed me was at a rehearsal of the 
consecration ceremony by a London Lodge of Instruction. It was made a special 
feature of the occasion, and great pains had been taken to secure adequate talent. The 
result was most harmonious, which will not be so if I drag out to further length these 
reflections. I have endeavored to give them a certain degree of practicality, and I hope 



that which I have written may bear a little fruit in a greater devotion to our Order, and 
a fuller acquaintance with its sublime principles. 


It may be thought that in the latter part of my remarks I have wandered altogether 
from my subject, but I would rather contend that the several points I have noted, if 
looked at and considered in the right spirit, do tend to the elevation and the proper 
presentment of the high ideals on which the Order is founded. I must confess that the 
recent great world struggle rather struck Masonry at its base, and caused one to have 
grave doubts and apprehensions as to its future. But through the providence of the 
Great Architect of the Universe, it has recovered its equilibrium, and now stands in a 
position of greater strength than possibly it has had at any period of its present form 
of existence. I feel that this very strength is a clarion call to consolidate our efforts in 
promoting peace and harmony and earnest good will amongst ourselves and the 
peoples of the earth. I think it is a wise decree that prohibits us from employing 
Masonry politically. If anyone has studied the history of Masonry in other countries, 
particularly in those where the Latin races abound, he will see that our Order has been 
made a screen to mask the most daring and appalling crimes. And yet, in view of this, 
I do venture to say that we do not actually live up to the high standard of our Masonic 
calling. Of course it will be understood that I am speaking of Masons in the 
aggregate, and not of individual and honorable exceptions. If I should seem severe or 
captious, I can only say that Masonic zeal perhaps tempts me to make over-heated 
statements, but as to their veracity I feel certain. Masonry if properly apprehended, 
opens the door to a new world -we pass from darkness to light— see to it that that 
light irradiates in an ever widening center, so that you may communicate wisdom and 
knowledge during your path through life! 


NOTES (by the Editor) 


1 . There are several forms of ritual followed in England among which those taught by 
the "Emulation" and "Stability" Lodges of Instruction are perhaps the best known. 
Those who would like more light on this subject would do well to consult Sadler's 
history of the former (if they can get hold of it) and Golby's "Century of Stability." 
The "Masonic Ritual Described Compared and Explained" by J. W. Hobbs would be 
very useful in this connection. 2. This of course refers to England where lodges of 



instruction are common. They are regularly organized and are open to all Master 
Masons. 


— o — 


Paul Jones, Scottish Mason, American Patriot 


By. BRO. WILLIAM M. STUART 


The author of this vivid historical story of Revolutionary days is becoming widely 
and deservedly known as a writer of American fiction, and we are glad to be able to 
introduce him to our readers, and to be able to promise them further productions of 
his pen. 


Like the tale of a mythical god of old Athens reads the record of that courageous 
gentleman of the long ago, who though born in one of the lower stratas of Scotch 
society, attained riches, titles and honor; who came to walk with kings, but whose 
proudest boast ever remained that he was an American citizen. 


Paul Jones, the son of a poor Scotch gardener, was born July 6, 1747, in Arbigland, 
parish of Kirkbean, stewartry of Kirkcudbright. It was on the estate of Lord Selkirk, 
nobleman of distinction, whose castle was on St. Mary's Isle, that Paul first saw the 
light of day. Years after the future commodore of the American navy was to do the 
employer of his father an injury and then make ample reparation. 


The youth of Paul Jones was spent on the shores of the Solway Frith across the 
channel from Whitehaven, which also he was to bring into the limelight of history. 



Although the name has now become so familiar that it is difficult to think of him in 
other terms, it must not be forgotten that the famous sailor's birth name was not Paul 
Jones, but John Paul. Under that name he was at the age of twelve apprenticed to a 
Mr. Younger of Whitehaven, a merchant engaged in trading with America. Before he 
was thirteen John Paul sailed for Rappahannock, Virginia, in the ship Friendship. 
From the first he liked America. His elder brother, William Paul, had already settled 
in Virginia, and it was in his home that John stayed while on this first voyage to 
America. 


A business failure on the part of Mr. Younger now induced that gentleman to release 
John from his apprenticeship, and the boy was therefore thrown upon his own 
resources. He, however, improved to the full such limited opportunities as he had. 
Filled to the brim with the thirst for learning, he studied late at night, not only 
navigation and kindred subjects, but French as well. In time he became a very good 
French student, and his scholarship in other lines was such that he did not have to 
blush when in the presence of the learned. 


John was still but a boy when he shipped as third mate on a slaver hailing from 
Whitehaven. And in 1766 he secured a berth as first mate on the brigantine Two 
Friends, also engaged in the slave trade. At this time the business of slave trading was 
considered entirely respectable, but John Paul grew so disgusted with it that he left 
the business after the ship had arrived in the West Indies, and returned to Scotland as 
a passenger on another vessel. On the way over both the captain and the mate of the 
ship died of the fever, and Paul took command, bringing the brigantine safely into 
port. This act earned for him the appointment as master of the ship. 


In the year 1770 he commanded the Betsy of London, a vessel engaged in the West 
India trade. John now entered into speculations and made considerable money. It was 
in this same year of 1770 that, being ever in search of Light, he was initiated in St. 
Bernard Lodge, No. 122, F. & A. M., of Kilwinning, Kirkcudbright, Scotland. This 
was on Nov. 27. 



The next year John Paul renounced Scotland as his home, and in 1773, being called to 
Virginia to settle the estate of his brother, William Paul, he decided to stay there and 
set up as a planter. He now had some property, although it would appear that he never 
was a very rich man. It was also probably about this time that he decided to change 
his name by adding to his birth name that of Jones. 


Until recently it had remained a mystery just what induced him to take this step. But a 
few years ago that indefatigable historian, Cyrus Townsend Brady, cleared up this 
point. It seems that during his lean years Paul had grown on very friendly terms with 
a gentleman of North Carolina by the name of Wiley Jones. Although Brady does not 
mention this point, it is exceedingly probable that the cause of this friendship was 
Masonry. Jones was of much help to John Paul when the latter sorely needed it, and 
in romantic gratitude Paul added the name of Jones to his own. Later Wiley Jones was 
instrumental in securing for John Paul Jones his first commission in the infant navy of 
the United States. 


John Paul Jones seems to have been an enthusiastic and consistent Mason. Both 
before and during the Revolution he was a frequent visitor at the lodges in Boston, 
Philadelphia and New York. There is not the slightest doubt but that it was Masonry 
which first brought him to the attention of influential Americans. Later most of the 
officers who sailed with him on his various cruises were Masons, including the 
afterward famous Richard Dale, lieutenant on the Bonhomme Richard at the time of 
her battle with the Serapis. Dale and Jones were firm friends as well as Masonic 
brothers, and worked together in utmost harmony. 


On Dec. 7, 1775, John Paul Jonex received his commission as lieutenant in the 
Continental navy, being ordered to service on the Alfred. It is said that to him fell the 
honor of hoisting the first American flag over a ship of war. This was the celebrated 
Rattlesnake flag with the motto, "Don't Tread On Me." 


Jones' first independent command was the schooner Providence of seventy tons 
burden and armed with four tiny guns. With this feeble force he made a very 



successful cruise in which he captured sixteen vessels and destroyed British property 
aggregating a million dollars. 


Shortly after this, while in command of the Alfred he made another cruise and 
captured great stores of clothing, of which the patriots were then in much need. 


Paul Jones was commissioned a captain on the very day that the stars and stripes were 
adopted as the national flag. Ordered to the command of the Ranger, a corvette of 
three hundred tons, he hoisted at her masthead on the 4th of July, 1777, the new flag. 
This particular ensign had been made from "slices of their best silk gowns" by the 
Misses Mary Langdon, Augusta Pierce, Caroline Chandler, Dorothy Hall and Helen 
Seavey, of Portsmouth, N. H., for presentation to Jones for this very ceremony. The 
ladies were present on the deck of the Ranger when the flag was raised. 


This flag had a glorious history. It streamed over the Ranger when Jones set sail to 
carry to the King of France the news of Burgoyne's surrender; it still flew from the 
masthead of this famous ship when she captured the Drake; it received from the 
united French fleet at Brest on Feb. 14, 1778, the first salute by a foreign naval 
power; and it went down with the Bonhomme Richard after the desperate fight off 
Flamborough Head. 


According to Augustus C. Buell in his history of Paul Jones: "When Jones returned to 
this country in February, 1781, he found Miss Langdon of 'the quilting party' a guest 
of the Ross family whose house was always his home in Philadelphia. By way of an 
apology he explained to her that his most ardent desire had been to bring that flag 
back to America, with all its glories, and give it back untarnished into the fair hands 
that had given it to him nearly four years before. 'But, Miss Mary,' he said, 'I couldn't 
bear to strip it from the poor old ship in her last agony, nor could I deny to my dead 
on her decks, who had given their lives to keep it flying, the glory of taking it with 
them.' 



"'You did exactly right, Commodore,' exclaimed Miss Langdon, 'that flag is just 
where we all wish it to be— flying at the bottom of the sea over the only ship that ever 
sunk in victory.'" 


After arriving at Brest with the message for the French king, Jones soon took the 
Ranger on a cruise destined to be famous. He fairly swept the English Channel and 
the Irish Sea of British commerce, causing the price of marine insurance to sky-rocket 
and himself to be denounced as a pirate, a blackguard and a traitor. 


Knowing the harbor of Whitehaven like a book, he determined to surprise it and burn 
the shipping. Taking two boat crews, he landed in the night, surprised the forts, which 
appear to have had but small garrisons, then attempted to burn the fleet of 
merchantmen that fairly crowded the harbor. But here fortune turned against him. His 
torches had burned out. Running into a nearby house he secured some fire which he 
placed in the hold of a vessel warped to a dock. Soon this ship burst into flame. 


But now the dawn had come up and the populace were aroused. Jones himself 
describes what ensued. He says: "The inhabitants began to appear in thousands, and 
individuals ran hastily toward us. I stood between them and the ship on fire, with my 
pistol in my hand, and ordered them to stand, which they did with some precipitation. 
The sun was a full hour's march above the horizon; and as sleep no longer ruled the 
world, it was time to retire. We re-embarked without opposition, having released a 
number of prisoners, as our boats could not carry them. After all my people had 
embarked, I stood upon the pier for a considerable space, yet no person advanced. I 
saw all the eminences round the town covered with the amazed inhabitants." 


The raid had been but partly successful, yet it served to terrorize the inhabitants of the 
British coast towns and awaken them to a feeling for the coast- wise citizens of 
America, who for so long had been forced to endure the aggressions of the British 
navy. 



It was ever in the mind of Paul Jones to secure as a hostage some prominent Briton, 
that his captivity might serve to mitigate the evil experienced by the Americans. With 
this end in view he approached St. Mary's Isle and saw through the clustered foliage 
the turrets of the castle of Lord Selkirk. 


On the estate of this nobleman Paul had played as a little child. He knew every inch 
of the surrounding country. He held the family of Lord Selkirk in the highest respect, 
for the Lady Selkirk had in old times often befriended his mother. But he knew that if 
he could secure the person of the nobleman it would go a long way toward insuring 
the good treatment of American prisoners, such as were at this time languishing in 
that floating hell, the Old Jersey prison ship. 


Choosing two boat crews of his most trusty men, Jones debarked from the Ranger, 
landed on the shore of St. Mary's Isle and proceeded up the broad driveway that led to 
the castle. 


Coming very soon upon two countrymen, the Americans learned that Lord Selkirk 
was away from home. This was bitter news for Jones; but as the person of the lord 
was all he wanted, he gave the command to his men to right about face and march to 
the pier, but the men were inclined to revolt. They wished to loot the castle of the 
family plate that they knew it must contain. 


Jones pondered their grievance. He well knew the mental processes of the average 
common sailor. In those days if a sailor could not make prize money or secure loot he 
was very prone to mutiny. Bitterly Jones resented being placed in the position of a 
plunderer, and at that of one who had befriended him in his childhood. However, he 
could not risk a mutiny at this time. 


He, therefore, directed the officers of the party to proceed with the men to the castle 
and secure the plate, but on no account to permit any other pilfering, or any injury to 
the people of the castle. He then returned to the shore and awaited the return of his 
men. 



The party, now fully satisfied, made its way to the castle, secured the plate and 
returned to the Ranger without doing any further damage either to property or person. 


Later, when the plate was put up for sale, Jones, although he really could not afford to 
do so, purchased it and returned it to Lord Selkirk with an explanation and apology. 
His courtesy and thoughtfulness were acknowledged by Lord Selkirk in a letter which 
was printed in various papers, but which did not serve to lessen the storm of abuse 
showered upon Jones by the British public. The British had grown to fear him, hence 
they hated him. 


This raid has been made the subject of a novel by Cooper, and The Pilot has had a 
popularity with the reading public that has continued to this day. 


Shortly after this event Jones was attacked by the British man-of-war Drake near 
Carrickfergus. The Drake was a ship about equal to the Ranger in size and weight of 
metal, but was heavier manned. 


It was late in the afternoon when the action commenced. It continued for over an 
hour. At the end of that time the Drake's rigging, spars and sails were cut to pieces, 
one-fifth of her crew had fallen, and she was completely helpless. She was therefore 
forced to strike. On the Ranger but two men were killed and six wounded. Jones 
carried the Drake into Brest harbor as a prize. 


After the French alliance, Jones thought it probable that he would be able to secure a 
command sufficiently strong to work havoc upon the British shipping. Said he, "I do 
not wish to have command of any ship that does not sail fast, for I intend to go in 
harm's way." 



But he met with many discouragements. Franklin tried to aid him, but it was not until 
the summer of 1779 that he was enabled to secure a command that promised to be of 
any avail. Then he was given the Due de Duras, an old, rotten East Indiaman, which 
he proceeded to turn into a warship. Many of her guns, forty in number, were rusty 
and positively dangerous. Her crew had to be raised among the offscourings of the 
docks and wharves. Of her entire personnel, but seventy-five of the seamen were 
Americans. The rest were foreigners of various breeds, including even so, me Malays. 
The French government loaned him an hundred soldiers to act as marines. The 
officers were mainly American and included the brave, active and efficient Lieutenant 
Richard Dale, personal friend and Masonic brother of Jones. The flag that floated 
over the old ship, renamed the Bonhomme Richard, now in the harbor of L'Orient, 
was the same that Jones had raised on the Ranger in Portsmouth harbor. 


In Jones' little squadron there were also four other vessels, the Pallas, Cerf, 
Vengeance, Alliance. The last named was a small, well-built American frigate with an 
American crew, but commanded by the Frenchman, Captain Landais, who had been 
given this command as a compliment to the French government. Landais was a half- 
insane, wholly-jealous crank, who bitterly resented having Jones rank him, and who 
proved when the crucial moment came that he was more of a menace than a help. The 
three other vessels were small affairs, thoroughly French throughout, but flying the 
American flag. With this polyglot and feeble command Jones started out to win honor 
for the flag and immortality for himself. And, strange as it may seem, he succeeded in 
doing both. 


Sailing the temporarily quiet waters of the North Sea on the evening of Sept. 30, 

1779, Jones on the quarterdeck of the Bonhomme Richard sighted near Flamborough 
Head a large fleet of merchantmen convoyed by two powerful ships of Britain's navy. 
The first, a fine new frigate of fifty guns, was commanded by Captain Pearson. This 
frigate was the Serapis. The second ship of war was the sloop Countesss of 
Scarborough. 


It was already growing dark; a finger of light streamed from the tower on 
Flamborough Head; the moon was shedding its soft radiance over the water; the light 
of the battle lanterns made plain the rows of portholes in the sides of the ships. 
Crowds of curious people had gathered along the heights to watch the expected fight. 



The merchant vessels scuttled for cover, but the warships came straight toward the 
challenger of the naval supremacy of England. 


And now from the dark shadow with the double row of lurid portholes came a loud 
cry, "What ship is that?" 


For answer Paul Jones gave a command and a heavy broadside rang out from the 
Bonhomme Richard. 


Before the flash of the guns had died out an answering broadside crashed from the 
eighteen-pounder gun of the Serapis. Through the rotten sides of the Richard the 
heavy balls tore, splintering beams and tearing human flesh. 


Then, too, there was other cause for apprehension on the part of Jones. Two of the old 
rusty cannon in the lower tier of guns burst with the first discharge, killing their crews 
and hurling pieces of metal everywhere, some of them even penetrating the deck 
above. 


But the Richard surged slowly ahead while Jones tried to manoeuvre her into position 
for raking. Still firing heavy broadsides, the Serapis avoided her antagonist and came 
sweeping up on the port side. Soon the bowsprit of the Serapis got entangled in the 
rigging of the Richard and locked together the two ships swung side by side, the bow 
of each pointing in a different direction. Jones hastened to lash the ships together, for 
he well knew that his chance of success lay in making it a close fight. If he allowed 
the Serapis to chose her distance she could knock the rotten old East Indiaman to 
pieces with impunity. 


And now the Pallas, another one of Jones' squadron, proceeded to attack the Countess 
of Scarborough. The other ships gave no aid. Rather, the crazy Frenchman, Landais, 
took himself off with the Alliance, while the other ships stayed at a safe distance. 



The gloom of the autumn evening had fallen fast; it was now quite dark, except for 
the joint illumination of the moon and the ever- flashing broadsides of the ships. The 
roaring of the heavy cannonade echoed and re-echoed along the coast and far inland, 
filling the hearts of the peasantry with foreboding. 


On the high poopdeck of the ancient ship stood Paul Jones watching the enemy pound 
his command to pieces under his very feet. For the decayed planking of the Richard 
offered but slight impediment to the flight of the heavy balls from the battery of the 
Serapis. Within an hour from the time the action commenced the main battery of the 
American ship was silenced, everything in the path of the terrible discharges from the 
enemy being blown either out or in. It is said that from this time on the balls from the 
eighteen-pounders of the Serapis went straight through the Richard without hitting 
anything, the planking and timbers on both sides having been cut asunder and hurled 
out of the way. The gundeck was a veritable shambles. And now the ship caught fire ! 


Almost immediately after this the ship's carpenter told Jones that in the hold the water 
was pouring in very fast. The old tub was sinking under their feet. And to add to the 
confusion, someone released the two hundred prisoners that had been held below 
deck on the Richard. These men came tumbling up the hatchways, adding 
tremendously to the hazard of battle, for they were all British seamen. And now 
among the mongrel crew of the Richard some began to cry for quarter, while even 
among the officers murmurs were heard that Jones should strike. Surely this was the 
time to try a man with a heart of oak. But Jones had a heart of steel and fire. 


And now from the Serapis came the hoarse cry, "Have you struck?" 


Immediately Jones sprang upon the rail and, funneling his hands, roared back through 
the sulphurous gloom, "sir, I have not yet begun to fight !" 



Then, as though in an effort to blast that unconquerable spirit, the broadsides of the 
Serapis reopened with added intensity. Splinters flew in clouds, the flames secured a 
new start, masses of stifling smoke rolled up from below decks and almost strangled 
the men. All of which but served to stir Jones to new endeavor.. 


First he caused a rumor to be circulated among the released prisoners that the Serapis 
was sinking, and that the only salvation for both crews was to keep the Richard afloat. 
The terrified prisoners thereupon, rushed to the pumps and worked heroically, 
releasing for other duty many of Jones' men. Next he hauled two nine pounders across 
the spardeck, had them loaded with chainshot and grape, and opened fire on the 
mainmast of the Serapis, hoping to bring it down. Then he directed the fight in the 
tops and the rigging of the entangled ships. 


About this time Jones stopped long enough to reprove one of the junior officers for 
indulging in profanity. "Don't swear, Mr. Stacey," said he. "In another moment we 
may all be in eternity, but let us do our duty." 


In view of the fact that the British have always characterized Jones as a pirate, this 
seems rather strange language to use at such a time and place. 


If the British had it all their own way below decks, it was not so either on the main 
deck or aloft. The French soldiers of the Richard had from the rigging of the 
American ship fairly swept the deck of the Serapis clear of men. Also, the Americans 
had speedily swarmed into the tops and upper rigging of the Richard and, crossing 
over into the rigging of the Serapis, had driven the topmen out and gained command, 
thus being able to fire directly down on the British deck and into the various 
hatchways that led to the gundeck below. 


And now an old American tar, taking a bucket of hand grenades, crept out along a 
yard that hung directly over the main hatch of the British ship, calmly lighted the fuse 
of one of his missiles and tossed it down into the hole. Almost immediately there 



followed a terrific explosion, which tore up part of the deck of the Serapis and put 
many of the guns of her main battery out of commission. 


It seems that the powder monkeys of this battery had accumulated behind each gun 
several surplus charges, while some had been broken open and the powder strewn 
along the decks. When the grenade exploded here the loose powder was ignited with 
disastrous results. 


Now the Americans fairly rained grenades on the deck of the Serapis and even tossed 
them through the portholes of the ship. If most of their cannon had been rendered 
useless, they yet retained and could use a most formidable weapon. And now the 
Serapis caught fire. The Richard had been almost continuously on fire. 


On the Richard the doctor came running on deck bawling that the water was gaining 
so fast in the cockpit that it already floated the wounded there. He advised an 
immediate surrender. "Tut ! Tut ! Doctor," smiled Jones amid all that reign of horror, 
"would you have me strike to a drop of water? Just help me a bit with this gun." 


The crew of the Serapis growing desperate, attempted to board. They were beaten 
back. The crew of the Richard made a like attempt which also failed. But the 
continued hammering of Jones' two ninepounders against the foot of the mainmast of 
the Serapis bore fruit. The mast tottered and swept downward into the sea carrying the 
top of the mizzen mast with it. 


For Jones things now looked brighter. But at this instant out of the gloom came the 
Alliance firing alike upon both the Serapis and the Richard. In vain the Americans 
shouted for the crazy Frenchman to hold his fire. Broadside after broadside he 
discharged, returning again and again to the attack. Many of the Richard's crew were 
killed by the missiles from the Alliance, the captain of which desired to make the 
Richard strike to the Serapis that he might have the honor of taking both ships. 



Seeing that their calls were unheeded, the Americans of the Richard's devoted crew, 
now under fire from both friend and foe, turned again to their job. Lieutenant Richard 
Dale had been wounded, but in the excitement of the fight failed to realize it. 
Throughout the contest he was a veritable tower of strength to Jones. 


The contest had now been raging for three hours. About half of the crew of the 
American ship had fallen; nearly two-thirds of that of the Serapis. The Pallas had 
captured the Scarborough. This fight could not go on forever; human endurance could 
not stand much more; nor were there men enough left in both crews to furnish food 
for powder for many more hours. Someone had to yield. Jones would not. Hence on 
the deck of the Serapis, the commander, Captain Pearson, tore down the British colors 
with his own hands. 


The bloodiest fight in all naval history was over ! 


The perfidious Landais had at last sailed away with the Alliance. Lieutenant Dale led 
on board the captured Serapis a prize crew and sent Captain Pearson and his first 
lieutenant to the Richard. When Pearson handed to Jones his sword in token of 
surrender, he is reported to have made a remark to the effect that he would hate to 
fight with a halter around his neck. 


The answer of Jones was characteristic of him; courteous, high-minded gentleman 
that he was: "Sir," said he, "you have fought like a hero; and I make no doubt your 
sovereign will reward you in the most ample manner." 


Pearson's sovereign did just that thing; he made Pearson a knight. When a long time 
after this Jones heard about it, he remarked dryly, "He deserves it. And if I ever fall in 
with him again, I'll make him a duke." 



In the morning after the bloody night battle it was soon found that the poor old 
Bonhomme Richard, which Jones had named in honor of his friend. Dr. Franklin, 
could not be saved. Therefore, the prisoners and the wounded were transferred to the 
deck of the Serapis, jury masts were rigged on the latter, and sail set for Holland. 


Bow foremost the Richard sank into the sea, from her topmast still streaming the first 
Stars and Stripes ever hoisted over an American man-of-war. 


Arriving at the Texel, Jones was commanded by the Dutch to either set the French 
flag over his ship, accepting a French commission, or give up his prizes. 


Now one of Jones' famous sayings was that "I have ever looked out for the honor of 
the American flag." 


On this occasion he lived up to that saying, as he always did. He refused to lower the 
American flag, choosing rather to give up his prizes. Deposing Landais from the 
command of the Alliance, Jones shifted his colors to that ship. After carefully 
refitting her, Jones put to sea in the teeth of both a howling gale and a whole fleet of 
blockading British ships and brought the Alliance safely through the English Channel 
to Corunna in Spain, and later to a French port. The five hundred and four prisoners 
that he had taken were afterward exchanged for a like number of patriots who had 
been languishing in British dungeons. 


Jones was now not only a hero, he was the talk of all Europe. The French created him 
a Chevalier of the Order of Merit. He returned to America in February, 1781. 
Congress proceeded to pass a flattering resolution concerning him. 


The end of the war found no command for him in the American navy, for the navy 
was temporarily abolished at the close of the struggle. Jones went to Russia and was 
commissioned by the queen a rearadmiral, later being promoted to the grade of 



admiral in command of a squadron in the Black Sea. In the Russian navy he displayed 
his genius as of yore, but he did not like the service. He eventually returned to Paris, 
where his health began to fail. He died July 18, 1792, being but forty-five years of 
age. 


According to the historian Brady, to whom reference has already been made, there 
was found among the papers of John Paul Jones the following in his own 
handwriting: 


"In 1775, J. Paul Jones armed and embarked in the first American ship of war. In the 
Revolution he had twenty-three battles and solemn recontres by sea; made seven 
descents in Britain, and her colonies; took of her navy two ships of equal, and two of 
superior force, many store ships and others; constrained her to fortify her ports; suffer 
the Irish Volunteers; desist from her cruel burnings in America, and exchange as 
prisoners of war, the American citizens taken on the ocean, and cast into prisons of 
England, as 'traitors, pirates, and felons !' " 


Ever since being made a Master Mason Jones had retained his membership with the 
lodge at Kilwinning, but it does not appear that he received a Masonic burial in Paris 
The Protestant cemetery in which he was interred was officially closed in 1793, and 
the location of his grave was forgotten. But a few years ago General Horace Porter, 
then United states Ambassador to France, caused a search to be made, the results of 
which were that the body of the hero was discovered, identified, and brought back to 
America on the deck of a warship more powerful than he had ever dreamed of. 


At Annapolis his casket now rests, at the famous school where young fledglings of 
the Eagle's brood are taught technical details of the sea officer's trade, and filled with 
the heroic traditions of our navy. And among those traditions there are none more 
inspiring than those which cluster about the name of him who has at last been brought 
back home. 



The urge of his fiery courage and unquenchable spirit has tended to animate 
thousands of young officers who have made the navy of the United states a thing 
known and honored throughout the world. It was the spirit of such as he and 
Lawrence which doubtless nerved the crew of the Cumberland to keep on firing while 
fighting a battle that they knew was hopeless; the spirit of never-say-die that kept 
them cheering for the flag above even as the ship sank into the waves. 


And when many centuries shall have rolled by and our beloved nation, following 
along the path blazed by the inexorable law of decay and death, has sunk into the 
oblivion that cloaks the dust of Chaldea, Carthage and Palmyra, wise men of a strange 
new race, as yet ill the loins of the future, searching for the glory that was America, 
shall marvel exceedingly over the record of that dauntless man, who, when the way 
was dark and to all others the cause seemed lost, hurled back in the teeth of the enemy 
that indomitable cry of defiance and purpose: 


"Sir, I have not yet begun to fight!" 


— o — 


WHAT WAS FREEMASONRY DESIGNED TO BE? 


By BRO. SILAS H. SHEPHERD, Wisconsin 


In a letter accompanying the following too brief article Bro. Shephard says: "Perhaps 
I have stressed brotherly love rather forcibly, but it seems to me it really needs 
stressing. I have met many brethren who admitted they did not believe in it. They 
were unwilling to practice what Freemasonry teaches." One wonders very much why 
such brethren ever joined the Order. It hardly seems possible that they could have 
truthfully answered the questions put to them before they entered the lodge, unless 
this attitude be due to disillusionment. It is as true of Masonry as of anything else, one 



only gets out of it what one puts into it, and only one who practices the fraternal 
precepts of the Craft can ever know what brotherly love may be. 


THE Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons is the custodian of a system of 
symbolic teaching which had its origin in a remote antiquity. From the earliest 
records of humanity we find evidence of the use of geometrical and architectural 
symbols being used to teach basic moral and spiritual truths. 


The advantage of this method of teaching is twofold. It makes a deeper and more 
lasting impression, not only on the mind, but on the heart and soul of the candidate 
and it precludes the dogmatism which verbal teaching has so often included, and 
which has obscured the vital and fundamental truths. 


The symbols and allegories used by Freemasonry are all symbolical of basic moral 
and spiritual truths. The verbal explanations offered may be considered as 
commentaries. The symbol or allegory is always of greater value than the 
commentary. In fact the great design of Freemasonry is to build a Temple of 
Character by the use of the symbolic tools and implements, and every effort to arrive 
at a clearer conception of Freemasonry should have this purpose ever in view. 


The enduring things in life are those that are true and vital. The Fatherhood of God 
and the Brotherhood of Man are basic laws of nature, and our failure to recognize and 
obey them is the cause of all our economic, social and political strife and discord. 
Nature displays harmony, and mankind should subdue the passions of ignorance, 
prejudice and superstition, and improve themselves by building a character which is 
found to be square, level and plumb. 


We profess Brotherly Fove, Relief and Truth as our tenets. We explain our broad and 
comprehensive idea of Brotherly Fove. It must be made more than lip service to be of 
value— we must make it an active principle of our lives. 



The brethren who formed the Grand Lodge of England, in 1717, clearly defined the 
only basis on which a universal brotherhood can be established. To "Only oblige them 
to that Religion in which all men agree." Are we doing this today when we refuse to 
recognize Freemasons who have adhered to this basic principle more carefully than 
we have? 


There is great difference of opinion among Masonic writers regarding the exact status 
of Freemasonry regarding religion. Some say it is not a religion. By "a religion" we 
infer one of several or many religions, and in such a sense they are correct. 


No man can, however, participate in the forms and ceremonies and fail to have the 
highest emotions of his religious nature reached. Here he finds the vital truths of his 
particular religion, be they what they may. 


Freemasonry is such a wonderful system of morality that it reaches the heart of the 
most humble initiate and is profound enough to make the greatest intellects its 
lifelong students. 


The fact that it contains a whole philosophy of life and immortality and has hidden 
and veiled allusions to the details which each brother must work out for himself, 
makes it advisable for us to frequently revert to the vital and fundamental truths 
which differentiate it from all other institutions. 


The Square of virtue includes, in its visible symbolic form, the lines which are 
symbols of the Level and the Plumb. It also includes in its Masonic application the 
basic duties of man to God by an upright life, and to our fellowmen by equality, or 
Brotherly Love. The point within a circle is capable of many interpretations and much 
speculation. When we consider that from a center there are radii which project as the 
spokes of a wheel, we can receive a most beneficial idea of how Brotherly Love 
conforms to a great law of spiritual development. The center symbolizes the Supreme 
God. Each radius symbolizes an individual. As the several radii draw away from the 
center they draw further away from each other. The only way we can do our full duty 



to God is by fulfilling our duty to our fellowmen, and likewise the only way we can 
do our full duty to our fellowmen is by doing it to God. 


As builders of character we have to become proficient in the use of the tools and 
implements of the several degrees, and these are for use on our own character only. 
Not until we have thoroughly learned how to apply them are we given the Trowel, 
which is the first implement that in any way affects others. 


By its use we may learn to actually practice the tenet of Brotherly Love, and consider 
every human being as a brother. True, he may err most grievously and appear to 
deserve our severest condemnation but who among us does not err, and are we not in 
a measure responsible for the environment which may have contributed to his errors? 
The poorest human creature is our brother, and even though his faults appear most 
grievous we must remember a most wise admonition, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." 


The great design of Freemasonry is to build character. To live up to the tenets we 
profess ought to be of first importance. If Brotherly Love is not true we should cease 
to teach it. If it is true we are bound by every obligation of honor and duty to put it 
into practice. 


Belief in a Supreme Being, whom Freemasonry designates as The Great Architect of 
the Universe, and belief in the Immortality of the Soul are the only basic religious 
tenets which can possibly unite men of every country, sect and opinion. 


Belief in the tenets of Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth are as far as we may safely go 
in social relationship. 


As individuals we must continually apply all the tools and implements so that we may 
complete our Temple and receive the reward, Truth— the long lost WORD. We must 



use the twenty-four-inch Gauge and Common Gavel; the Plumb, Square and Level; 
the Trowel and all they signify continually. Never let them rust for want of use. 


When every member of a lodge has some such conception of the design of 
Freemasonry, our Fraternity will function as it was designed to do, and Plenty, Health 
and Peace will abound, and Peace and Good Will prevail on earth. So mote it be. 


— o — 


What Masonry Is Not 


BY BRO. GEORGE H. DERN, Governor of Utah, P.G.M., Associate Editor, Utah 


MASONS generally like to hear or read a discussion of what Masonry is and what it 
stands for. 


One of the ways of proving a thing is by elimination, and perhaps some light may be 
thrown upon the subject of what Masonry is by telling a few things that Masonry is 
not. 


IT IS NOT A REFORMATORY INSTITUTION 


In the first place, Masonry is not a reformatory institution. We make no pretense of 
going out into the highways and byways, picking up men who have strayed and 
fallen, making them members of our Fraternity and reforming them. That sort of work 
is highly commendable, and Masons, as individuals, may be proud to engage in it, but 



it is not the mission of Masonry. A man, to be eligible for Masonry, is required to 
come up to a certain standard, and we need not fear that the standard will ever be too 
high. 


The brother who knows that a man who has petitioned for the Three Degrees has 
certain moral defects, but who says, "Well, he is a pretty good fellow in other ways, 
and perhaps Masonry will help straighten him out," and therefore permits the petition 
to go through, is not doing his duty. 


He is not doing his duty, first, because, as already stated, Masonry is not a 
reformatory. We have troubles enough of our own without deliberately dragging in 
more. 


He is not doing his duty, second, because you cannot reform a man by making a 
Mason of him. If he is a bad Indian before he becomes a Mason he will be a bad 
Indian after he becomes a Mason. A man's character is not changed by repeating a 
few set phrases to him. It is not changed by what he hears, but by what he does. His 
character is formed by his past life, and he will always act in accordance with his past 
experiences. We are beginning to leam that a man does not make a deliberate choice 
every time a question comes to him. His actions today are determined by his actions 
of yesterday. His actions of yesterday were determined by his actions of the day 
before, and so on back to his childhood. 


Psychologists sometimes explain this on the theory of brain grooves. The first time an 
individual is confronted by a certain set of conditions he makes a deliberate choice 
and acts accordingly. The act of making this choice makes a groove in his brain. The 
next time he is confronted by a similar set of conditions his mind has a tendency to 
follow this groove. It is the easiest thing to do, and the doing of it makes the groove a 
little deeper. The third time the same situation is before him it is still easier to follow 
the groove, and the groove is further deepened. As the process is repeated time after 
time, the groove gradually becomes so deep that the mind follows it instinctively and 
without any effort. Indeed, it requires a conscious and decided effort not to follow the 
groove. A fixed habit has been formed, which has become a part of his nature. He will 



always and unconsciously let his mind run in this groove, and he cannot help acting in 
this particular fashion unless by a determined and persistent effort of the will he acts 
otherwise and starts a new groove. 


The Masonic Degrees may furnish him a temporary moral stimulant that will be 
beneficial if he acts according to the emotions that they arouse in him, but almost 
invariably that stimulant will soon wear off, and he will then be his normal self, and 
will live according to the actions of his past. If his life has contained hate and avarice 
and deceit and cruelty and slander and backbiting and lewdness, then those vices are a 
part of his make-up and they will show up in the future as they have shown up in the 
past. 


And so if we think we are going to make a man over by giving him the Masonic 
Degrees we are sadly mistaken, for the thing is scientifically impossible. When we 
are considering a petition we should think only of the man's past, and not of his 
future, because his past will absolutely determine his future. If he is not a good 
Mason before he gets the degrees he never will be. 


IT IS NOT A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION 


In the second place, Masonry is not a charitable institution. That is, we are not banded 
together for the purpose of administering charity. It is allowable and proper for a 
lodge, if it has the money, to relieve the pressing needs of its distressed members, to 
help the families of deceased members when their necessities require, and even to 
contribute to other worthy purposes; but nowhere in the Ritual, code or by-laws is 
there anything that makes it obligatory upon a lodge to dispense charity under any 
conditions. In fact, our lodge dues are not generally figured on any such basis. 


Now, this may be surprising to some of us, especially in view of the fact that one of 
our chief teachings is charity. The explanation is right here. We teach our members to 
be charitable. We bind ourselves, not as a body, but as individuals, to relieve the 
distress of others. It is the duty of every individual Mason to practice charity. 



Masonry, as an organization, is not a charitable institution but a teaching institution, 
and charity is one of its teachings. The Mason with a true understanding of his art 
therefore is not chagrined when other orders dispense greater sums in charity than do 
our Masonic lodges. He is only chagrined when members of other orders are more 
charitable than Masons. 


IT IS NOT A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION 


In the third place, Masonry is not a religious institution. Members of every sect and 
opinion are eligible, according to our basic law, and we have no right to reject a man 
solely on account of his religious belief. We hear an enthusiastic brother say, once in 
a while, "Masonry is my only religion," but in so doing he hardly uses the word 
religion in the accepted sense. Would it not be more accurate to say that Masonry is a 
system of morality, which she teaches to her devotees? Masonry exacts no faith or 
dogmas from her members. She only requires them to be good men and true. 
Religious liberty and tolerance are vital Masonic principles. Let us not forget that 
while we fight intolerance in others we must also fight it in ourselves. 


IT IS NOT A MONEY-MAKING INSTITUTION 


In the fourth place, Masonry is not a money-making institution, neither for its 
members nor for itself. Men are not supposed to join Masonry for business reasons 
nor because they thi nk they will reap a financial profit by so doing. Doubtless some 
do, but they are careful to keep the fact in the background, and they solemnly declare 
that they came uninfluenced by mercenary motives. If you know a man has put in his 
petition because he thinks it will help his business, you have an excellent reason for 
using the black ball. 


Neither does Masonry exist to make money for itself. There are good reasons to 
believe it does not do a lodge any good to become extremely wealthy. Its ideals are 
apt to be higher while it is poor. It is like the early Christian monasteries. When they 
were founded they had a high ideal, and their very poverty helped them live up to that 



ideal. In the Middle Ages, when they had become wealthy, many of the monasteries 
and convents were dens of vice and debauchery. Possibly the same thing could be 
pointed out in the high life of today. Let us hope Masonry will never have to sigh for 
the time, as Riley says, "When we were so happy and so pore." 


There are other things that Masonry is not. This little essay does not pretend to speak 
of them all. Neither does it undertake to tell all that Masonry is. Suffice it to say in 
brief that Masonry is an organization of high grade men with only one real mission, 
and that is character building. We may divide and subdivide as much as we please, 
but it all comes back to this, that we aim to develop the characters of our members, 
and we expect thereby to send a set of men out into the world who will have an 
uplifting influence upon everything they touch. 


— o — 


Links Between Lodge and Chapter 


By BRO. N.W.J. HAYDON, Toronto 


THE connection between "Ancient Craft Masonry", as modern American Freemasons 
understand it, and the Capitular Degrees has always been more than ordinarily 
interesting to the inquiring member of the Craft. In this review of the origin of the 
separate ceremonies, which seem to have been more closely linked together in earlier 
days, our Associate on the Board of Editors, Companion N.W.J. Haydon of Canada, 
treats very interestingly the known links in the chain of history. There is still much 
more to be learned, though whether all the historic facts will ever become clear is 
somewhat doubtful. 


AFTER a man has been received into a Masonic lodge, he is apt to become 
bewildered by several claims on his attention, not the least of which are those of the 



so-called "higher degrees". Finding himself almost at the bottom of the degree ladder, 
instead of the top as he had rather expected to be, he will —if he has the money to 
spare, and no one is good enough to advise him to digest first what he has already 
experienced -inquire as to what comes next and proceed with his travels. So the 
purpose of this paper is to help him discover what "next" is most natural, 

Masonically, and where to stop if he would profit by his experience. 


There has been in all known Masonic history but one formal and authoritative 
declaration ax to just what constitutes "Ancient Craft Masonry". This is to be found in 
the "Articles of Union" drawn up in November, 1813, and accepted as a basis for the 
healing of the Masonic differences which had for over sixty years (since 1751) 
divided our English predecessors into two hostile camps. Of these twenty-one 
Articles, the second reads as follows: 


It is declared and pronounced that pure Ancient Masonry consists of three degrees, 
and no more; viz, those of the Entered Apprentice, the Fellowcraft, and the Master 
Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch. 


But this article is not intended to prevent any Lodge or Chapter from holding a 
meeting in any of the degrees in the Orders of Chivalry, according to the constitution 
of the said Orders. 


from which it will be evident that all other so-called Masonic degrees or ceremonies, 
of whatever title, can claim to be such only because their membersh ip is confined to 
those who have passed through these original three. 


EARLIEST KNOWN RECORD 


Just when these "Degrees" became separate and secret ceremonies is still unsettled. 
The earliest known record of such is dated 1702, in the minute book of a lodge at 



Haughfoot, Scotland (1) and the others must have been revived prior to 1723, as they 
are mentioned in the First Book of Constitutions, of that date, drawn up by Dr. 
Anderson. 


The whole history of our Order forbids any opinion as to the degrees being originated 
at this date, as the brethren were so opposed to anything new that even the changes in 
the Constitution, which made possible the present broad-minded basis of admission to 
membership, were sufficient to commence the bitter disputes referred to above. 


The Royal Arch Degree was first conferred in lodges, the word chapter coming into 
official use in England about 1768, though Stirling Rock R. A. Chapter of Scotland 
claims a charter of 1743. The earliest known mention of it as a separate ceremony is 
found in an Irish work dated 1744 (2), but the statement there made is that this degree 
had been conferred "some few years" previously in York and in London and further, 
that it was conferred only on "Most Excellent Masons" who were "an organized body 
of men who have passed the chair and given undeniable proofs of their skill in 
architecture", so that this degree must have been originally a reward of Operative 
merit. 


As the years passed this pre-requisite became a barrier to the support of Royal Arch 
Masonry, so we find that in 1768, at Bolton, in Lancashire, nine brethrer, were 
"installed" Masters in order to qualify them for the Royal Arch (1), thus making them 
virtual or honorary Past Masters as, distinguished from those who were actual Past 
Masters, through service in the chair. The fact that nine brethren were so treated is 
evidence that the custom was much older than this record, and this method finally 
became a matter of routine as it is today. 


An Irish scholar (3) has preserved for us the record in a Dublin newspaper of 1743, 
that in a celebration by a lodge at Youghal, there was a procession in which was seen 
"the Royal Arch carried by two excellent Masons" and a minute of the same lodge of 
two brothers "passing to the dignity of Royal Arch Masons, they being proper officers 
of this lodge". 



AMERICAN EARLY RECORD 


The earliest record of this ceremony being conducted in the American Colonies is that 
of a lodge at Fredericksburg, in Virginia, dated 1753, which states that on the same 
evening two brethren were "raised to the Degree of R. A. Mason" following which an 
Entered Apprentice's Lodge was opened. 


There is much more interesting material available to fill in the above outline but, the 
present purpose being just to show the historical connection of the chapter with the 
lodge, the reader would gain more profit by making use for himself of the references 
given at the end of this paper. 


The next question is whence was the material drawn for the Royal Arch ceremonies; 
has it any symbolic connection with the lodge; does it serve to complete the 
instruction given therein? 


It will be remembered that, on becoming a Master Mason, one learned that, owing to 
the death of the Chief Architect, the plans were all awry because the knowledge that 
alone could make them serviceable was cut off. As a result there was received only 
that bare statement and further Masonic progress was based entirely on the hope that 
oneself or some other brother might regain that which was lost, thereby making 
possible the completion of the Temple, as existing in both h member and our Order as 
a whole. 


CENTRAL IDEA OF OUR SYSTEM This loss and recovery of some essential 
element of progress, generally termed "The Word," is the central idea of our Masonic 
system. The idea is not original with us as Words of Power were known and referred 
to many centuries ago, but we being Speculatives lather than Operatives see in it not 
some method of ceremonial magic, but a reminder of the perpetuation of life through 
the natural processes of death and renewal of our bodies. And, since familiarity has 
made us contemptuous of their divine character, we need to learn their correct use as 
they are the appointed pathway to that Temple of which all humanity are the ashlars. 



Dr. Oliver tells us (4) that in his time the candidate, this exaltation, was addressed as 
follows: 


Allow me to congratulate you on your admission into the sublime and exalted Degree 
of a Royal Arch Mason, which is at once the foundation and copestone of the whole 
Masonic structure. You may perhaps conceive that you have received this day a 
Fourth Degree of Freemasonry, but such is not the case; it is only the completion of 
that of a Master Mason. 


It may be said, then, without passing the limits of due caution, that the completion of 
the lodge in the chapter is the finding of the lost Word of Power, embodied in one of 
the Names whereby the Great Architect is known throughout this material universe. 
But, because these Names are as infinite of variety as they are of potency, we use as a 
focus for our finite intellirence that ancient form preserved in the Hebrew scriptures, 
known as the Tetragrammaton, and revered for centuries by countless worshippers. 


That this usage preceded the official separation we also learn from Dr. Oliver, as he 
tells us (5) "I have before me an old French engraving of the Ground Work of the 
Master's Lodge, dated 1740, containing the usual emblems and, on the coffin, is the 
'True Word' in Roman capitals." 


SEPARATION OF THE CEREMONIES 


Just why or how this conclusion of the Master Mason ceremony came to be separated 
from it and worked up into a different name and condition is difficult to state in a few 
words. A natural theory is that the same influence which brought about an earlier 
change in Masonic methods, making it possible for lodges to pass and raise their own 
members instead of leaving that power in the hands of Grand Lodge alone, was also 
responsible, as our Order increased in numbers, for granting the Royal Arch to 
brethren who could pass the prescribed trials of skill and firmness, but were prevented 



by that same increase from passing the chair. Even if, as is certain, the working was 
less elaborate than it is today, the complete degree would be inconveniently long, 
especially with the ceremonial changes involved. So that as the growing popularity of 
the Craft brought in men who had to consider the value of their time, the blemishes of 
"short forms" and of "hearing the lecture on some-future occasion" could only be 
avoided by the actions of those who, out of respect for the ceremonies, finally brought 
about the division into two at the natural point of cleavage. 


There is one more consideration that should be dealt with— what good will be served 
by joining the chapter and being exalted to the Royal Arch? If the Royal Arch truly 
contains the discovery of the Omnific Word or of the Ineffable Name, as it is also 
known, why is it that one sees the sign of the chapter on the persons of so many 
ordinary citizens? 


Here we touch on the mystical side of things, for neither lodge nor chapter is like a 
College of Surgeons, which requires its students to prove their practical as well as 
their theoretical knowledge of its secrets and mysteries, before they are granted the 
honors and responsibilities of graduation in their degrees. 


Our science can be learned only by experience in service and while that is coincident 
with our whole life, we should not refrain from entering upon it just because the end 
seems so far off. As a matter of fact we reap every day the slowly converging results 
of our efforts, some long past and forgotten, some recent, bnt the more we try to serve 
the more marked and speedy are the results. As Bro. Wilmshurst tells us (6): 


The pursuit of "secrets" is certain to prove futile, for the only secrets worth the name 
or the tinding are those incommunicable ones which discover themselves within the 
personal consciousness of the seeker, who is in earnest to translate ceremonial 
representations into facts of spiritual experience. 



Since the purpose of all initiation is to lift human consciousness from lower to higher 
levels by quickening the latent, spiritual, potentialities in man to their fullest extent 
through appropriate discipline. 


No higher level of attainment is possible than that in which the human merges in the 
Divine consciousness and knows as God knows. 


That being the level of which the Order of the Royal Arch treats ceremonially, it 
follows that Masonry, as a ceremonial system, reaches its climax and conclusion in 
that Order. 


OTHER CHAPTER DEGREES 


In Canadian chapters we have three ceremonies or degrees, the other two being 
known as the Mark Master and the Most Excellent Master, both of which precede the 
Holy Royal Arch and act as links between it and that of the Master Mason with their 
bases of history, symbol and mystery-teaching. 


In England and its dependencies the Mark Degree has been a separate Institution, 
governed by its own Grand Mark Lodge since 1856, owing to its being refused 
recognition by that Grand Chapter as a separate degree, because of the terms of the 
Act of Union. There, too, it also consists of two parts, Mark Man and Mark Master, 
usually worked on the same occasion, the former applying to workmen who had 
gained some skill but were not yet able to work alone, and the latter to Fellowcrafts 
who had earned the right to travel in foreign lands and work as Masters (7). This 
recognition has now been granted officially and some changes of organization may 
ensue as a result. 


In Scotland, the Mark is conferred in lodges, but the Royal Arch is not recognized by 
that Grand Lodge, while, in Ireland, both are serving Masonic interests. 



The use of the Mark is, naturally, very ancient and widespread, as Operatives, being 
usually illiterate, had to use symbols for purposes of identification. Collections of 
Marks have been gathered from all parts of the world where stone has been worked, 
and ingenious theories devised by Masonic scholars to reduce their various shapes to 
a system. For the most part they consist of straight lines making an uneven number of 
angles, but curved lines have been found in Scotland (8) and India. Indeed, the theory 
has been advanced that our present alphabet, through its descent from Phoenician and 
Greek letter-systems, owes its origin.s to the marks used by operatives who built the 
temples of Egypt and its Colonies in Asia Minor (9). 


Just when a distinct ceremony was first used is not definitely known. The oldest 
record of its working as such is dated 1769 (10), but the famous Schaw statutes of 
Scotland under date of 1598, require that when a Fellow of the Craft is received, his 
name and Mark must "be orderlie buikit" (11). 


Symbolically, the granting of the right to use a Mark is akin to the Rite of 
Confirmation in the Church, and to the legal "coming of age". It was not granted until 
the apprentice had finished his term, passed his test, and been received as a Fellow of 
the Craft by his lodge. Then, no longer need his work be governed at every step by 
some more skillful Craftsman. He now stands on his own feet and accepts 
responsibility for his own acts. He is considered a man of mature years, sound 
judgment and good morals. His Mark is put on his work; on it he builds his reputation 
and, if his sons follow in his trade, they would frequently use his Mark, though with 
some slight difference. We, though Speculatives, still follow this custom, and every 
Mark Master is required to select and register his Mark and cut it on his "Chapter 
penny". Apart from this we emphasize the lessons of the Master Mason by regarding 
the Mark as made visible in personality and character, than which no man can go 
further. 


MOST EXCELLENT MASTER 



This degree is not worked in Great Britain but is peculiar to Canada and the United 
States, and the latter still work the ancient ceremony of "passing the chair" in memory 
of the old regulation as to Installed Masters. 


While the phrase "Excellent Master" has a definite place and value in Capitular 
Masonry from its earliest times, it does not appear that there was also a special or 
distinct ceremony conferring such a title until much later. M. W. Bro. Mackey tells us 
(12) that originally "this degree was the sixth of the York Rite" and he adds that it 
was "the invention of [Thomas Smith] Webb, who organized the Capitular system of 
Masonry as it exists in America". As this first Grand Chapter for the United States 
had not come into being in 1798, and the original York Rite had ceased to exist by 
about 1789 at the latest, it seems more probable that Webb's "invention" was simply 
an adaptation of material already respectable with long use. 


The legend of this degree is concerned with the Keystone, and in conjunction with the 
Mark, teaches the lesson of patience under injustice caused by official ignorance, and 
the final triumph of work properly done. 


REFERENCES 

(1) Origin of the English Rite of Freemasonry, by W. J. Hughan . 

(2) A Serious and Impartial Enquiry, etc., by F. Dassigny, M. D. 

(3) Caementaria Hibernica, by W.J. Chetwode Crawley, LL. D. 

(4) Origin of the Royal Arch, by Rev. Geo. Oliver, D. D. 

(5) The Necessity of the Royal Arch, by M. Ex. Comp. William F. Kuhn. 

(6) The Meaning of Masonry, by W. J. Wilmshurst. 

(7) By Ways of Freemasonry, by Rev. J. T. Lawrence, M. A. 

(8) A Treatise on Masons' Marks, by Charles A. Conover. 



(9) Ars Quatuor Coronatoram, Vol. 3, page 189. Kenning's Cyclopedia of 
Freemasonry. 

(10) Concise History of Freemasonry, by R. F. Gould. 

(11) Mark Masonry, by W. J. Hughan. 

(12) Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, by Albert G. Mackey, M. D. 


— o — 


The Story of Freemasonry in Colorado 


By BRO. GEORGE B. CLARK, Colorado PART II (Concluded) 


ATTENTION has been directed to the fact that the authority exercised by the Grand 
Lodge of Colorado was obtained from that delegated to it by the lodges forming the 
Grand Lodge. Those lodges derived their authority by reason of a warrant or charter 
of Constitution granted to them in regular form by the Grand Lodges of Kansas and 
Nebraska. This question may be asked: from what sources came the authority 
exercised by the Grand Lodges of Kansas and Nebraska ? 


The Grand Lodge of Kansas was erected March 17, 1856, at Leavenworth, by 
representatives of three lodges all chartered by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, viz: 


No. 1— Smithton Lodge, No. 140, at Iowa Point, chartered May 30, 1855. No. 2— 
Leavenworth Lodge, No. 150, at Leavenworth, chartered Mav 30, 1855. No. 3— 
Wyandotte Lodge, No. 153, at Wyandotte, chartered May 30, 1855. 



The Grand Lodge of Nebraska was erected Sept. 23, 1857, at Omaha, by 
representatives of three lodges all chartered as follows: 


No. 1— Nebraska Lodge, No. 184, at Bellevue, chartered Oct. 3, 1855 by Illinois. No. 

2— Giddings Lodge, No. 156, at Nebraska city, chartered May 28, 1856, by Missouri. 
No. 3-Capital Lodge, No. 101, at Omaha, chartered June 3, 1857, by Iowa. 


The Grand Lodge of Iowa was erected Jan. 8, 1844, at Iowa city, by representatives of 
four lodges all chartered by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, viz: 


No. 1— Des Moines Lodge, No. 41, at Burlington, chartered Oct. 20, 1841. No. 2— 
Iowa Lodge, No. 42, at Bloomington, chartered Oct. 20, 1841. No. 3— Dubuque 
Lodge, No. 62, at Dubuque, chartered Oct. 10, 1843. No. 4-Iowa city Lodge, No. 63, 
at Iowa city, chartered Oct. 10,1 843 . 


The Grand Lodge of Illinois was erected April 6, 1840, at Jacksonville, by 
representatives of six lodges chartered or under dispensation as follows: 


No. 1— Bodley Lodge, No. 97, at Quincy, chartered Aug. 30, 1836, by Kentucky. No. 

2— Equality Lodge, No. 101, at Equality, chartered Aug. 29, 1837, by Kentucky. No. 

3— Harmony Lodge, No. 24, at Jacksonville, chartered Oct. 2, 1838, by Missouri. No. 

4— Springfield Lodge, No. 26, at Springfield, chartered Oct. 8, 1839, by Missouri. No. 

5— Far West Lodge, No. 29, at Galena, chartered Oct. 10, 1839, by Missouri. No. 6— 
Columbus Lodge, U. D., at Colunlbus, under dispensation from Missouri. 


The Grand Lodge of Missouri was erected April 24, 1 82 1 , at St. Louis, by 
representatives of three lodges all chartered by the Grand Lodge of Tennessee, viz: 



No. 1— Missouri Lodge, No. 12. at St. Louis, chartered Oct. 8, 1816. No. 2— Joachim 
Lodge, No. 25, at Herculaneum, chartered Oct. 5, 1819. No. 3— St. Charles Lodge, 
No. 28, at st. Charles, chartered Oct. 5, 1819. 


The Grand Lodge of Tennessee was erected Dec. 27, 1813, at Knoxville by 
representatives of nine lodges all chartered by the Grand Lodge of North Carolina, or 
perhaps more properly by the Grand Lodge of North Carolina and Tennessee. This 
was accomplished at the direction of and under orders from the Grand Master of the 
Grand Lodge of North Carolina. The following participated: 


No. 1— St. Tammany Lodge, No. 29, at Nashville, chartered Dec. 17, 1796. No. 2, 
Tennessee Lodge, No. 41, at Knoxville chartered Nov. 30, 1800. No. 3— Greenville 
Lodge, No. 43, at Greenville, chartered Dec. 11, 1801. No. 4-Newport Lodge, No. 

50, at Newport, chartered Dec. 5, 1806. No. 5— Overtor Lodge, No. 51, at Rogersville, 
chartered Nov. 21, 1807. No. 6-King Solomon Lodge, No. 52, at Gallatin, chartered 
Dec. 9 1808. No. 7— Hiram Lodge, No. 55, at Franklin, chartered Dec. 11, 1809. No. 
Cumberland Lodge, No. 60, at Nashville, chartered June 24, 1812. No. 9— Western 
star Lodge, No. 61 at Port Royal, chartered Nov. 21, 1812. The title Grand Lodge of 
North Carolina and Tennessee was assumed in 1801. 


The Grand Lodge of Kentucky was erected Oct. 16, 1800, at Lexington, by 
representatives of five lodges, all receiving authority from the Grand Lodge of 
Virginia. 


No. 1— Lexington Lodge, No. 25, at Lexington, chartered Nov. 17, 1788. No. 2, Paris 
Lodge, No. 35, at Paris, chartered Nov. 25, 1791. No. 3— Georgetown Lodge, No. 46, 
at Georgetown, chartered Nov. 29, 1796. No. 4— Hiram Lodge, No. 51 at Frankfort, 
chartered Dec. 11, 1799. No. 5— (Solomon) (Abraham) Lodge, U. D., at Shelbyville, 
under dispensation. 


The authority of the Grand Lodge of Colorado is thus traced in a regular manner and 
in a direct line to that of the Grand Lodges of Virginia and North Carolina. The 



establishment of Masonry in these and the other colonies is another story. Suffice it to 
say here that Masonry was established in North Carolina directly from the Grand 
Lodge of England in two lodges and then, through the appointment by the Grand 
Master of the Grand Lodge of England of Joseph Montfort as Provincial Grand 
Master for North Carolina, by the chartering by him of some nine or more lodges. 
After the Revolutionary War, these lodges, in 1787, threw off the English connection 
and erected the Grand Lodge of North Carolina as a sovereign Grand Lodge which 
functions to this day. 


Masonry was established in the Colony of Virginia independently by the Grand 
Lodges of England, Scotland and Ireland. No Provincial Grand Master ever 
functioned for Virginia, its lodges receiving charters from and reporting direct to the 
Mother Grand Lodges over seas. At the time of the Revolutionary War in 1778, nine 
of these lodges declared themselves independent and erected the Grand Lodge of 
Virginia. 


From this very small beginning of 52 members in three lodges at the time of the 
formation of the Grand Lodge of Colorado in 1861, the progress has been steady and 
very satisfactory. At the present time, according to the returns as of July 31, 1925, 
there are 31,159 members in 145 lodges, an average of 215 Masons to each lodge. 


GREAT NAMES ARE MENTIONED 


In every branch of human endeavor there are some names that stand out over and 
above the others, some names that are remembered for personal excellence or great 
activities while the names of the others are lost. Colorado Masonry has some such 
names, those of personages who have loomed large in Masonic affairs and whose 
names and deeds it is well to remember. 


The first great name in Colorado Masonry is that of its first Grand Master, John M. 
Chivington. Great, not because of being Grand Master, but great because he made it 
safe for people to come to Colorado and enjoy life. It is to Col. Chivington, who 



taught the Indian that the trails must be kept open for the white man to come and go 
in peace, that the honor goes. A minister of the church he was, but also a soldier, and 
one whom the Indian feared and respected. 


It is well to remember here at this time the name of Allyn Weston who gave us our 
Ritual, which Ritual stood the severe test of a frontier civilization. 


The next great name to remember is that of Henry M. Teller, for so many years Grand 
Master of Masons in Colorado, who carried the name of Colorado into high places as 
United states Senator and Cabinet Member, and whose ability carried the Craft 
through trying periods. 


The greatest Masonic project of our times, the George Washington Memorial 
Building now under construction at Alexandria, Virginia, is the result of a suggestion 
given to the Masonic world by a Grand Master of Colorado, Roger W. Woodbury. It 
was he who proposed a national memorial service for our first President, out of which 
came as a direct result the great memorial building. Thus the suggestion of our Grand 
Master was the inspiration for two of the greatest Masonic gatherings ever held in the 
United States. The first was the occasion of the centenary of the death of Washington, 
held at Mt. Vernon in 1899; the second was when the cornerstone of the Washington 
Memorial Building was laid. And no doubt the third and largest will be held when the 
building is completed and dedicated. 


Most of us have read that famous poem, "The Lodge Room Over Simpkins' store." 
Have we realized that its author, Lawrence N. Greenleaf, was recognized as the poet 
laureate of Freemasonry, that his fame as a Masonic poet was nation-wide? As Grand 
Master of Colorado, as editor, as writer of correspondence reviews, and in his many 
other activities he should be remembered by all Colorado Masons. 


One of the greatest Masonic students of the country wrought among us for many 
years and we are even yet slow to appreciate his greatness. Coming generations will 



read the works of Henry P. H. Bromwell and perhaps find the secrets that he tried to 
tell but which we of today are but beginning to suspect. 


But time presses, we must hurry on. We can but point out a few names here and there 
and trust the future biographer to tell the greatness of these Masons. There is E. LeN. 
Foster, who has given years and years of himself in the service of his brethren 
through the upbuilding of a Benevolent Fund. There is Robert D. Graham, student 
and probably the greatest Masonic lecturer on the platform today, who is proud to 
point to a Colorado lodge as his home. Great and wise Masons said that Uniformity of 
Work in the Ritual was impossible of accomplishment— yet it was accomplished and 
the one responsible for it was William W. Cooper, then Grand Fecturer and now 
Grand Secretary. The last name we shall propose for coming generations to 
remember, is that of the most loved of Colorado Masons of recent years, Charles H. 
Jacobson, for so many years Grand Secretary. 


These are by no means all the great names produced by Colorado Masonry but rather 
just a few, a few who will never be forgotten. Nearly every lodge can tell of men 
whose activities are worth recording yet who worked in the comparative quiet of their 
own communities, satisfied that their fame should travel no farther. 


THE ROY AT ARCH IS ORGANIZED 


With the coming of the parent body of Ancient Craft Masonry to Colorado, came also 
the concordant orders of Royal Arch Capitular Masonry, Royal and Select Cryptic 
Masonry, Knight Templarism, and the Scottish Rite. Unlike the lodge system these 
other bodies are governed by national organizations; and original jurisdiction is 
maintained over all territory not served by a state body of that Rite. These central 
national bodies had been in existence many years before Colorado was made into a 
territory and naturally they claimed jurisdiction there. In a new state these bodies are 
generally established in regular order. First comes the lodge, then the Royal Arch 
chapter, then the commandery of Knight Templar, and finally the council of Royal 
and Select Masters. The Scottish Rite may be established at any place in the series 
when there are sufficient members to justify it. 



We have seen that the Grand Lodge was established in 1861. We next see that the 
Royal Arch appeared as early as 1863. As exclusive jurisdiction over Colorado 
territory was held in the General Grand Chapter it was to this body that petition must 
be made for the establishment of chapters of Royal Arch Masonry. Dispensations 
were issued by the General Grand High Priest at various times for the formation of 
five chapters in Colorado and each temporary organization was perfected into a 
chartered chapter in due time. In this way regular authority was given to five chapters 
located as follows: 


At Central City and numbered 1 " Denver City " " 2 " Pueblo " " 3 " 
Georgetown " " 4 " Golden " " 5 


In 1 872, while there were but three chapters chartered, an effort was made to form a 
Grand Chapter, but due to one of the chapters declining to take part nothing came of 
it. At this time a suggestion was made that the three chapters in Colorado and the two 
chapters in Wyoming combine to form a Grand Chapter, but this movement was over- 
ruled by the General Grand High Priest as not being possible under the laws of the 
General Grand Chapter. 


Under the date of April 22, 1875, the General Grand High Priest gave his consent to 
the formation of a Grand Chapter in Colorado. Representatives of the five chapters 
met in convention on May 11, 1875, and perfected the organization of the Grand 
Royal Arch Chapter of Colorado on that day with five chapters and 282 members. 
This meeting was held in the Fink Block, comer of 15th and Holladay (now Market) 
streets, Denver, Colorado. Wm. N. Byers, of Denver city, was elected Grand High 
Priest, and Ed. C. Parmelee, of Georgetown, as Grand Secretary. This branch of 
Masonry has advanced steadily from 5 chapters averaging 56 members each in 1875, 
to 51 chapters with 8064 members, an average of 158, as of July 31, 1925. 


For the benefit of the student the following table is submitted of the data as they 
appear in the records of the General Grand Chapter: 



Date of Date of Chapter No. dispensation Charter Central City, No. 

1. .March 23, 1863 Sept 8, 1865 Denver, No. 2 April 1863 Sept 8, 1865 

Pueblo, No. 3 May 24, 1871 Sept. 20, 1871 Georgetown, No. 4 Aug. 12, 

1872 Nov. 15, 1874 Golden, No. 6 Dec. 8, 1873 Nov. 25, 1874 


All participated in the formation of the Grand Chapter of Colorado May 14, 1875. 


KNIGHT TEMPLARISM IS ESTABLISHED 


Knight Templarism first appeared in 1875, as is evidenced by a dispensation issued to 
members at Denver City under the date of Jan. 13, 1866, by the Grand Master of 
Knights Templar of the U.S.A. to form a commandery there. Following this, under 
date of Nov. 8, 1866, a dispensation was issued, authorizing the members at Central 
City to form a commandery. Eight years elapsed and the next dispensation was issued 
Aug. 17, 1874, for the formation of a commandery at Pueblo. There being now three 
commanderies in Colorado it was deemed wise and proper that a Grand Commandery 
should be formed. Sanction was given by Grand Master J. H. Hopkins on Feb. 10, 
1876, and the representatives met by agreement at Denver on the following day. On 
March 14, 1876, the Grand Commandery of Colorado was established. The first 
Grand Commander was Henry M. Teller, and the first Grand Recorder was Ed. C. 
Parmelee. From the small beginning in 1876 of three commanderies with an average 
of 42 members, progression has been steady to the present count as of July 31, 1925, 
of 36 commanderies with 4771 members, an average of 133 members each. 


CRYPTIC MASONRY IS ESTABLISHED 



Cryptic Masonry first made its appearance in Central city in 1871, when the Grand 
Master of the Grand Council of Illinois issued a dispensation under date of Nov. 9, 
1871, to several Companions to form a council there. The charter was granted Oct. 
23, 1872, as Central city Council, No. 54, on the Illinois register. This council 
continued with varying success until 1875, when it ceased to function. Nothing 
further was done until 1891, when through the efforts of Companions J.C. Johnston 
and Henry Dowson the Cryptic Masons of Dever were gathered together to form a 
council. A dispensation was issued by the General Grand Master under date of Jan. 
16, 1892, to 23 members to institute Denver Council, No. 1. The charter was granted 
by the General Grand Council, Oct. 26, 1894, to 93 members. In rapid succession 
dispensations were issued and charters granted establishing councils in Trinidad, 
Durango, Pueblo, Canon city, Akron, and Gunnison. The latter two, however, were 
not constituted, having failed to complete their organization. 


A convention was called according to agreement to meet in Denver on Dec. 6, 1894, 
for the purpose of organizing a Grand Council. There were represented at this 
convention Denver Council, No. 1, of Denver; Rocky Mountain, No. 2, of Trinidad; 
Durango, No. 3, of Durango; Akron, No. 4, of Akron; Canon city, No. 5, of Canon 
city; and Pueblo, No. 6, of Pueblo. The charter of Akron Council had not arrived at 
this time but, by vote, its delegate was seated as regular. Organization was perfected 
and the Grand Council of Colorado erected in form on this date, Dec. 6, 1894. A 
disagreement arose between the new Grand Council and the General Grand Council 
over the manner and form of the organization of the Grand Council of Colorado. This 
condition existed until July 30, 1898, when all differences were adjusted and the 
Grand Council cf Colorado became a full member of the family of the General Grand 
Council of the United States. 


From the start of 5 councils with 191 members, or an average of 38, progression has 
been slow but steady until at the present time, July 31, 1925, there are 14 councils 
with 2454 members, an average of 175 to each council. 


THE SCOTTISH RITE IS ESTABLISHED 



About the time that the chapter and the commandery were being established, those 
interested in the Scottish Rite began the agitation for the introduction of that branch. 
The idea is generally prevalent among nonMasons that the Scottish Rite is one branch 
of Masonry in which a Mason receives at one time all the degrees from the 4th to the 
32nd, inclusive. As a matter of fact this Rite is composed of several bodies, separate 
and distinct, yet all reporting to one common body. These bodies are known as: 


The Lodge of Perfection, conferring the degrees of 4th to 14th, inclusive. 


The Chapter of Rose Croix, conferring the degrees of 15th to 18th, inclusive. The 
Council of Kadosh, conferring the degrees of 19th to 30th, inclusive. 


The Consistory, conferring the degrees of 31st and 32nd. 


The Scottish Rite is administered in the united States in two jurisdictions, the 
Northern with headquarters at New York C ity, and the Southern with headquarters at 
Washington, D. C. Colorado is in the Southern Jurisdiction. 


The first body of this Rite to be established in Colorado was the Delta Lodge of 
Perfection, chartered Jan. 26, 1877, followed by the Mackey Chapter of Rose Croix, 
chartered April 11, 1878. For ten years there were the only bodies chartered, but the 
degrees beyond the 18th were made available by "Communication", this ceremony 
being generally performed by the representative of the national body, who at that time 
was Bro. L. N. Greenleaf. 


Denver Council of Kadosh received its charter Sept. 3, 1888, followed very shortly by 
Colorado Consistory, on Oct. 17, 1888. Colorado now had its full complement of 
Scottish Rite bodies. These four bodies were all numbered 1 and located in Denver. In 
1918 a second series of bodies of this Rite were chartered in Denver, and in 1919 a 
third series in Pueblo. The first returns available for Colorado Consistory for 1889, 



show 53 members; while the latest returns as of Dec. 31, 1893, show 5368 members 
for the three consistories . 

— o — 

"Shall I ask the brave soldier, who fights by my side 
In the cause of mankind, if our creeds agree? 

Shall I give up the friend I have valued and tried 
If he kneel not before the same altar with me? 

From the heretic girl of my soul should I fly, 

To seek somewhere else a more orthodox kiss? 

No, perish the hearts, and the laws that try 
Truth, valor, or love, by a standard like this!" 

—Tom Moore. 


— o — 


THE ATTACKS ON FREEMASONRY IN AUSTRIA BY BRO. THEODOR HILM, 
AUSTRIA 


CONDITIONS in Austria in recent years have been of much interest to Freemasons, 
but little has been permitted to become known because of the necessity for extreme 
secrecy as to membership, even to the adoption of Masonic names by members of the 



Craft— aliases as it were— that their true identity might not become known to those 
interested in creating difficulties for the Institution. In this brief article some little 
light is thrown on some of the conditions prevailing in that country and also on the 
work which zealous members of the Craft are accomplishing. 


IT seems to be an endless campaign, the fight of the day with the night, of the good 
with the evil, of the truth with the lie. Where are the stronger forces? Where shall lie 
the victory ? The millennium, when Christ will reign and Satan shall be bound, is it 
still far away? Are the efforts of those who are striving onwards and upwards, are 
they in vain ? Is it a natural law that when the glory of the light has ended, the forces 
of the darkness will begin to act? Will those who bear the light, will they make it 
shine, all powerful, omnipotent, or will they stumble and fall and extinguish the 
flame? 


Unity is strength. This has always proved true; it is of greater importance now than 
ever before. Masonry today is almost divided into two camps, Anglo Saxon and 
Latin, but the battle it has to fight is the same all the world over, as it meets with the 
same type of opponents. Does that not mean preparing the way for the enemy? Or are 
there hidden influences? Divide et impera, divide and govern, a stratagem of ancient 
Rome— has Rome ever forgotten it ? Parts are more easily defeated than is the whole. 
Hungary and Italy are good examples. Who is to come next? 


There is a singular coincidence in the ways of war. The same kinds of soldiers are 
used, national troops on business, Field Marshals, like Mussolini, visible to all eyes, 
commanding. The wise General Staff in the background gives the necessary 
directions. And Mussolinis, small and tall, appear everywhere. Austria has her share, 
though there is paper war only. Michl, an Austrian Pan-German, is accusing us as 
originators of the World War, of the murder in Sarajevo. His recent voluminous 
pamphlet has been much noticed in Austria and Germany and has found a wide circle 
of believers. Numerous attacks have followed. The most important perhaps, and of 
more recent date-where the General Staff even appeared on the scene-was an article 
in the "Reichspost," the official paper of the Roman Catholic party, the mightiest in 
Austria. 



This article, which appeared on April 4, 1925, is entitled "The Secret Brothers." It 
tells first of the successes of Freemasonry in Austria, how the Viennese Grand Lodge, 
founded Dec. 18, 1918, with fourteen lodges and a thousand members, shows today 
sixteen lodges and 1500 members and is principally interested in educational 
problems. This, it says, it leams from the Narodny Listy, a leading Prague journal, 
while the Viennese Press, where the lodges have widespread connections and wield a 
power as never before, does not speak about these successes. The article says it is as 
if the lodges did not exist and did not have influence in every form of local 
government and legislation. The Press is silent, it says, hiding by this silence the 
proceedings which go on behind closely drawn curtains, concealed from the eyes of 
the mortals which do not belong to the secret fraternity. 


In the general turnover after the war the lodges succeeded in getting official 
acknowledgment, according to this writer, for at that time nothing appeared so urgent 
in legislation as to grant this permission. To speak the truth, the article says, the 
lodges had never had great troubles before for, disguised as humanitarian 
associations, they were doing their work and their members were only obliged to go 
to the near Pressburg for the ritualistic assemblies. Now, having free course, says the 
writer, it was presumed they would come out of their secret corners and tell the world 
what they had to say, what gifts they had to bestow on mankind. 


But things happened differently, according to the article in question. A festival 
meeting was held on the first of June, 1919, in the palace of Archduke Ludwig 
Viktor— a great triumph, with 600 brethren present, all in Masonic clothing. "Now we 
are trusting the future," an orator declared. "If we have been taken until now as some 
kind of valets of the King of Hungary, as mere harmless, peaceful dreamers, what an 
error, we are not quite so harmless. Now the way is free, as there are kings no more." 
In the same meeting the Grand Master proclaimed: "Now a real Masonic activity will 
begin !" Nevertheless, the "Reichspost" says it is hidden, the brothers disguised as 
philanthropists, as popular educators and orators, acting in a hundred changing forms, 
always one aim in view which they are concealing now just as they did then. They 
are not mere dreamers, the article asserts. "Masonry intends and will bring war ! " 


And thus the article goes on, accusing us as antagonists of Christendom, of religious 
education, as promotors of dangerous school reforms. The 1500 brothers, it says, in 



sixteen lodges, is a small number, but the number does not make it. This secret 
society, which wants to stay secret in the full freedom it has been granted, does not 
boast itself in sumptuous temple buildings like their American brethren, but has a 
predominating influence in a very powerful political party, according to the 
"Reichspost," while the social democratic Austrian workman has become its 
plaything. The real leaders of the workmen are losing their power under the sway of 
Freemasonry, it declares, adding that one of the most important political facts is 
found in the influence of an uncontrollable international secret society on Austrian 
socialism which, it says, must seriously be taken into account. 


The article was reprinted in full in the "wiener Freimaurer Zeitung," of April, 1925, as 
it supplied a welcome occasion to show that erroneous opinions prevail in many 
quarters. As a reply it was stated that Grand Lodge has by no means to shun the light 
of the day, that it is quite unpolitical, that it has none of the alleged aims in view, that 
it has nothing to do with government or legislation. 


There is only one idea which the Grand Lodge is eager to serve, and that is the idea of 
peace, mutual understanding and reconciliation. On numerous occasions Grand 
Lodge has openly and repeatedly declared its principles, and in the six years of its life 
has supported officially many institutions for the furtherance of peace. It was 
specially active in propagating the Pan-European idea as a means to enable the 
League of Nations to become more efficient than it is at present and in this way to 
seek permanent peace on this continent. With regard to our alleged attacks on religion 
and education it remains to be said that the lodges are formally and conscientiously 
bound by the "Ancient Charges" which form an essential part of our Constitution. The 
lodges have among their members adherents of many parties, conservatives and 
progressionists, and this being the case, it is not true that they could decisively 
influence a political party. 


In the writer's opinion the continual attacks are very much to be deprecated, as we are 
rapidly approaching a new state of things, a new age, and the occasion will need the 
co-operation of all forces which could serve the public weal. Of course, if our 
aspirations are intentionally misunderstood, we can do nothing more than strictly 
follow the way marked out by the principles of our Order and patiently endure the 
assaults from whatever side they may come. 



o 


EDITORIAL. 


R. J. MEEKREN Editor-in-Charge 


BOARD OF EDITORS 

LOUIS BLOCK, Iowa 
ROBERT L. CLEGG, Ohio 
GILBERT W. DAYNES, England 
RAY V. DENSLOW, Missouri 
GEORGE H. DERN, Utah 
N.W.J. HAYDON, Canada 
R.V. Harris, Canada 
C. C. HUNT, Iowa 
CHARLES F. IRWIN. Ohio 
A.L. KRESS, Pennsylvania 
F.H. LITTKLEFIELD, Missouri 
JOSEPH E. MORCOMBE, California 
JOSEPH FORT NEWTON, New York 



ARTHUR C. PARKER, New York 
JESSE M. WHITED, California 
DAVID E. W. WILLIAMSON, Nevada 


WHY? 


IT is rather quaint that at this late day in the greatest and most civilized country in the 
world, particularly remarkable (neglecting aeroplanes, gramophones, jazz, wireless, 
evolution, etc.) for the enormous number of daily papers and magazines that are 
published and the still more enormous number of people who read them, that an 
editor should have to rise up and remark that he disclaims all official responsibility 
for the opinions of his contributors. The primary function of THE Builder, the one for 
which it was started and to which it has always remained steadfast, is to provide 
members of the N. M. R. S., and the Craft at large, with accurate and trustworthy 
information about Masonic subjects. Some subjects are controversial and in these 
cases the only possibility is to present both sides of the question as brethren able to do 
so can be prevailed upon to write about them The fear of truth and knowledge, even 
knowledge about the other side, is certainly not Masonic. 


* * * 


WHAT DOES IT STAND FOR? 


A the present time a great many Masons are asking the question "What does 
Freemasonry stand for as an Institution?" Also it would be useless to ignore the fact 
that many brethren think it ought to stand for something - that it ought to advocate 
patriotism or public schools or Americanization or law enforcement. Well-intentioned 
brethren say, "What is it good for if it doesn't stand for something - if it doesn't take a 
stand for something?" Not perhaps in these words or exactly by the same mental 
steps. Many pass from an idea that is legitimate to one that is not; from a conception 



of what Masonry is, or at least should be, to one which is quite foreign to its spirit and 
intent. 


How is this to be judged? To give a concrete example, it is quite within the bounds of 
Masonry's traditional functions for a Grand Lodge to build a home or a hospital or a 
school, and endow or maintain it. It would be, we think, though perhaps some would 
disagree, quite proper for a lodge to maintain a bed in a local hospital, to assist 
deserving young people with the expenses say of going to college, to contribute to the 
relief of families in poverty or other distress - without any Masonic claim on the part 
of the recipients of the benevolent or charitable action. But on the other hand it would 
not be proper for a Grand Lodge to recommend the building of a hospital or the 
founding of a university by the state or city, and still less so for it to consider ways 
and means by which a State Legislature or City Council could be induced to 
undertake such projects, or the people led to support a demand for them, however 
laudable the proposals might be in themselves. 


From this illustration a principle emerges quite clearly. Any action which is wholly 
confined to the Order, over which it has complete control and which remains entirely 
due to its own volition, and within its own hands, and which is also, of course, in 
conformity with the tenets of the Institution, is legitimate. But as soon as such action 
involves the consent or cooperation of the community at large, or sections of the 
community, it becomes illegitimate. No matter how laudable a proposal may be, no 
matter how necessary it may seem, if it be one requiring the action of the community 
as a whole, or in the persons of their constitutional representatives, it becomes a 
political question. It is a political question even if the majority in the community were 
overwhelmingly in favor of it, even if opposition to it be quite non-existent. The mere 
fact that it involves political action in Council chambers or legislative halls, or even 
that it requires the support of non-Masons, puts it outside the class of things in which 
Freemasonry can act as an Institution, and into that other class in which Masons must 
act! or refrain from acting, as individuals, and each according to his own opinion and 
conscience. 


But it will be worth while to consider the matter further, and ask the question what 
the true function and purpose of Freemasonry really is. In. a large measure Bros. 
Shepherd and Dem have answered the question in their brief but pithy articles that 



appear in the present issue of THE BUILDER. That they have approached the 
question from the opposite standpoints of the affirmative and negative has not 
prevented them from reaching essentially the same conclusions. Masonry is an 
association of Masons, and its function is primarily just that, to enable Masons to 
associate together, learn to know each other, help each other, teach and inspire each 
other. An institution of civil engineers, a learned society of students or scientists is 
founded and conducted on exactly the same principles, their particular functions, the 
reason for their existence, is to afford means for an interchange of ideas and 
information. An association of master-builders does not bid for contracts as such, 
neither does a society of architects enter a competition for the design of some great 
building. In each case individual members compete or bid, yet no one thinks or says 
that their organization has no use. Freemasonry is symbolically a society of architects 
and builders engaged in erecting spiritual habitations; the Great Architect has charge 
of the Temple. It is Freemasonry's function as an Institution to teach the Apprentice 
and train the Craftsman - but the work is done by each individually as he finds 
employment in the world. 


* * * 


LEADERS OF THE BLIND 


DR. WILLIAM F. KUHN, whose death was such a great loss to the American Craft, 
was responsible for the following clever parody of a well-known definition of 
Freemasonry. He said that to many Masons it was apparently "a beautiful system of 
gymnastics illustrated by signs, steps, grips and words." 


It would be quite possible to take this seriously and give it a meaning quite other than 
its apparent one - the one intended. For gymnastics properly mean education as a 
whole, not merely physical training, the ordinary meaning in colloquial English, and 
Masonic education is symbolically illustrated by steps and signs and words, when the 
inquiring Craftsman begins to look beloved the surface. But of course what Bro. 

Kuhn wished to emphasize was that in so many lodges no one ever did look below the 
surface, and his adaptation of the traditional formula was intended as an ironical 



rebuke to those ritualists who are also literalists and have not perceived that the letter 
alone killeth, that the meaning, the spirit, alone maketh alive. 


Louis Block, Past Grand Master of Iowa, is responsible for the following anecdote: 


"Here is what actually happened not long since in a certain lodge not a thousand miles 
from here. The Grand Master was paying the lodge an official visit. He had been duly 
received and welcomed, conducted to the East, and seated beside a leading Past 
Master of the lodge. He returned the gavel to the Master of the lodge and the work 
proceeded. 


" 'Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth - ' 


"Said the G. M. in an undertone to the P. M.: 'Listen to this, for I want to ask you 
sortie questions.' 'All right.' . . . 'in the day when the keepers of the house shall 
tremble and the strong men shall bow themselves - ' 


"G. M. to P. M. 'What does that mean?' 


"P. M. to G. M. 'I don't know.' 


". . . 'and the almond tree shall flourish, and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and 
desire shall fail.' 


"G. M. to P. M. 'What does that mean?' 



"P. M. to G. M. (irritably) '1 don't know. I never did know! I haven't the slightest idea 
what any of it means!' 


"Many, many times he had recited it - many more he had heard it recited. Yet to him 
it meant no more than does a Latin prayer to a worshipper who knows no tongue but 
English. ..." 


If such ignorance, which in this case could have been so easily remedied - any public 
library would have the material, any clergyman could (we hope) have explained the 
passage - is to be found among the rulers of the Craft, whose duty primarily is to give 
instruction, what are we to expect of the rank and file ? 


But there is not only ignorance of the meaning of Masonic teaching and the truths 
underlying the symbols, but also of the legal and executive side of the Institution. To 
see the number of questions that are referred to our Grand Masters and their Deputies 
that could be answered at once by consulting the constitutions, the code or regulations 
of the jurisdiction, is enough to make one wonder if aspirants for office have the least 
idea of the qualifications they ought to possess. The fact of the matter probably is that 
the ritual bulks so large in lodge activities, and requires so much effort on the part of 
the average officer, that knowledge of the constitution and Masonic law, and even 
often enough the by-laws of his own lodge, is thrown into the shade, and simply 
forgotten. There are many Worshipful Masters, unfortunately, who hardly know how 
to put a motion properly and are quite unable to properly decide any point of order 
that may arise. And there are very many more who have no idea what the functions 
and prerogatives of the Master of a lodge really are, even in executive matters. It is 
most deplorable where such conditions exist, and shows the great need for the 
stimulation of a desire to learn more than the bare forms on the part of every Mason. 
Without that desire little improvement is to be looked for. 


* * * 


ALANSON B. SKINNER 



The following letter speaks for itself: 


I am attaching a news clipping from the Fargo Forum containing an account of Bro. 
Alanson B. Skinner's tragic death near Tokio, N. D., on Aug. 17. Bro. Skinner had a 
very interesting article in THE BUILDER several months ago and I later received a 
most interesting letter from him with reference to Masonry and the Chippewa- 
Ojibway tribe, or rather that was the subject discussed. 


I am sure that the country and Masonry has lost a most valuable citizen and brother 
through his untimely death. 


S. S. Hynes, North Dakota. 


From the clipping it appears that Bro. Skinner met his death in an automobile 
accident while engaged in prosecuting his archeological researches. From 1919 to 
1924 he had been employed by the American Museum of Natural History, and was 
Curator of the Milwaukee Station. His Masonic affiliations were also in Milwaukee 
At one time he was on the board of Associate Editors of THE BUILDER and it is 
with very great regret that we learn of his death. 


— o — 


What Is Symbolism? By BRO. R. J. MEEKREN 


A SUBJECT that perennially crops up among Masons whenever they are discussing 
the more serious aspects of the Institution is symbolism. It might well appear, judging 



by the flow of books and articles on the symbols and symbolic teaching of Masonry, 
that the subject must be worn quite threadbare, yet even a casual acquaintance with 
what has been written will show that this is not the case, indeed it will often appear 
that the would-be expositors are more in need of explanation than the symbols of 
which they treat. It would, therefore, seem that it might be better to attack the 
problem from a different angle, for a problem Masonic symbolism has certainly 
become. To adopt the words of Paul the Apostle, it is foolishness to some and to 
others a cause of stumbling and misapprehension. 


Mackey, whose explanations of Masonic symbolism, in spite of much that is 
questionable, are probably still the best and safest, speaks of a "Science of 
symbolism," and he would define Masonry as a "system of morality developed and 
inculcated by the science of symbolism." Strictly speaking, in the present day sense of 
the word, there is no such thing, and what it is proposed to do in the present article is 
to approach the subject from the strictly scientific point of view. 


Those who are at all acquainted with the story of the development of our modern 
science, the really great achievement of our civilization, are aware that the great 
strides that have been made in all directions in recent years have been in part due to 
the breaking down of the old water-tight compartments that separated one science 
from another. The comparative method has been the potent apparatus by which so 
much has been done in the latest investigations, especially in subjects dealing with 
man himself, individually and collectively. It fact, many subjects not long since 
regarded as quite insusceptible to scientific treatment have been elevated into 
sciences properly so-called through the application of this method alone. The 
problems of the different forms of religion among the various races and peoples of the 
earth have very largely been elucidated by comparing them together, and obscure 
survivals in one explained by cases where the custom or belief was still in full force. 
And later still much has been done by considering them in the light of psychology. 
Nothing is actually isolated in the world, we have to distinguish and separate, analyze 
and abstract, in order to deal with the raw material of knowledge, the multitudinous 
phenomena of the world around us. This is the only way in which we can deal with it, 
and our minds are formed innately and by habit to so function. But when this has 
been done, if we forget (as it is so very easy to do) that our subject, our generalization 
or abstraction, is intimately connected with other things at every point we lose all 
sense of balance and proportion, and what knowledge we have gained becomes in 



truth more or less falsified because we have lost the reality of its place and connection 
in relation to the whole. 


As an example, a very simple and obvious one we distinguish in our own bodies 
various members and organs. In this case we are not likely to forget the connection 
we are not likely to deem the hand an entity apart from the arm to which it belongs, or 
the brain that directs it according to sensations received by the eye or ear. But a 
mountain is as much a part of the earth as the hand is of the arm, or the earth part of 
the solar system. The abstract formulae of mathematics or chemistry are no more than 
representations of the normal, usual or habitual way in which things behave, as much 
so as when we generalize about our fellows in saying one is generous, or another 
irascible, or another virtuous. Usually we prefer to say, speaking of inanimate things, 
the invariable mode of action rather than habitual. But we cannot logically use this or 
like terms absolutely, for our knowledge is based on a quite limited amount of 
experience, and we are never likely to be able to demonstrate that there are not minute 
variations in the reactions of material objects. Human beings, and even animals, as 
individuals, show much variation, but in the mass can quite well be covered by cut 
and dried rules as statistical research has shown. So many individuals in a thousand 
will die in a certain time, so many will be born, so many get married and so on. It is 
true that the rates are variable from place to place and time to time, but we are dealing 
with groups of individuals all of whom are highly variable in themselves. If such 
groups can be so accounted for in useful fashion, if they exhibit a tendency to act as a 
whole according to a rule or law, much more will groups of individuals or units 
whose variations are very small, such as the supposititious systems of molecules that 
form the material objects of every-day life according to the accepted hypothesis of 
physical science. The point is that the tendency of thought is always to make absolute 
and invariable entities out of limited generalizations. We speak of justice, or fortitude, 
and immediately that principle of action or disposition of mind assumes a 
separateness and distinctiveness that it has not really got in itself. This is true all 
through the whole field of experience, from a boy's interest in batting averages to the 
business man's rules for disposing of routine matters in his office, from the infant's 
first distinctions of distance between the toy offered to it that it can grasp and the 
electric chandelier for which it reaches in vain, to the biologist's classifications of 
living organisms into groups and families and varieties. And so in dealing with 
Freemasonry, those who are seeking further light, once they have acquired the 
rudiments of the subject as taught in the lodge, can hardly have it too often impressed 
upon them, that Masonry cannot be understood fully as an isolated fact. Its history 
cannot be properly understood in ignorance of the secular history of the countries and 
communities in which it has appeared, its laws cannot be appreciated without 



reference to the science of jurisprudence in general, its objects, its raison d'etre must 
be interpreted in the light of social organization in general, and so too with regard to 
its symbols. 


THE MEANING OF THE WORD DISCUSSED 


As a first step it may be useful to see what the word symbol actually means. 

Generally of course everyone knows its signification, but the history of a word and its 
use often gives fresh light upon it. Webster's dictionary tells us it is "the sign or 
representation of something moral or intellectual by the images or properties of 
natural things," gives as synonyms, emblem, figure, type. A sentence from Samuel 
Taylor Coleridge is quoted in further elucidation: "A symbol is a sign included in the 
idea it represents— an actual chart chosen to represent the whole, or a lower form or 
species used as the representative of a higher in the same kind." It is also used in 
place of letter, or character, as in algebra and mathematics generally. 


The word itself is pure Greek, transliterated without any change but the dropping of 
the case ending. Symbolon. (the Greek letter "u" is usually represented by "y" in 
English) is "a sign by which a thing is known or inferred," it is used generally in 
Greek in the sense of sign, mark or token. Sumbola, symbols, in Greek, were the 
same thing as the Latin Tesserae hospitalis, pieces of bone, coins, or other objects 
broken in two, part being kept by each of two parties as a pledge and proof of 
friendship. In principle these were essentially the same thing as the medieval "tally," 
which was a piece of wood split in two, after various notches had been cut on it, as a 
mutual record of an account. Or the original form of cheque in which the paper was 
tom in two, the fitting together of the two pieces being a proof of its genuineness. The 
derived meanings of the word in Greek thus came to be the half of anything, a 
corresponding part, a ticket, a permit or license, a verbal signal, a watchword, any 
distinctive mark, such as the "Confession of faith" in the Christian Churches, or the 
outward sign of a conception or idea. 


An allied word Symbolaion had the meaning of "a mark or sign from which a 
conclusion is drawn" and came to be used for a covenant, contract or bond. Both of 



these words were derived from Symballein, which is literally "to throw together," a 
word used in very many ways, as to meet together, to fight. But among the secondary 
meanings are those of guess, conjecture, interpret, understand, compare, reckon, 
compute and agree upon. 


From all this we can see the line of development of meaning in this term, from things 
put together, compared together, to things taken as representing other things with 
which they have previously been put, compared or associated. There is nothing 
mystical, abstruse or far fetched about all this. It is a matter of every day usage. 
Limiting the meaning of the term in accord with ordinary usage, to objects or 
representations of objects, that are taken to mean some other thing or group of things 
not so easily described or depicted, we can still find plenty of symbols in every day 
use wherever we choose to turn. Some are very modern, as for example the 
trademarks of manufacturers, the badges of societies, and some very ancient, as the 
letters of the alphabet. As is well known the latter were in their origin pictures of 
actual objects, which were conventionalized into pictographs such as were many of 
the Egyptian hieroglyphs, and then by further simplification becoming ideograms, 
like the characters of Chinese writing. How far we should be justified in calling such 
designs, or graphs, symbols in the stricter sense above defined, is open to question, 
but when these characters ceased to be taken as representing an idea but were used to 
designate a specific soul, they certainly became symbolical. The letter "A" in Greek is 
Alpha, from the Semitic, Aleph, which meant ox. The original form of the letter was a 
drawing of a bull's head. In the course of transmission, after it had become purely 
symbolical, the letter got turned upside down. "B" is Beta in Greek, which is from the 
Semitic Beth, a house, and was originally an outline drawing of a house. 


This process, however, does not altogether fit the definition given by Coleridge, as 
here we have the greater representing the less, instead of the reverse, as he postulates. 
Yet though the sound of the letter "A" is a simpler and a lesser thing than Aleph, the 
ox, of which it is the first phonetic element, yet as a whole the use of alphabetic 
writing is an enormous advance on pictographic or ideographic. In any case whether 
the meaning ascends or descends the principle of using one thing to stand for another 
is the same. 


SYMBOLS ARE NOT OBSOLETE 



Modern symbolical devices, such as the use of a wheel in design for the badge of an 
automobile association, of a wing to represent an aviator, or a word made up of the 
initial letters of the full name of a firm or company, all these are too much in evidence 
to need more than a bare notice in passing. Arbitrary designs or trademarks would 
not, in the restricted sense, properly be called symbols, but rather emblems or tokens 
(in the general sense), though whether there are many such things as purely arbitrary 
marks or devices is doubtful. In the minds of those who adopt them there is usually 
some connection or association that would tend to bring them into the class of 
symbols properly so-called. And here we reach the psychologic aspect of the subject. 
Though by usage we limit the word symbol to an actual object, or the representation 
of an object visible and tangible (or at the least a reference in words to such an object 
as being real and actual) which is taken to mean something else, yet we must not 
allow ourselves to be led to isolate the process of symbolizing from the other mental 
processes or modes of expression in which one thing is compared or associated with 
another and then used to represent, describe or suggest it. Such rhetorical devices for 
example as metaphor, simile, allegory and like figures and modes of speech are 
psychologically exactly the same kind of thing as symbols. 


WORDS ARE SYMBOLS 


As a matter of fact, many, perhaps the majority of words are the fossilized relics of 
forgotten analogies, metaphors and symbolisms. For example, take the word cylinder, 
which to most men will at once recall an essential part of an engine. It is derived from 
a root meaning to roll, and from that root was named a form of solid that would easily 
roll, a roller that is. This is perhaps a secondary development, but let us take the word 
pipe, which probably makes most people think of another mechanical artifact, a 
hollow piece of metal usually. The root of this word is the same as that of "peep," a 
chirping or whistling noise. This is itself probably onomatopoeic, that is, derived 
from a conventionalized spoken reproduction of the kind of sound intended. From 
this it is applied to a musical instrument devised to make such sounds, such as the 
flute, whistle, or panpipes, and as these were all essentially pieces of wood, metal or 
other material with hollow ducts, the word finally comes to mean such objects for 
whatever purpose formed. Take another word at random, the word "attend" will do. A 
meaning that will perhaps first occur to mind is that of being "present at," not 
however just being present somewhere, but at a special kind of occasion, nearly 



always implying the presence of other people as well. The root of the word means 
simply to stretch. From mechanical or physical stretching it is applied metaphorically 
to a stretching or tension of the mind, to pay attention to something. From this it 
passes to the sense in which one gives attention to another person, as a physician 
attends his patient, and from that to attending a meeting, or a church service where 
attention will be given to the proceedings. This sort of thing could be illustrated from 
half the words that might be found in the pages of a dictionary, and very likely if we 
knew more of ultimate derivations from the great majority of words in all languages. 
Figurative and symbolical language is especially the province of the poet and orator, 
but every metaphor and simile, even of the most commonplace character and used by 
most matter-of-fact people, is of the same kind thing. Either original or secondhand 
symbols are our counters of conversation, and even in the driest and most precise of 
technicalities may be traced what originally were fresh and poetic comparisons and 
analogies. Except for an irreducible minimum of purely imitative word is probably 
the most of our words were thus formed, and even the former really follow the same 
principle, as to imitate a bird's note, a dog's barking, a cow's lowing, brings those 
creatures to mind, the characteristic call or cry of each standing as a representative of 
the individual. Some words in use among us are patently thus originated— as the 
names of a chickadee and bob-o-link and whippoorwill. 


SYMBOLISM BASED ON ASSOCIATION OF IDEAS 


Indeed the principle thus seen to be the underlying ground of symbolism is possibly 
the characteristic mode of operation of our minds. Some psychologists have referred 
all thinking to the association of ideas. This as a theory is probably not now very 
widely accepted, but it, does undoubtedly have a large place in our mental processes 
and it includes the kind of comparison that we are specifically dealing with. Psycho- 
analysts would have us believe, not without considerable warrant in fact, that we are 
all of us symbolists without knowing it, that our dreams are elaborate and intricate 
systems of symbols representing unconscious and repressed tendencies and wishes. 
Whatever judgment may be passed on this theory such explanations it least again bear 
witness to the universality of the principles involved, for even if they import a 
symbolic meaning into phenomena in which it really does not exist, it at least is an 
instance of the faculty of symbolizing, of setting one thing to mean another. 



The net result then of this preliminary survey is to show that the use of symbols is a 
normal resource of humanity in the expression or recording of thoughts and ideas. If 
this be so why is it that so many are moved to impatience and even disgust with the 
elaborate symbolical explications of Masonry that form such a considerable part of 
the literature of the Craft? This is a question that could only be fully answered in 
detail, but in general this aversion and impatience are probably very frequently due to 
a feeling that these intricate systems are either not true, or if true are of no 
importance. Such an impression is, we must confess, in many cases more than 
justified. But the fault lies not with the employment of symbols but with the manner 
or purpose of their employment. We do not quarrel with language or condemn its use 
because some people tell us lies, or others bore us with uninteresting relations of 
unimportant events. The fundamental trouble with most of the elaborate 
interpretations of Masonic symbols is that their authors have tried to read something 
into Craft teaching that was not properly there. Perhaps it is not quite accurate to say 
properly there. It was Adam Weishaupt who said in defense of his system that no one 
had propounded an explanation of Masonry or an account of its object that received 
the consent of anyone else and that in such a confusion of opinions he felt quite 
justified in adding another. The truth must be confessed that Masons have never been 
agreed just what the teaching of Masonry really is, or perhaps more accurately, what 
it should be; and every would-be Masonic prophet and teacher has assumed, or 
attempted to give the impression, that his explanation was the original and authentic 
one, and was concealed in the symbols of the Fraternity by the mythical sages who 
founded it. 


THE POWER OF SYMBOLS 


However, these brothers are not to be condemned without deliberation; the ground of 
their offending may turn out to be a trivial matter, or one of detail only. One of the 
essentials of symbolism, of metaphor and simile, is suggestiveness, which means, 
worked out in fact, that everyone has suggested to him not wholly what the speaker or 
teacher has in mind, but largely what he has of his own to bring to its interpretation. 

In technical language, and most of our everyday language is the same kind as what is 
strictly called technical, suggestiveness, vagueness, is as far as possible eliminated. 
When a surgeon speaks of making an incision, or of the articulation of a joint, though 
the words were originally figurative, in usage they have come to designate very 
definite ideas. So when the mechanic speaks of a rivet, a bolt and nut, or the exhaust 
of an engine; again all these words were originally applied figuratively but 



understood very precisely. So also in such everyday words and phrases as eating, 
getting up, cutting, and hundreds of others, the meanings are so clearly defined that 
we all probably have about the same mental reaction to them, that is, they have the 
same import to the hearer as to the speaker. But when one describes the heat of 
summer, and says the "air in the streets was like the blast of a furnace," we all realize 
that he means it was very hot, but we all picture it differently according to our own 
experience. One who knows furnaces will conceive it differently from one who 
knows only the kitchen fire. 


It would be easy to select scores of illustrations from literature of this kind of thing. 
Certain metaphors become fashionable, and then they start on the downward path, 
and may eventually desiccate into technicalities. In general it is unsafe for anyone to 
use a figure or a symbol that is out of his own experience, the chances are a thousand 
to one he will not get it quite right. That has been one great fault of many writers on 
Masonic subjects. They have attempted to develop the allegorical use of Craft 
symbols with no knowledge of operative Craft technique; as, for instance, when 
Mackey speaks of the squaring of stones being less skilled work than that of setting 
them and therefore left to the apprentices, whereas in fact it is rather the reverse. It is 
easily seen that here he was constructing a supposed technical fact out of the 
allocation of working tools to the three degrees in Speculative Masonry. Some such 
errors are even to be found in our rituals, as where in one degree something is said to 
be done "on the point of the chisel under the pressure of the mallet." This almost 
reminds one of the famous definition of a crab, that it is a red fish that walks 
backward. A chisel is a tool with an edge not a point, and a mallet gives rather an 
impact than a pressure. 


This kind of mistake is more likely however to be made in the secondary 
development of a symbol or group of symbols than in the original choice, and for a 
good reason. A symbol or emblem (we are still using the words in their widest sense) 
is first adopted to express some idea, and to express it intelligibly; for by this time it 
should be clear that the primary function of symbolism is to express, to reveal, not to 
conceal. Medieval craftsmen were at one in this with Greek sculptors and primitive 
picture writers. One universal kind, that in a restricted sense might not be allowed the 
name symbol, is the attribute. An object which serves as a label. For instance a statue 
of a woman with a bow and quiver is Artemis, with spear and helmet probably 
Athene. A naked man with a harp is Apollo, with club and lionskin Hercules. So the 
Medieval artist put in the wheel of St. Catherine, the lamb of St. Agnes, the keys of 



St. Peter. This is quite elementary and due to simple association of such objects in the 
story of the person represented, but it leads on to the symbolic representation of 
abstract ideas. Before the writer lies a plate showing insignia adopted for the Army of 
the United States. For the medical service is a winged staff with serpents twined 
round it— the attribute of Aesculapius, the god of healing. For foreign service is a 
partial view of the statue of Liberty, for the musical service a conventional lyre, for 
the engineers a castle, for aviation a perspective outline of a flying plane. This last 
and several others not mentioned are on the first or pictographic level merely. The 
second of those mentioned suggests that those who have been on foreign service will 
have seen the statue of Liberty. The castle of the engineers represents one of their 
chief functions, the designing of protective works. We see in this modem instance a 
great variety of reason for adopting the specific designs, and this has always been the 
case. The choice of an emblem or symbol is due very largely to accidental 
circumstances, which also accounts for the fact that the same object can represent 
different ideas, as the anchor is the badge of naval service and also an emblem of 
hope. And on the other hand the same idea can be symbolized in many different 
ways. We may have an inflamed heart for charity, or a woman caring for little 
children. A torch or a lamp or a book may represent knowledge. The torch again may 
mean truth. Justice is represented by the balance, and also by the sword. The one 
thing is that there should be some direct or indirect association that gives an 
intelligible and natural connection between the thing represented and the object 
representing it. This, of course, is contrary to the received doctrine that symbols were 
chosen to conceal secret doctrines from all but the initiated. That they have never 
been used in this way would, of course, be going too far. But even here the general 
rule holds good? the symbol must be obvious in meaning to those in the secret. The 
appropriateness of a symbol depends on a common experience. The pictographic 
aeroplane is obvious in meaning to all of us today. The more subtle symbol of the 
statue of Liberty would be clear on reflection to most Americans, but might be very 
obscure or unintelligible to people in other countries. The staff of Aesculapius 
requires a knowledge of ancient mythology to appreciate fully, though it of course has 
become almost as conventional as the letters of the alphabet. 


The symbol then is intelligible naturally and obviously to the group with the same 
kind of experience as the one who chooses it. If the early Christians used the fish as a 
secret sign it was obvious to them, it had references to baptism as well as representing 
in a kind of picture puzzle a confession of faith. Jesus Christ the son of God, the 
Saviour. For the initials of this phrase in Greek, Iesous Christos Theou Uios Soter, 
spell Iethus, the word for fish. The drawing of a fish therefore became at once a 
symbol of the faith and a token of recognition. 



The conclusions then that we must come to are that Masonic symbolism, in the first 
place, is no mystical or abstruse thing apart from everyday life, but rather quite 
normal and inevitable; and secondly that the primary meaning of these symbols is an 
obvious one so long as we keep in touch with reality. It may not be always obvious to 
the uninitiated because he has not had the same experience. It may not always be 
obvious to the uninstructed Mason because the original fitness of the choice may have 
lain in a state of affairs now passed away. To understand such as these wider 
knowledge is required parallel to that necessary for the full explanation of the badge 
of the medical service, or how "B" came to represent a certain consonant. But after 
this it must be remembered that the advantage of symbolism is in suggestiveness, and 
that everyone brings some new element to its interpretation, every one if he looks can 
see some new shade of meaning. For those who like definite statements we can 
conclude by saying that the primary, simple and obvious meaning is the authoritative 
and authentic one, so far as these qualifying words apply, but that any meaning the 
individual can find for himself is also just as legitimate so long as it is in accord with 
the primary significance. 


NOTES AND REFERENCES 


For the purely Masonic aspect of the subject Mackey's Symbolism of Masonry and 
Haywood's Symbolical Masonry are recommended. The latter work is the result of 
two years intensive research in which about everything ever written on the subject 
was examined. Mackey's Encyclopedia also has much on the subject under 
appropriate headings. 


The psychological aspect has been extensively discussed in recent years by the 
psycho-analytic school. Dreams and Myths by K. Abraham, Dreams and Totem and 
Taboo by Freud, the originator of the method, and a Brief Outline of the Freudian 
Theory by Barbara Low. Readers are, however, warned that they may find much in 
books on this subject to repel them. 



On characters and symbols used in writing, the article on alphabets in the 
Encyclopedia Britannica may be consulted. Of modern symbols there is a useful list 
in Symbolism for Artists by H.T. Bailey and Ethel Pool. 


On the symbolism of primitive magic Tyler's Primitive Culture and Frazer's Golden 
Bough will be found useful as an introduction to the subject, more especially as they 
are written with quite other purposes in view. 


QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION What is a symbol? On what principle are symbols 
chosen? How and by whom are they selected and why are they employed? Is 
symbolism as a means of expression obsolete? What is it real function? 


— o — 


THE LIBRARY 


A "VADE MECUM" 


THE KEYS OF FREEMASONRY. By Charles E. Green. Published by R. S. 
Sampson, Perth, Australia. May be purchased through the National Masonic Research 
Society Book Department, 1950 Railway Exchange, St. Louis, Mo. Cloth, illustrated, 
index, 163 pages. Price, postpaid, $2.00. 


THE author states in the preface that much contained in his book was first given in 
the form of lectures and addresses delivered in various places in Western Australia, 
but this would not have been evident from a perusal of the work itself, as in many 
similar cases it is. 



It is rather a difficult book to classify. Arranged in the form of a connected sequence, 
largely a historical sequence, it yet has much of the character of a compendious 
encyclopaedia. While it is to a considerable extent (and quite frankly) a compilation, 
yet the author's own thought is everywhere in evidence. The larger part of the book is 
devoted to just Freemasonry, the Blue Lodge, yet considerable space is given to the 
so-called higher degrees, and their relationship, historical and symbolical, with the 
Craft is worked out. 


One chapter is in effect a select descriptive bibliography of Masonic literature. 
Another is devoted to Masonic collections. There is much useful and interesting 
information in the appendix. The extent of the author's reading is in evidence on 
every page and the style, though unadorned, has a simple directness about it that is 
pleasing. In short, it appears to be a most excellent little book for the purpose for 
which it was written, an elementary manual for the ordinary Mason who would like to 
know more about the Craft, but has no access to Masonic libraries and has not the 
means to purchase many books, or the time to read them. Practically every aspect of 
the Institution is touched upon, including all the historical points on which there have 
been or still are serious controversies. The author evidently relies a good deal on Bro. 
J. S. M. Ward, more so perhaps than is really safe, as the enthusiasm of this writer 
often leads him to leap to his conclusions over very wide gaps in his argument. Bro. 
Green also adopts the "one degree" theory of pre-Grand Lodge Masonry, though the 
evidence for two grades is almost overwhelming. He has also evidently read the late 
Bro. Stretton's works and has inserted his rather unconvincing diagram of the 
supposed method of raising large stones by the Operative Masons. Bro. Stretton, by 
the way, an engineer by profession, ought surely to have devised something more 
practical. In truth mediaeval Masons did not use large stones as a rule. It was even 
one of their boasts that their tremendous vaults and arches were built of stones that a 
man could carry up a ladder on his shoulder; although of course the derrick and crane 
were used by them as it was by the Romans. He also reproduces the present day "Gild 
Mason's" division of the Craft into Square and Arch Masons, of which there is no 
trace whatever in medieval or ancient records. It is simply a technical feet that it is no 
harder to cut the voussoir of an arch than a square ashlar. It is of course more difficult 
to build an arch than a wall, but that there were ever two classes of mason setters has 
yet to be shown, except the division still existing between skilled and unskilled. 



Such points as these however can hardly be called blemishes, as the author is entitled 
to present his own opinion on the points at issue; they are mentioned only to caution 
readers of the book that there is a difference of opinion about them, and that the 
consensus of Masonic scholarship is rather against than for the point of view 
presented. 


A reproduction is given of the famous (or should we say, notorious) drawing in the 
possession of the Grand Chapter of Scotland supposed to be by the Italian artist 
Guercino. That the composition can be anything more than a sketch, is obvious at a 
glance, supposing it to be by a competent artist; and on this supposition it can hardly 
be intended for a real composition as the recumbent figure is so utterly out of 
proportion to the others. It has never been clearly stated on what grounds it was 
assigned to Guercino or to so early a date as 1665. Nevertheless, in view of the claims 
made for it, it is very interesting, and the author is to be thanked for making it 
accessible tin the Craft at large. 


The make-up leaves something to be desired, and although the small type brings the 
book down to a convenient pocket size, yet it would probably be more readable were 
it larger. Wit offer this as a suggestion should the author contemplate a second 
edition. 


* * * 


THE HEBREW HERCULES 


THE STORY OF SAMSON AND ITS PLACE IN THE RELIGIOUS 
DEVELOPMENT OF MANKIND. By Paul Cams. Published by The Open Court 
Publishing Co., Chicago, 111. May be purchased through the Book Department of the 
National Masonic Research Society, 1960 Railway Exchange, St. Louis, Mo. Boards, 
188 pages, illustrated, index. Price, postpaid, $1.10. 



THIS little work arose out of a friendly controversy between Mr. George W. Shaw 
and the author regarding the relationship between myth and history. Dr. Cams takes 
the view, very generally accepted, that historical characters, that is to say people who 
actually existed, often attract to themselves and their stories legendary details from 
pure myths An instance is given of this, where Alexander the Great has become the 
hero of quite mythical romances to the complete exclusion of his real achievements. 

In like manner Dr. Cams is willing to allow that there may have been a 
swashbuckling hero of the tribe of Dan who bore the name Samson, or Shamshon, but 
holds that the stories preserved in the Book of Judges are almost wholly, if not 
entirely, mythical. 


The name of the hero fits in well with this as it is derived from Shamash, a word for 
sun, and literally would appear to signify "sun-like." This, of course, though it fits the 
myth theory, is no evidence, as many real men have borne names derived from the 
sun and other natural objects among all races, and names of the same kind were 
common among the Hebrews. 


The author compares the Samson story, which is admittedly a fragment preserved by 
Post-exilic scribes and editors of the sacred scriptures, with the legends of Hercules, 
Izdubar, Dagon, Melkarth, Adonis and Osiris, and shows striking parallels between 
them. Samson is not a builder, but his death in the destmction of a temple is not 
without interest, and perhaps significance, especially if the author is at all right in his 
guess that the original unmutilated story gave an account of his resuscitation or 
resurrection. 


There is a great deal of material collected in the work, much of which is of indirect 
interest to Masons, but it must be acknowledged that the style affects the reader as 
somewhat scrappy. And though professedly written as a popular work, yet a great 
deal is taken for granted the absence of which might well leave those unfamiliar with 
these subjects in a state of doubt as to the precise bearing of the facts alluded to. Also 
the author evidently has small sympathy with the Hebrew point of view. In fact he 
compares the tribe of Dan to gypsies and equates the Philistines with modem 
civilized communities, and assumes that the real Samson, if he ever lived, was only 
an ancient rowdy or tough, whom the Philistine police very properly sought to 
suppress. This prejudice, however, does not affect the value of the book as a 



contribution to the subject of solar heroes and demi-gods. A closer analogy would 
perhaps have been the conflicts between the nomad Indians of the plains and the 
white settlers. Only in the ancient case both Philistines and Hebrews were immigrants 
and had an equal right, or no right, to the territory they occupied. 


— o — 


THE QUESTION BOX 
and CORRESPONDENCE 


REGULATING THE INTERVAL BETWEEN DEGREES 


The Lodge le Progres of Honolulu was founded in 1841, chartered in 1842 as a 
subordinate symbolic body of the Supreme Council of France, Ancient and Accepted 
Scottish Rite. 


Le Progres, as number 128, was carried upon the roll of the parent body at Paris to the 
year 1895, when it came into the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of California as 
number 371. 


For upwards of a generation the Lodge le Progres endeavored to operate as a 
"Scottish Rite Blue Lodge." Its authorizations were derived from the Supreme 
Council of France and were altered only as a friendly concession to York Rite 
Masonry coming to the then Kingdom of Hawaii. 


Before the writer is a copy of the "General Regulations of Scottish Masonry for 
France and Her Dependencies," published in 1846. As a contribution to the problem 



or question of the element of time in acquiring the "further" - not "higher" - degrees, 
the following Regulation, being Article CCCXXV, is submitted: 


"The delays between each of the three first degrees are fixed as f allows: 


"From the proposition to the reception, three months; 


"From the reception to the 2nd Degree, five months 


"From the 2nd Degree to the 3rd, seven months; in all fifteen months. 


"Nevertheless, in case of urgency, attested by an express resolution of the lodge, and 
signed by the five highest officers, and clothed with the seals and stamps, the above 
fixed delays can be abridged. This resolution should be submitted to the Secretary 
General's office of the Rite, charged to transmit it to the Lieut. Gr. Com., or to him 
who fills his office, who alone has the necessary power to grant dispensations, of 
which the benefit can only accrue upon certificate of payment of the cost of such 
dispensations into the hands of the Treasurer of the Holy Empire." 


Article CCCXXVIII reads: 


"The advancement in degrees is asked for by the Senior or Junior Wardens for those 
of the Apprentices or Fellowcrafts who have completed their time and who appear to 
them to merit this favor, by their instruction, their assiduity and their regularity." 


E. T., Honolulu. 



In your issue of June, 1925, just to hand, I notice an article headed "Should a Grand 
Lodge Regulate Advancement to the Higher Degrees?" and I perused the varying 
answers from quite a number of the American Grand Lodges. 


The Grand Lodge of Queensland is the baby Grand Lodge in the world, and I think I 
am safe in saying that the control of admission to the Higher Degrees is entirely 
outside its jurisdiction. The difficulties met with in your parts are, however, provided 
for by regulation in the Higher Degrees themselves. 


In this State of Queensland it is impossible to enter Royal Arch Masonry within 
twelve months of being raised as an M. M. A Royal Arch Mason can then take some 
of the "side degrees," such as the Royal Ark Mariner, Red Cross Council and the 
Cryptic Series almost any time he likes: but when it comes to the really Higher 
Degrees, such as the Rose Croix or 18d, then so far as the Scottish Rite is concerned, 
a Mason must have proved himself by long and active service both as a Mason and as 
a Royal Arch Mason before his admission would be considered. In the Rose Croix 
Degree the members are all elderly and those who have won their spurs, and also very 
select. 


Then again, it is provided by Constitution that a further five years must elapse before 
he can be admitted into the 30d. So you will see how we are safeguarded in 
Queensland. If you can publish this in your next issue of THE BUIEDER it may do 
some good. 


Leslie P. Marks, Hon. Sec'y, Supreme Council S.C., 
Queensland 



THE EVOLUTION OF THE LODGE 


I wish to thank you for your notes on the evolution of the lodge. When I was made a 
Mason (in 1874) the lodges in this jurisdiction were always opened on the E. A. 
Degree, and every Entered Apprentice had the option of joining the lodge at the time 
of his initiation, and thus becoming a contributing member with all the privileges and 
responsibilities of membership. He might remain unaffiliated if he chose to do so. 
Two who took their degrees with me did not join the lodge, because they were about 
to go to California. They visited the lodge two or three times after receiving the 
degrees, and were recorded as visitors from the lodges of the Holy Saint's John. I was 
sorry when our Grand Lodge amended its regulations, and ordered that the work of 
the lodge should be done on the Third Degree, and none but Master Masons admitted 
to membership. 


There are many good things in THE BUILDER this month. Long may it flourish. 


J. Vroom, New Brunswick. 


* * * 


GENERAL GRAND LODGE 


I would like to know the history of the attempts to form a General Grand Lodge of the 
United States and the causes of failure. Where can I locate this information? 


F. C. D., California. 



Some mention of this will be found in Masonic histories, both general and those 
dealing with Freemasonry in the older States, but for some reason or other historians 
seem rather to have shirked the subject. 


There have been many attempts to form such a General Grand Lodge, beginning as 
early as 1779. On the 27th of December, 1779, American Union Lodge, attached to 
soldiers of the Connecticut line while stationed at Morristown, N. J., adopted a 
resolution for the appointment of a General Grand Master over all the lodges in 
America. On Feb 7, 1780, a committee met at Morristown with delegates from 
Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland. They 
endorsed a resolution for the formation of a General Grand Lodge. Meanwhile, in 
January, 1780. the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania elected Washington Grand Master 
of the United States and notified other Grand Lodges of its action, requesting their 
approval. For reasons not known the thing came to naught. In 1790 Georgia started 
agitation for a General Grand Lodge. In 1799 South Carolina renewed it. North 
Carolina made the proposition again in 1803. Prior to Washington's death, the plan 
always was to elect him the first General Grand Master. 


In 1806 plans were made for a convention in Philadelphia in 1807, and another in 
Washington in 1808, neither of which met. Another unsuccessful effort was made to 
hold a convention in Washington in 1811. The Grand Lodge of North Carolina again 
proposed a convention to be held at Washington in 1812, which failed to meet. In 
1822 such a convention did meet there, presided over by Henry Clay. Nothing came 
of it. 


At a convention held at Baltimore in 1843 for the purpose of adopting a uniform 
ritual, some discussion was given to the question, and they agreed to meet again in 
1845 and 1847. But once more, no results were forthcoming. Further conventions 
were held at Lexington, Kentucky, in 1853 and at Washington in 1855 and Chicago in 
1859. Like their many predecessors, they failed to accomplish their purpose. 



The psychological moment for a General Grand Lodge passed by at the time when the 
several states agreed to form the United States. Had the latter not taken place just 
when it did, it is a grave question whether it could have happened after say, 1800. So 
with a General Grand Lodge. The feeling of individual independence has always been 
too strong for any of our Grand Lodges to sacrifice any sovereignty whatsoever. 


A.L.K. 


* * * 


THOMAS R. MARSHALL 


In your account of the funeral of the late Thos. R. Marshall you say "It was conducted 
by the A.&A.S.R." This is only partially true. The Rite held their services at the home 
and Ancient Landmarks Lodge, No. 319, took charge on the entrance of the cortege to 
the cemetery and conducted the services at the commital. Bro. J. Clyde Hoffman, W. 
M., is shown at the head of the casket in the picture. 


Fred A. Lorenz, Indianapolis, Ind. 


* * * 


ORIGIN OF THE EASTERN STAR 


I have before me a "Manual of the Order of the Easter n Star," published in 1872. On 
the title page it is said to be "Arranged by Robert Macoy, National Grand Secretary," 



and in the Introduction, which gives a brief account of the various "Adoptive' degrees 
conferred on women in France and other countries, I find the following: 


"Many systems of Adoptive Masonry have, from time to time, been introduced in the 
United States, with varied success none of which, however, seemed to possess the 
elements of permanency, except the Order of the Eastern Star, which was established 
in this country during the year 1778." 


In a copy of an address given by Dr. Robert Morris, before the Grand Chapter of the 
Order of the Eastern Star of California, in April, 1876; Dr. Morris claims to have 
originated the Order of the Eastern Star in 1850. 


Can you advise me which is correct ? Was Bro. Macoy in error in his statement that 
the Order was introduced in this country in 1778 ? 


A. F. Florida. 


The Order of the Eastern Star, in its present form, was really the creation of Robert 
Morris, but he apparently took as the basis of his structure an adoptive side degree of 
the same name, and one would judge from outside indications of very similar content. 
This degree had no organization and was conferred by any Master Masons who 
possessed it upon their female relatives. There may have been individual chapters in 
some places of more or less permanent character, and it is barely possible that it, or 
some degree like it, was introduced as early as 1778, though without some 
confirmatory evidence it would not be wise to put too much confidence in the 
statement you quote. Substantially, however, the Order, as an independent institution, 
was started in 1 850, though the ritual and organization seems to have been quite 
radically recast and simplified in 1855. 



PRESIDENT HAYES A BAPTIST? 


Referring to the matter on page 288 of the September issue of THE BUILDER 
regarding denominational affiliations of the Presidents: 


My parents were ardent Baptists, and the Hayes-Tilden campaign was on when I was 
a grown-up lad. My father made quite a point of the statement that Rutherford B. 
Hayes was a Baptist, and in that connection I have a rather vague memory of having 
been told that while Governor of Ohio, Hayes taught a class in a Baptist Sunday 
School. 


Of course this is not authentic proof of anything, but I should say that Baptists in 
Columbus should know positively. 


I notice that Harding's name was omitted from the list. 


G. B. H., Washington. 


* * * 


WHO SHOULD GIVE INSTRUCTION? 



Is it proper for anyone but a Master or Past Master, or possibly a Warden to deliver 
any of the monitorial lectures or present aprons or working tools ? My understanding 
of the matter is, that it is an unwritten law that none but the above mentioned officers 
should do these things, but the Master can delegate anyone to perform any of these 
ceremonies. 


I will be glad to know if there ever has been a ruling made on this point, and what that 
ruling may be or whether it is or is not proper for any but the above mentioned 
officers to perform the ceremonies in question. 


W. B. M., New York. 


In the first place every state has its own independent Grand Lodge to regulate such 
matters, and whatever rule or decision any one of them may have arrived at is usually 
based on local customs or the ideas of influential members of the Craft in that 
jurisdiction. 


Arguing from first principles it is quite certain that all instruction is the responsibility 
of the Master. He either gives it personally or selects qualified brethren to do so in his 
place. Consequently, unless there is a well recognized rule or decision to the contrary 
in the jurisdiction, the matter would appear to be entirely in the Master's own hands. 
Actually there is a great variety of usage, and it would take altogether too much space 
to attempt to cover the whole ground, but it would be hard to think of any system of 
allocation of the duty of giving charges and instructions that is not followed 
somewhere. 


* * * 


ANOTHER PATRIARCH 



Some time ago I wrote for you an article dealing with brethren who had been for very 
many years useful, notable and active in our Masonic Fraternity. 


Please let me call your attention to the September issue of the Bulletin, issued at 
Redlands, Cal., by our good Bro. J. H. Logie. He instances a case of Dr. A. W. King, 
a member of Redlands Lodge, No. 300, who, on Aug. 21, 1925, became one hundred 
years old. Some months ago he attended lodge and delivered the charge of the Third 
Degree. He was Master of his lodge in 1859 and for some years thereafter. 


Robert I. Clegg, Associate Editor, Chicago, 111. 


* * * 


YE EDITOR'S CORNER 


Have you heard the story of the substitute? When Morrison was playing Faust - some 
of you have seen the play - he was taken sick, and he had to use a substitute. Faust 
was a very tall, slender fellow. The substitute was a short, fat fellow. In the last scene 
where the devil departs into hell, he goes through a trap door. The substitute got along 
all right until he came to that part, and as he was descending into the infernal regions, 
he was so fat he stuck in the trap door, and those below stage pulled on his legs and 
tried to pull him through, and those above tried to shove him through, but they 
couldn't do it, so there he stuck. It got pretty amusing, but realistic to one of the boys 
in the gallery. The boy in the gallery did not know why the actor could not get 
through, but jumped to his own conclusion, and got on to his feet and yelled, "Thank 
God, hell is full." This was one of Dr. Wm. F. Kuhn's stories. 



This extract from an address by Bro. I. E. Newsom, Grants Orator of Colorado, is 
worth repeating, though the view spoken of is not altogether a new thing: 


"The modern view of religion does not require that the devotee shall remove himself 
from all contact with the world in order that he may thereby commune with God. This 
view is well expressed in the following poem: 

"The parish priest 
Of Austerlitz 

Climbed up a high church steeple, 

To be near God 

That he might hand 

God's word down to the people. 

"In sermons grave 
He daily wrote 

What he thought sent from heaven; 

And dropped this on 
The people's heads, 

Two times one day in seven. 


"In rage God said 



'What meanest thou?' 


The priest cried from the steeple 
'Where art thou, Lord?' 

The Lord replied, 

'Down here among my people.'"