The Builder Magazine 

April 1930 - Volume XVI - Number 4 

ROSICRUCIANISM IS FREEMASONRY An Introductory 
Sketch 

by Bro. H.V. VOORHIS 

There seems to be a decided interest in Rosicracianism springing up among 
Masonic students. The mystery of the Rosy Cross, as it is more generally known, is 
apparently becoming more mysterious. (The terms Rosicrucian and Brother of the 
Rosy Cross are in reality synonymous, but the first term often intimates a reference 
to the "Order" itself, while the second connotes a relationship to the Rose Croix, 
now the Eighteenth Degree of the Scottish Rite of Masonry.) This revival of 
interest manifests itself every few years with added zest and is caused, usually, by 
a new investigator appearing upon the horizon with new (or at least more) facts; 
combined also with the a certain activity within the modem Rosicmcian societies. 


Lately I have pemsed several important writings containing opinions on the 
existing complex and conflicting data related to this obscure subject. These show, 
to my own satisfaction at least, that the history of Rosicmcianism and Freemasonry 
has a common spiritual descent, a common mystery and at one time, during the 
early years of the two movements, had a common motive. 


The mere mention of the word "Rosicmcian" in occult circles immediately 
produces an atmosphere of awe. Individuals who are the most sound logicians in 
every other branch of research, almost without exception begin to float on air, and, 
for the most part, enjoy it, as soon as this subject is broached. As Arthur Edward 
Waite has said: 



Perhaps there has never been a realm of inquiry which has been colonized to such 
an extent by fools and knaves of speculation. If there has been one other, it is that 
which adjoins with no intervening boundary - 1 mean Emblematic Freemasonry. 


The reason for this condition is not difficult to see. It is a condition of mind, 
resulting from the perusal of the many works on the subject by the great students 
who have written so deeply and voluminously on not only the subject of 
Rosicrucianism itself, but also on the outstanding men and, in a few instances, the 
women involved in the manifold workings of "The Order of the Rosy Cross." 


It would almost seem that every person of note as an occult scholar from the year 
1500 to 1800 (and possibly further) has been in some manner connected with the 
"Order." Independent schools of or allied to Rosicrucianism have developed an 
individual literature partion to each school - thus complicating the development of 
a system rather than clarifying it. Says Waite: 


The great spiritual symbolism which has come down to us through several houses 
of tradition, is not, I think, communicated in a plenary sense by any one school; it 
is rather the harmony of all. 


A sentence once written in the thirteenth century by that unsurpassed thinker, 
Roger Bacon, can be applied very pertinently to Rosicrucianism. He said: 


The subjects in question are weighty and unusual, they stand in need of the grace 
and favor accorded to human frailty ... for I am speaking of the sophistical 
authorities of the irrational multitude, men who are authorities in an equivocal 
sense, even as the eye carved in stone or painted on canvas has the name but not 
the quality of an eye. 



The eminent English Mystic, Waite already quoted, says further: 


The touchstone is always life, and for this reason antiquity per se is not a test of 
value. There would be no Hidden Mystery of the Rosy Cross if it had not suffered 
successive transmutations, adjusting a change of venture to a new heart of motive. 
I think, indeed, that it has died many times and has been as often reborn, even a 
little "nearer to the heart's desire." 


Anderson, whose Book of Constitutions was first published in 1723, gives a source 
for Masonic origins of which many subsequent writers have availed themselves 
down to the present day. The representations made by these good brethren of 
earlier days do not bear critical analysis in some respects, in spite of the fact that 
we do not question their motives nor the sincerity of their beliefs. One statement 
concerning the origin of Freemasonry has to do with its beginnings in the Garden 
of Eden, for Anderson says: 


Adam, our first Parent, created after the Image of God, the Great Architect of the 
Universe, must have had the Liberal Sciences, particularly Geometry, written on 
his Heart; for even since the Fall, we find the Principles of it in the Hearts of his 
Offspring, and which, in process of time, have drawn forth into a convenient 
Method of Propositions, by observing the Laws of Proportion taken from 
Mechanism: So that as the Mechanical Arts gave occasion to the Learned to reduce 
the Elements of Geometry into Method, this noble Science thus reduc'd, is the 
Foundation of all those Arts (particularly of Masonry and Architecture), and the 
rule by which they are conducted and perform'd, etc., etc., etc. 


In the dedication of The Constitution, J. T. Desaguliers, Deputy Grand Master, 
takes pains to say that he needed not to tell his Grace of Montagu, to whom it was 
addressed, 



. . . what Pains our learned AUTHOR has taken in compiling and digesting this 
Book from the old RECORDS, and how accurately he has compar'd and made 
everything agreeable to History and Chronology, so as to render these NEW 
CONSTITUTIONS a just and exact Account of MASONRY from the Beginning 
of the World to Your Grace's MASTERSHIP. 


The views of Anderson, and those of later writers who followed him blindly, or 
elaborated upon the beauteous concepts of their times, are no longer accepted. In 
fact we are hard put to prove our existence prior to the Norman Conquest, and it is 
not until we reach the year 1390 A. D. that we first find documentary evidence - 
the Regius Poem, also known as the Halliwell MS., now preserved in the British 
Museum. A few of these early Old Charges are the only definite evidence we have. 


Rosicrucianism, however, has numerous documents relating to its activities, and 
especially during the two centuries prior to the year 1717, when speculative 
Freemasonry established this date as the foundation stone of a new dispensation. If 
we accepted the evidence offered by Spencer Lewis, the Rosicrucian Order can be 
traced back to King Thothmes III, B.C. 1500. However, let us put aside this 
speculation as to very ancient origins and content ourselves with the later history. 


It cannot be refuted that, in the century prior to the formation of the premier Grand 
Lodge of England, many eminent men were practicing Rosicrucianism, not only in 
England but also in Germany, France, Holland and possibly other countries. 


The word "Rosicrucian" first appears in print in 1614, and shortly thereafter the so- 
called Order first took form as a permanent organization through a man known as 
Christian Rosenkreutz whose date of birth appears to have been about 1378, 
although his Fama and Confessio did not attract attention until two hundred and 
fifty years later upon its original publication. (1) 



There is no exact period of commencement of the Rosicracians as an Order, as 
there is in Freemasonry. Every well informed Mason recognizes the date 1717. 
There can be no misunderstanding that at that time the first Grand Lodge of 
Masons appeared. The best we can say about Rosicrucianism is that Rosy Cross 
literature appeared in German and Latin between 1614 and 1616 - affirming that a 
secret and mysterious Order had existed in Germany for some two centuries. These 
writings marked the entrance of Rosicrucianism into the daylight of 
contemporaneous criticism and attack. 


To acquaint those interested with this branch of learning, Thomas De Quincy, in 
1824, wrote a work entitled Historico-Critical Inquiry into the Origin of the 
Rosicrucians and the Freemasons. While this served as an excellent introduction to 
the subject, it was, to quote Waite, 


A mere transcript from an exploded German savant, whose facts are tortured in the 
interest of a somewhat arbitrary hypothesis. 


The first serious treatment of the subject in English, from an historical standpoint, 
was Hargrave Jennings' The Rosicrucians, Their Rites and Mysteries, 1870. It had 
gone into many editions and is still a so-called textbook on Roscrucianism. The 
two-volume edition of 1887 is considered the most desirable. 


This treatment has been superseded by the Real History of the Rosicrucians, 1887, 
by Arthur Edward Waite and by another work written many years afterward on this 
subject from the pen of the same author (really his magnum opus), The 
Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross, 1924. This book is a most exhaustive treatise, 
especially in the treatment of the material whereof this so-called "Order" is built. 


There is at least one excellent work in another language by Fr. Wittemans, D.L., 
covering the history of the Rosicrucians - but, so far, it is not available in English. 



In America a writer, whose work on this subject in connection with Freemasonry 
has been taken seriously, is Brother Ossian Lang, Grand Historian, of the Grand 
Lodge of New York State. A small pamphlet reprinted from the proceedings of the 
Grand Lodge of New York, 1918, written by Brother Lang, gives data purporting 
proof of a Rosicrucian derivation of Freemasonry. 


In the recent work of Manly P. Hall, the subject of Rosicrucianism is taken up by 
the author in the chapter headed "The Fraternity of the Rosy Cross," by 
formulation of four postulates. The material has been carefully selected from a 
very wide range of works and excellently arranged. 


Rosicrucianism first appeared in Germany (in the City of Cassel) in the latter part 
of the sixteenth century and came into public light, as already mentioned, in 1614. 
After arousing a great deal of interest in that country for about ten years, the 
mysteries of the Rosy Cross died down, and, because of the departure of several of 
the Rosicrucian adepts to India (2), the struggle for "thought freedom" was shifted 
to the Netherlands, where it had been going on slowly for a quarter of a century. 
Persons of the highest classes of society met in palatial structures under the 
Rosicrucian banner at both Amsterdam and The Hagu in 1622. Some of these 
persons ran afoul of the law of the land and were haled into court on various 
charges. 


About this time, according to Wittemans, Frederic Henry, Stadtholder, who leaned 
toward the occult, and who no doubt saw a "writing on the wall," shifted his 
protection from Rosicrucianism to Freemasonry (3). 


In France there was no Rosicrucian activity until about 1623, when, after a first 
public announcement, the Rosicrucians became embroiled in arguments with the 
Jesuit Fathers. Descartes and Abbe de Villars were about the only two flaming 
spots of French Rosicrucianism of this period and, as they have not the slightest 
connection with Freemasonry, we turn our attention to England. 



Concerning Rosicracianism in England, Wittemans remarks that: 


The efforts of the Rosicracians to erect a new spiritual temple of humanity, which 
failed in Germany, the Netherlands and France, were destined to be crowned with 
success in England. In the latter country the free development of human thought 
was not hampered by orthodoxy and, there, resulted in a spiritual movement that 
afterward found expression in Freemasonry, the universal temple of wisdom and 
fraternity. 


Some time between 1614 and 1620, according to Waite, Robert Fludd, an English 
philosopher, physician, chemist, mechanic, anatomist, mathematician and 
astrologer, having been influenced by Maier became a "convert" to Rosicrucian 
thought. 


He at once began writing on the subject and there appeared in 1616 his Apologia, a 
defense of Rosicrucianism. This was followed by a dozen or more other works on 
Rosicracianism over a period of some twenty years. There are some (Dr. W. Wynn 
Westcott, for instance) who believe that Fludd was the first English Magus of the 
Brotherhood. At any rate, Fludd, together with Ford Veralam, better known as 
Francis Bacon, formed an English Rosicrucian Society in which Bacon, though 
secretly, played the principal role. 


Bacon was 57 years old when Elias Ashmole, the famous English astrologer, was 
born and of whom we have positive proof of his being "made a Freemason" at 
Warrington in 1646. Bacon, however, died in 1626 at the age of 65 years, without, 
so far as we have any positive evidence, ever having been "made a Freemason." 


Bacon is believed by many to have been the real author of the works attributed to 
Shakespeare and to have superintended the English translation of the Bible. He was 



the author of many works of a philosophical nature. His only connection with our 
story, however, is in relation to certain theories advanced by various writers that 
Freemasonry was either partially or totally shaped by him. To such Waite says: 


The attempt to explain Freemasonry - Emblematical, Speculative and Figurative - 
as a new birth in time of the Order of the Rosy Cross has passed into desuetude, 
and yet there is evident - for it manifests now and again sporadically - a certain 
unsatisfied feeling, as if the last word still remained to be said. So also is there a 
feeling that in some way, occult and unproven, a shaping influence was exercised 
by Francis Bacon, Lord Verulam, on the first beginnings of the Masonic Order. I 
do not suppose the last word has been said on this subject either, but it is clear to 
my mind that it must be one of negation This thesis was started by Nicolai, in an 
appendix on the origin of Freemasonry attached to an Essay on the Knights 
Templar. The foundation is Bacon's unfinished romance The New Atlantis, written 
late in life and published posthumously. 


This view is not taken by either Fr. Wittemans or the Rev. F. de P. Castells of 
England. Bro. Castells, who is engaged at present on works concerning the origin 
of the Masonic degrees, supports, with modifications and amplifications, the views 
of Mrs. Henry Pott as advanced in her Francis Bacon and His Secret Society. Fr. 
Wittemans says: 


He [Bacon] ranks first among those who made Freemasonry heir to the 
Rosicrucian philosophy, at the time when the Masonic body underwent a 
reformation in the XVIIth century. 


Manly P. Hall contributes this information: 


Johann Valentin Andreae is generally reputed to be the author of the Confessio. It 
is a much-mooted question, however, whether Andreae did not permit his name to 
be used as a pseudonym by Sir Francis Bacon. Apropos of this subject are two 



extremely significant references occurring in the introduction to that remarkable 
potpourri The Anatomy of Melancholy. This volume first appeared in 1 62 1 from 
the pen of Demoeritus Junior, who was afterward identified as Robert Burton who, 
in turn, was a suspected intimate of Sir Francis Bacon. One reference archly 
suggests that at the time of publishing The Anatomy of Melancholy in 1621 the 
founder of the Fraternity of R. C. was still alive. This statement - concealed from 
general recognition by its textual involvement - has escaped the notice of most 
students of Rosicrucianism. In the same work there also appears a short footnote of 
stupendous import. It contains merely the words: "Joh. Valent. Andreas, Lord 
Verulam." This single line definitely relates Johann Valentin Andreae to Sir 
Francis Bacon, who was Lord Verulam, and by its punctuation intimates that they 
are one and the same individual. 


As Robert Macoy, the well-known Masonic writer, believed that Andreae was the 
true founder of Rosicrucianism, so, following the reasoning of Mr. Hall, 
indications appear that Bacon was responsible for even more than is generally 
suspected in the launching of our project. Further references along similar lines are 
found in Godfrey Higgins' Anacalypsis, and in the writings of the late Frank C. 
Higgins. 


No matter which view one considers correct, it is most certainly a fact that Bacon 
lived at a time in which the minds of the forefathers of organized Masonry had 
their setting - a time in which it appears that English Rosicrucianism waned and 
Freemasonry assumed its outward role and continued on - and, according to Bro. 
Castells, soon worked out its role. 


To go into this matter further would entail a complete review of Waite's, Castells', 
Mrs. Pott's and Fr. Wittemans' works, to say nothing of those quoted in this article. 
One must refer the reader to the writings of these individuals if interested in 
obtaining the latest views thereon. Wittemans' book, as indicated, is, unfortunately, 
not yet available in English. 



The Rosicrucian connection with Freemasonry was considered in Quatuor Coronati 
Lodge, No. 2076, of London, in a paper written by Dr. Wynn Westcott in 1894 
(4). 


Edward Conder, Jr., Waite, Van der Gon, Alting, Raemaekers, Mrs. Pott and 
Castells all agree that Bacon and Rosicracianism certainly had something to do 
with Freemasonry just prior to its "revival" of 1717. But so many opinions have 
been expressed on various phases of the subject that to cite any here would be 
burdensome reading. 


Fr. Wittemans estimates that over twenty thousand books and articles have been 
written on Bacon's alleged authorship of Shakespeare's plays. It would be natural 
to suppose that there would also be an extensive literature on the Baconian theory 
of Masonic origin. Just the reverse however, is true. Although there is a distinct 
school of the Bacon-Masonic origin theorists, it is supported by but few writers, 
and their contentions have received but meagre support. 


Many writers endeavor to prove that the Rosicrucians used many symbols 
traceable to ancient Masonry. This department of our subject is even more 
confusing, especially to minds not trained in symbology, but it cannot be denied by 
anyone familiar with the "teachings" of both " fraternities " that many similarities 
do exist. Basing their judgment on things symbolic, De Quincy and Buhle believed 
that Freemasonry was Rosicracianism modified by those who introduced it from 
Germany into England. 


Because of changes in ritual after the formation of the premier Grand Lodge, 
before which time Freemasonry and Rosicracianism were supposedly closely 
allied, and the organization of the present or modem Rosicrucian societies, which 
appear to lack descent from the original "Order," those differences have broadened. 



The recent work of Bro. Castells (5) has again brought these questions to the fore 
among Masonic students. Coupled with the fact that the Rose Croix Degree has 
been drawn into the discussion, we have the outpourings of the English and 
American societies working under the banner and the name of Rosicrucianism, so 
that the present period promises some interesting research into these absorbing 
topics. 


Freemasonry is defined as "a beautiful system of morality, veiled in allegory and 
illustrated with symbols . . . Truth is its center. It is founded on the purest 
principles of Morality, Brotherly Love and Charity," which Rosicrucians "have 
aimed to produce, in the crucible of spiritual alchemy, the perfect Man, who loves 
God above all, on whose heart the Christ has awakened and who has become a 
pillar of love and wisdom among his fellowmen," says Wittemans. 


Where one "system" leaves off and the other begins cannot be precisely defined - 
like a mixture of water and glycerin, no one can tell by vision which is more in 
quantity. Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry, it seems, were once entwined. Since 
that time each has perceptibly changed in both spirit and matter. If they were 
definitely separated once, much more must be known to determine their points of 
separation. Even now their forms are not easily separated. The teaching of each 
"system" is not a clear and defined thing. Students of either school fail to present a 
positive agreement in aims or objects - and even less, the students of both. 


The writer has not set down the above in a disparaging sense, but just the reverse. 
He has read many works on both subjects and feels that studies of this nature are 
far more important than the grinding out of meaningless "joining Masons. " In fact, 
he feels that works such as Fr. Wittemans, are permanently valuable and hopes that 
this publication will be translated into the English language in the near future, so 
that it may take its proper place beside the work of Waite, Castells, Hall and others 
cited above. It is by far the most thorough and comprehensive work of its kind that 
has come to my attention and makes an excellent companion volume to Waite's 
The Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross. Its value, particularly to Masonic students, as 
well as to students of the Rosy Cross, lies in the great clarification it makes of the 
subject it covers. 



NOTES 


(1) The Fama Fraternitatis, which is believed to have been written in the year 1610, 
but which apparently did not appear in print until 1614, although an earlier edition 
is suspected by some authorities. Manly P. Hall, An Encyclopedic Outline of 
Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic, Rosicrucian and Symbolic Philosophy, 1928. 


(2) See the notes on the Fatin pamphlet by Henrieus Neuhusius, 1618, in Waite's 
Occult Sciences, 1891, p. 210. 


(3) Certain data in the work cited concern an ancient Masonic lodge in Amsterdam 
of great antiquity, have a bearing on this subject, and may bring out some 
interesting light on Freemasonry in the Netherlands. 


(4) "The Rosicrucians, Their History and Aims, with reference to the alleged 
connection between Rosicrucians and Freemasonry," A. Q. C. vol. vii, p. 37. 


(5) The works by the Rev. F. de P Castells referred to are his Antiquity on the Holy 
Royal Arch, 1927; the Origin of the Masonic Degrees, 1928; and The Historical 
Analysis of the Holy Royal Arch Ritual, 1929. 


— o — 


JOHN HUS: REFORMER AND MARTYR 



By BRO. T. M. MATEJOVSKY, with a Foreword by BRO. J. S. ROUCEK 


Our readers will recall the interesting articles contributed by Bro. Roucek last year 
upon the subject of Czecho- Slovak Masonry, and we are now further indebted to 
him for communicating to us this paper on the great Bohemian religions leader and 
reformer. Written in Prague, it was read last year before Shakespear Lodge in 
England, and the Lodge La Republique in France. As it plunges a little abruptly 
into the theme for readers unacquainted with the history of Europe in the medieval 
period, Bro. Roucek has written a brief introduction. Bro Roucek is now Professor 
of Social Science at the Centenary Junior College, Hackettstown, New Jersey. 


THE following article by Bro. Matejovsky on John Hus is written primarily from 
the Masonic viewpoint. As such it has been delivered as a lecture in English and 
French lodges. Because my articles in THE BUILDER have been concerned with 
the development of Bohemian Masonry, I should like to write a few words of 
introduction, in order to make it easier for the reader to understand what Hus 
represents to us, from the viewpoint of the development of moral ideas, which we, 
as Masons, stand and fight for. Somewhere on the road toward our goal of Masonic 
perfection, John Hus stands in the shadow of Middle Ages, as a rock around which 
the waves of human passions roused by religious convictions are raging. But he is 
a rock which is also a milestone, probably one of the greatest, which marks the 
rough and difficult road from moral subjugation to spiritual freedom. 


Our English literature does not concern itself very much with this figure, any more 
than it does with the history of Central Europe. Notice, please, that our best 
histories of this continent always emphasize the limit of their treatment, as, for 
example, "The History of Western Europe," as if the history of Central Europe was 
not connected, and very intimately connected, with the formation of Western 
Europe, and thus also of the United States. We find mention of Hus here and there, 
but the evaluation of this great personality is always limited to a few lines, which 
really mean nothing. The most popular of our historical university textbooks, for 
example, dismisses Hus with the following: 



While his (Wycliff s) followers, appear to have yielded pretty readily to the 
persecution which soon overtook them, his doctrines were spread abroad in 
Bohemia by another ardent reformer, John Huss, who was destined to give the 
Church a great deal of trouble. 


This present age of extreme nationalism recognizes that the foundation of our 
patriotic and nationalistic feeling lies in the historical memories of a certain people, 
based mostly on heroic figures connected with their past. From this limited 
definition our historians come to a conclusion that this nationalist movement 
started at the period of the French Revolution and culminated in the World War. 
To fulfill it, our nation entered the World War, and Wilson expressed it in his 
phrase, the "Self-determination of small nations. " But we must emphasize that the 
Czechoslovaks have been trying to live their nationalistic life ever since the times 
of John Hus, the fifteenth century, as is demonstrated in the following article. 


One of the illustrations shows the monument of John Hus in the Old Town Square 
at Prague. It is a symbol of that for which the Czechoslovaks fought, the memorial 
of the hero who represents today the ideal of Czechoslovak national life. That 
country "over there" is not yet afflicted with the "debunking" now so popular 
among the intelligentsia of America, and so Hus still represents the ideal for which 
President Masaryk, Dr. Eduard Benes and the Czechoslovak legionnaires fought 
during the World War! love of country, of freedom, of righteousness, of integrity 
in Church and State. The same ideal is alive in the hearts of all Czechs, at home 
and abroad, and they are about 500,000 strong in the United States, who see 
realized in him the loftiest conception of duty, patriotism and spiritual freedom. 


Hus has no parallel known to history. Let us not depreciate the heroes of other 
nations, which can present many eminent personalities in their history. But Hus 
was a spiritual pioneer to a very marked degree, and his stand for truth, which he 
sealed at the stake, constitutes an era in the world's history. Where else can the 
duty of a Christian man be more magnificently summed up than in the famous 
saying: " Seek the Truth, Listen to the Truth, Learn the Truth, Love the Truth, 
Speak the Truth, Hold the Truth, Defend the Truth, until Death"? I dare to 
challenge any brother Mason whether he knows of any higher Masonic ideal. Hus 
perished in the angry flames of Catholic fury in 1415. But he stands for the 



defense of the truth, he passed on the torch that has lighted the revolt against 
ecclesiastical despotism, the struggle for spiritual freedom, which is so eminently 
the ideal of Freemasonry. 


Let me call attention to an incident in the life of John Hus which is connected 
most intimately with our Masonic practice. The Council of Constance accused him 
of heresy. He answered: "I am ready humbly to retract anything that shall be 
proved to me to Scriptures." 


For this conviction Hus died. Such a thing had never been known before, for any 
man to refuse unconditional obedience too the Pope or Council. Hus was, at that 
moment, the first in the Middle Ages to refuse to obey an authority till then 
supreme. And reason and conscience won. This is why he is called the torch which 
threw light into mediaeval darkness. But the smoke of the fire which burned his 
body drifted over foreign countries, and a very few years after his death Hussites 
made their appearance in Germany, in Holland, in Poland and even in England. 


Thus the Bohemians took up as an inheritance from John Hus the fight for truth, 
respect for personal conviction, loyalty to freedom and a love of fraternity. 


If such a busy man as Mussolini can busy himself to publish a book on John Hus 
in this country (it appeared last year), then, I believe, that we too can afford a little 
of our time to the consideration of the following article. 


JOHN HUS 


IT has been said that Jan Hus was a forerunner of the Reformation, but at the same 
time it has been pointed out that he is regarded as belonging to the Middle Ages. 
The Roman Catholic Church is anxious to insist that Hus died believing Catholic 



and that therefore the free-thinkers have no right to regard him as one of their 
spiritual fathers. 


Thus the question arises as to whether the Freemasons should pay heed to Hus and 
whether any Masonic principles can be found in his teaching. It is undeniable that 
Hus cannot be dismissed as being a man of the Middle Ages because he lived in 
the years 1369 to 1415. Indeed, it was not so long ago that Monsignore Marmaggi, 
the Papal Nuncio, left Prague and his post precisely on account of Hus, 

BECAUSE he desired to do his best to prevent the Czechoslovak Government 
from taking part officially in the celebrations which are annually held in Bohemia 
on July 6th, the anniversary of the day when Hus was burnt at the stake in 
Constance. If in our days a diplomatic representative leaves his post - an entirely 
unusual occurrence in diplomacy - on account of Jan Hus, is it fitting to assert that 
the questions concerning him are out of date, and that there are more important 
matters with which we should occupy ourselves? The desire of the Roman Church 
is that no mention should be made of him; this means that the questions of Hus 
and of the results of his doctrine is still pregnant with significance for the thought 
of the modern individual and is still a painful question for the Curia. 


Let us answer three questions: What does Hus mean to the Czech nation? What 
does Hus mean to Europe? What does Hus mean to the Bohemian Brethren? 


WHAT DOES HUS MEAN TO THE CZECH NATION ? 


As regards the first question, let us admit that there is no generally accepted view 
on Hus, even amongst the Czechs. The majority of them, however, recognize his 
unique character and speak of him as one of the great men produced by their 
nation. The minority - the Clerical circles - likewise regard him as a great national 
figure, but consider him as the cause of the misfortunes which befell the Czech 
nation, as the cause of the long wars that "destroyed many monuments of art in 
Bohemia and brought about great bloodshed through which the Czech nation 
nearly perished." The Clericals describe him as a man who destroyed respect for 



authority by reason of his disobedience to Church authority and thereby brought 
his nation to within an ace of complete ruin. 


The majority of the Czechs, however, are definite followers of Hus. Amongst 
these, two groups may be distinguished. One group regards him in the first place 
as the creator of the modern Czech language, and in the second, as the successful 
defender of Czech national rights in the University of Prague and the awakener of 
Czech national consciousness; the radicals amongst these admirers of Hus point 
out that the Hussite movement prepared the way for the emancipation of the 
peasants from the oppression of the feudal magnates and see in him a forerunner 
of modem democracy and modem Socialism. 


In addition to this, the second group sees in Hus a great awakener of men's 
consciences, a great forerunner of the humanitarian movement which teaches 
universal brotherhood and the duty to seek above all the human being in every 
individual. 


Neither of these groups looks for the scholar and the theologian in Hus, they are 
concerned above all for the moralist, the reformer and the pioneer. They place his 
personal merits above his endeavors as a scholar. 


We have set ourselves three questions, and it is evident from the first question that 
if we solve it satisfactorily we immediately obtain the answers to the remaining 
two questions. 


It is necessary to give a short account of Hus' life. We know little of his origin. 

The name Hus was really a pejorative nickname, but we do not know its true 
origin. The particular opinions regarding Hus are so divergent that we need not be 
surprised by the fact that two years ago Professor Pekar declared that Hus was not 
born in southern Bohemia, far from Prague, in the little town of Husinec, as has 
been generally accepted during the previous 500 years, but in the village of 



Husinec which is situated two hours' journey to the north of Prague. Let us note in 
passing that this assertion has remained without support. Hus, therefore, obtained 
his name from his birthplace, a small town in southern Bohemia. 


He was a student at the University of Prague and had an unhappy time in his 
youth; in Prague he often was without enough to eat. In accordance with the views 
of that time, he became a priest. He was ever zealous in his studies, he obtained 
the degree of the university, and became first professor, and later rector, of the 
university. He was not therefore an ordinary professor nor even an insignificant 
scholar. His education was of the French type, for the University of Prague was 
established upon the model of the University of Paris in the year 1348. Its founder, 
Charles, King of Bohemia, was of French origin on his father's side; his father, 
John of Luxemburg, having married the last princess of the old Czech dynasty of 
the Premyslids, who had reigned in Bohemia for 500 years, up to 1306. In addition 
to this, Charles had been brought up in France, and at the time when he ascended 
the Bohemian throne he was no longer able to speak Czech, and was obliged to 
learn his mother's language once more. Having a Parisian education, he desired 
that his nation - he wrote this expressly in the foundation charter - should likewise 
make use of the best learning of the day. We mention this in order to show that 
Franco-Czech relations are not of recent date. 


Several Czechs had studied in Paris before Charles, and all of them were eminent 
both as scholars and as moralists. Hus must therefore be considered as a flower of 
a branch of Czech culture that had been grafted with a shoot of French origin. It 
was at the end of the 13th century that the Czech first came into contact with the 
French; Czech historians prove that the Albigensians, who were of French origin, 
had settled in the very district where Hus was born. Thus Hus continued the old 
traditions which had been brought to Bohemia and had called forth in the Czech 
nation a certain kind of regionalism, the characteristic features of which are found 
by some sociologists to be still existent amongst those Czechs whose homes are 
situated in the neighbourhood of his birthplace. These characteristics consist in a 
serious view of life, a profound sense of genuine religion, a zealous democratic 
spirit, and a readiness to defend the truth, when ascertained, to the very death. 



From Hus' letters we know that in his youth he liked comfort and soft clothing. 
What is the explanation for the fact that this man of lowly parentage suddenly 
became the spiritual leader of the nation? 


Hus was an eloquent preacher, and owing to his abilities in this direction the 
archbishop appointed him preacher to the synodal assemblies, at which he, with 
the consent of the archbishop, admonished the clergy to live purer lives, and not to 
set the people a bad example. At that time the Church was very wealthy and 
consequently attracted into its ranks many men who were not fit to become priests. 


When the Papal commissioner arrived in Prague to sell indulgences, Hus opposed 
him and thus came into conflict with the majority of the University professors, 
who were of German nationality. Charles, the founder of the University, had 
divided the professional staff into four "nations": Czech, German, Polish and 
Magyar. The Czech professors were in the minority; indeed nearly all the Czechs 
were members of a progressive minority. After this experience Hus and his friends 
succeeded in inducing King Vaclav to recognize the natural rights of the Czech 
nation, and the conservative foreigners thus found themselves in the minority. 


Owing to the mediaeval structure of society, the religious services held in the 
churches were not conducted in Czech; the common people, whose language was 
Czech, could not pray in church, and Czech hymns had to be sung in the 
churchyard. 


A number of influential citizens built in Prague a church to which they gave the 
name of "Bethlem" and obtained permission for sermons to be delivered in this 
church in Czech, so that the common people could sing hymns and pray there in 
their own language. Hus was the second preacher in the Bethlem church; he 
sacrificed his career at the University to the needs of the common people. 



After Hus had delivered a sermon he used to write with a piece of coal the main 
points of his discourse on the wall of the church. This was a great novelty, and he 
aroused a considerable opposition by it, and also because he wrote tracts in Czech. 
He was not the first to do this; before him a Czech landowner, Thomas of Stitny, 
had written in Czech on spiritual matters, and had likewise been reproached by the 
scholars of the University for profaning learning. The theologians found fault with 
Hus for profaning theology. In our days one can find in Protestant churches many 
Scriptural inscriptions which speak to visitors even when the minister is silent; 

Hus was the first of whom we have record who sought in this way to win the 
congregation over to his views. 


Hus had still a further connection with Western Europe. His friend Jerome, an 
eloquent and gifted orator, who had traveled through the whole of Europe, brought 
with him to Prague from England the works of Wycliffe. The reasoning of this 
forerunner of the Reformation interested Hus, and when the archbishop, who up 
till then had been his friend and protector, turned from him and ordered Wycliffe's 
books to be burned, Hus opposed him and began to defend Wycliffe's doctrine. 
When he did not desist from his arguments, Prague was placed under an interdict, 
and this meant the expulsion of Hus from Prague. 


Thus an insignificant preacher and agitator of unknown origin became the leader 
of the nation. 


Hus departed from Prague for the Czech countryside and there he preached 
sermons which had not been delivered in the churches. "He preached on 
pilgrimages, on marriages, under a limetree, between the hedges," said a 
contemporary chronicler. His sermons were of an entirely new character; it may 
be said that he preached practical Christianity, for he did not deal with theological 
problems, nor did he lay any stress on dogma. 


Although Hus, up to this time a favorite at the royal Court, upheld the natural 
rights of the Czech element at the University, this does not signify a manifestation 
of Chauvinism, or of a desire for University emoluments. He remained a poor 



man, and as regards the rest, he preached and wrote: "I prefer a good German to a 
bad Czech," and in another place he wrote: " Accursed is the man who abandons 
truth for a piece of bread." 


It is a well-known fact that at that time the Church was in a very bad condition; it 
was the period of Pope John XXIII, who was accused of having been a pirate on 
the high seas. Hence Hus appealed to the Council of Constance against the 
sentence of excommunication passed on him by the Pope. And when he 
discovered that the Council of Constance held the same view as the Pope, he 
appealed to reason. 


For the journey to Constance Hus obtained a letter of safe conduct from the 
Emperor Siegmund, brother of the King of Bohemia. Today we know from the 
documents of the Council of Constance that his fate was sealed before ever he 
arrived in Constance. Even if he had submitted and had renounced his views, he 
was to have been incarcerated until death in a monastery somewhere on the Rhine. 
Hus' defense and examination before the Council of Constance was really only a 
game with loaded dice. He was imprisoned immediately on his arrival in 
Constance, and he was never to be released. He was never to return to Bohemia. A 
martyr's death at the stake on July 6th, 1415, was merely the last act in the tragedy 
of his living death in the monastery prison. 


Why did Hus die a violent death when a large number of other zealous men who 
proclaimed the need for Church reforms died peacefully, like ordinary men, in 
freedom? Why were not Erasmus, Luther and Calvin condemned to die a martyr's 
death? 


Today we know; for history has instructed us. Hus died a martyr's death because 
he did not keep secret the fact that he considered not only the Church, and the 
dignitaries of the Church, but also the representatives of the State, to be the cause 
of the corruption in the Church and in society. He regarded Emperor Siegmund as 
the chief offender. Hence it was in vain that he made an appeal to human reason, 
and to the Scriptures. Hus placed himself in opposition to the theocracy of Church 



and the absolutism of the State, and therefore he was doomed. Luther upheld 
feudal views, and therefore the Elector supported him against the Council of 
Worms. Calvin became a ruler, and therefore he did not die. Hus was in advance 
of Europe, and being isolated, died at the stake. 


The Hussites, who comprised nearly the whole of the Czech nation, chose the 
chalice as the emblem for their banners, and hence they were known as Kalisnici; 
that is, "men of the chalice." However it was not a question merely of this symbol. 
Five years after the death of Hus the Czech nation assembled without arms to 
consider the methods to adopt for the defense of their convictions. It was not until 
the announcement was made that a crusading army was to invade Bohemia and 
that the entire nation, with the exception of young children, was to be 
exterminated, that the national leaders asked the University of Prague whether it 
was permissible for Christians to take up arms in defense of their religious 
convictions. The University decided that in this and similar cases it was a question 
not only of the right but also of the duty to defend one's religious beliefs. The 
reply of the University was incorporated in four principles known as the Articles 
of Prague. 


The first Hussite principle was: 1. the Word of God may be preached by all 
persons authorized so to do, laymen included. 


2. The Lord's Supper shall be administered to all persons, whether priests or laity, 
in the form both of Bread and Wine. 


3. Grievous offenses of all persons, not only of the laity but also of priests, shall 
be dealt with by the regular law courts. 


4. Seeing that great possessions and the powers of ruling princes have drawn the 
attention of priests from spiritual matters, the priests shall be deprived of this 
power and the bishops shall not be allowed to act in the capacity of temporal lords. 



These articles must be understood from the point of view of their consequences. 
The first article signifies freedom of speech and religious conviction, which 
corresponds to the present-day freedom of the press and the right of presenting 
petitions. The second article signifies the democratization of society and the 
abolition of theocratic order. Laicization was strengthened by the third article, 
which demanded the democratization of the judicial system and of the 
administration. This article signifies also the abolition of class privileges. The 
secularization of property, which was proclaimed for moral reasons, signifies the 
separation of the Church from the State. 


The Hussite Wars, which began in 1420, five years after the death of Hus, were of 
a defensive character, and their object was above all the establishment of peace 
and quietness; as we see from one of the three Hussite songs that have been 
preserved. The Hussite Wars were waged in defense of the new democracy which 
was coming into being, and of the new social order. For fifteen years the Czech 
nation defended itself and upheld its views. It did so not by reason of its military 
and numerical predominance, but because at that time it surpassed its rivals and 
adversaries in education. At this period the Czech people occupied a leading 
position in European education. This is not the statement of a Czech nationalist, 
and still less of a Czech Cauvinist, but of a German, Dr. Bezold, who wrote: "The 
Hussites not only defended their opinions, but also taught the rest of Europe, and 
particularly their neighbors the Germans, a lesson in religious, political and 
national tolerance." The chalice was the symbol of the new social order. 


It was not a question merely of the new orthography of the Czech language (it was 
Hus who devised this new orthography) but for the stimulation of interest in 
spiritual matters amongst the masses of the Czech people. Hus was the first 
national teacher of the Czech people. Before his time education was exclusively in 
the possession of the nobility, and to a certain extent, of the wealthy burgher class. 
Owing to Hus, "Czech women had more learning than many a Church dignitary in 
Rome, " wrote Pope Pius II, Eneas Silvius. It was not a question merely of 
administrative measures, when, owing to the influence of Hus, the statutes of the 
University of Prague were altered in the year 1409, but of interesting the entire 
nation in the development of its one source of education. In consequence of this 



widespread interest in spiritual questions ordinary folk among the Czechs held 
open air meetings in order to discuss matters which hitherto had been reserved for 
the clergy and the nobility. The great assemblies of the Hussites constitute the first 
attempt in Europe to establish a parliament without class distinctions. 


Hus defended his right to expound the Scriptures and the doctrines of Wycliffe not 
because he was a Czech but because he wished to be instructed by a world 
assembly; he brought his dispute before the bar of public opinion, and interested 
the whole of Europe of that time, on the question of the rights of conscience. 

When the young Frenchman Earnest Denis, late professor of the Sorbonne, 
presented his dissertation, in the year 1873, on John Hus, and discussed in it some 
of his political opinions, his teacher remarked: "Do you know that you would have 
been burned for these opinions, exactly like John Hus, if you had spoken in this 
way at his time?" The talented young scientist, possessing the French spirit, 
answered: "I know; but I know as well, that if Huss had not lived, I would be 
burned for these opinions at the present time." 


This answer contains as well the answer for the second question, which 1 placed at 
the beginning of this lecture. The answer to the second question, what signifies 
Hus for Europe? is briefly, Hus was the pioneer of liberty, of conscience and of 
modern democracy. 


As he appealed to the human reason, against the council at Constance, further so 
he appealed to the human right for everybody without exception. This is the 
reason why the Freemasons in Czechoslovakia give place to Hus among the 
spiritual fathers of Freemasonry. 


If you ask me if any of the Czechoslovak lodges bears the name of John Hus, I 
must answer negatively. The oldest Czech lodge, which was established two days 
before the end of the world war, received the name "John Amos Komensky." This 
happened because the fourteen brothers who formed the first Masonic lodge 
before the war was yet ended agreed in this, that no one else could be more 
suitably chosen; so that this name would be placed on the shield of Czech 



Freemasonry. Because already, one hundred years earlier, it had been written of 
Komensky that he was the real father of modern Freemasonry. 


The man who said this was not a Czech, but a German, a professor of the 
university at Yenna, near Weimar, the favorite residence of our great brother 
Goethe, and of the Masonic student and author, Charles Christian Krause. 


One hundred years ago, the majority of the Czechoslovak nation slept still, not 
only in material obscurity but in spiritual slavery as well. Therefore the tenth 
Czech lodge adopted the motto: Veritas vincit, this was also the motto of Hussites. 


Hus signifies a great regenerative movement, the beginning of Czech renaissance 
in the fifteenth century. He signifies as well the beginning of the new movement, 
of the new renaissance of the Czech nation in the last century. 


One hundred years ago there came to Prague from Moravia, Francis Palacky, who 
became the great historian of the Czechoslovak nation. Palacky for the first time 
treated of the life of Hus in Czech history, and defended his name against clerical 
adversaries. It is a fact that it was the work of Palacky through which the national 
aspirations of the Czechoslovak people were awakened. Then years after the death 
of Palacky (who died a private scientist) there came to the university in Prague the 
young professor Thomas Garrigue Masaryk. 


The latter was first designated as professor of philosophy, but soon after he began 
to occupy himself with the synthesis of problems, to which he gave the title "The 
Czech Question. " 


A part of these studies is a book which has the title Johx Hess. Masaryk not only 
discussed the teaching of Hus as a matter of history, written by Palacky, but 



deduced the consequences of his studies, which signify the regeneration of the 
Czech nation in the sense of Hus. The process of the transmutation is not finished 
yet, the struggle which Masaryk undertook for the political liberty in the year 
1915, was begun in Geneva on the day of Hus, the 6th of July. 


This was done wittingly and purposely. The Czechoslovak legionnaires, who 
fought for the political independence of their country, have done so under the 
ensign of the Hussite chalice. During the last year of the war, one of the 
Czechoslovak regiments in Siberia received the name "Master John Hus' 
regiment," and continues to bear this name today. 


It can be said, that Hus awakened the Czechoslovak nation three times: The first 
time in the 15th century, the second time at the beginning of the 19th, and for the 
third time at the beginning of the 20th century. Led by the example of Hus, 
Palacky and Masaryk both insisted that the Czechoslovak nation should be so 
educated that they might deserve to stand among the most advanced nations of 
Western Europe, and to fight after the example of Hus for true liberty, and that 
Europe ought to consider the "Czech Question" as a part of the problem of 
European democracy. In this spirit the statesmen of Czechoslovakia defeated the 
Papal nuncio, Marmaggi, three years ago in Prague. Thus, have I endeavored to 
explain why the Czech Masons reverence and follow Jan Hus. 


— o — 


Masonic Clubs of the A. E. F. In the World War 
BY BRO. CHARLES F. IRWIN, Associate Editor 


FOR some years I have been deeply interested in the collection of data upon this 
subject. The effort has been unusually difficult by the seeming loss of interest upon 
the part of the men who were instrumental in creating and fostering the Clubs 



during the War. This may be accounted for to a degree by the stern necessity of 
recovering a professional and business standing upon return to civilian life. 


Out of the many Clubs that carried on the light of Masonry during the strenuous 
days of the struggle there are some that have been chronicled through the unselfish 
interest of members who gave, largely out of their own resources, the money to 
have printed booklets or pamphlets recording the origin and activities of their 
respective Masonic organizations. It has been our good fortune to receive copies of 
many of these pamphlet histories and from them to put in a consecutive form the 
series upon which we now enter. 


Moreover we have had the added good fortune to become the depository of a 
number of the original minute books and membership rolls of some of these Clubs, 
and in the nature of the case the histories we shall display in the series of articles 
here begun will have an added value and importance. 


In several instances the Clubs so nearly approximated to lodges that we hesitated 
for some time over the advisability of including their stories among our previous 
series that ran in THE BUILDER during the past two years. They, however, will 
find their place in this series. 


In view of the fact that it is our intention to present the results of these studies in 
book form at some time in the future, it will be of great assistance to us in covering 
the field adequately if the former members of Masonic Clubs during the War 
would kindly assist us by suggestions, and especially by the supply of any written 
information they may possess. The loan of booklets, histories of particular Clubs, 
together with the loan of pictures and other records, souvenirs or mementos 
connected with the life of such Clubs, for the purpose of having cuts made to 
illustrate these articles, will be regarded by us as a most fraternal consideration. It 
will be convenient if those able and willing to assist in this way would send the 
material to the author of this series, and we undertake, upon the completion of our 
use of the loaned material, to return it safely to those who so kindly permitted us to 
use it. 



The number of Clubs both at home and in Europe was so large that it will be 
necessary for us to compress the story of most of them and probably to publish 
more than one at a time. Frankly, there are a considerable number that are to us but 
names and locations. This list will be submitted to our readers as the series 
develops with the hope that some of their histories may come to us for use in our 
studies. 


It is as a labor of love we enter into this work, and we trust that from it may arise a 
new department of Masonic study, productive of valuable and permanent additions 
to the history of the Craft. Let us not permit the memories of these spontaneous 
Masonic activities of the Great War to be thrown into the rubbish heap, to leave 
only myths and vague traditions to be handed down to the coming generations. Let 
us contribute our portion of known Masonic facts so that around the present studies 
may grow a body of genuine historical record to instruct and guide the Craft should 
emergencies arise of a like nature unfortunately in the future. 


One of the anomalies of the history of Masonry during the World War is this, that 
the names of the brethren who were the active organizers and promoters of our 
Clubs during the War have in many cases passed into oblivion, while brethren who 
were apparently not identified with the war-time Masonic Clubs are now 
exceedingly active in fostering Masonic groups during peace time. Why is this so? 
Why have the war-time brethren permitted themselves to be thus shelved ? 


Another anomaly is this, that the bulk of the members and leaders in the war-time 
Clubs were enlisted men. Commissioned officers were few and far between as 
active Masonic workers. Today this is reversed, and men who have held or who 
now hold commissions from the government are the active Masonic Club leaders, 
while men who were enlisted soldiers have practically ceased to have any close 
connection with Club leadership. 



An illustration of this is seen in the conferring upon our war-time General Pershing 
the honor of the 33rd degree of Scottish Rite Masonry, and yet I have endeavored 
vainly to discover a single Lodge or Club in the A.E.F. which was honored by the 
presence of the General during the War. This is not at all intended to reflect on our 
wartime leader of the forces, but merely to illustrate how the bodies here at home 
have overlooked their opportunities to confer upon the brethren who bore the light 
of the Craft in dark days the honors their services deserved. It would be a most 
pleasing task for those who have studied the wartime Masonic leadership among 
the Craftsmen in the A.E.F. to furnish for such serious consideration a host of 
names of Masons who did so much to encourage and strengthen the courage and 
velour of our Craftsmen abroad. 


1. THE AMERICAN MASONIC CLUB OF NEVERS, FRANCE. 


This Club receives our first consideration due to the fact that it comes first on the 
official register of Masonic Clubs during the World War. It was not the pioneer in 
Club life, yet its history is a most interesting one. 


Nevers was the scene of much of the activities connected with the furnishing and 
refurnishing of motor transport during the war. At this post were located some of 
the largest motor assembly and repair shops of the A.E.F. 


Among its personnel therefore were to be found men of a high degree of education 
and skill. And naturally among such a group of Americans the Craft would find a 
considerable representation. Upon the Roster of the Club are to be found men of 
the universities and colleges as well as men from the factories and technical trades. 


Some years ago it was my good fortune to establish contact with Dr. Edgar Butler 
of Minden, Ida., who served the Club as its President. Bro. Butler is a successful 
dentist, and from his well-tested interest in the Craft during the War we are assured 
he is just as effective in his professional and fraternal activities today. Dr. Butler 



recognized the value of our researches into war-time Masonry and sent to us the 
original records and membership roll of the Club, to preserve with similar relics in 
a collected form and place, for future use by the Craft. What we have to say about 
this Club comes then from official sources and may be regarded as authentic. In 
addition to the valuable record furnished us by Bro. Butler, we were fortunate 
enough to establish a most delightful contact with Frank A. Starr of Richmond, 
Va., who served the Club most efficiently as its secretary during the War. We shall 
therefore have occasion to refer to his data as we go along. 


The American Masonic Club of Nevers, France, was 


AMERICAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCES 
OFFICE OF THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF 


France, April 17, 1919. 

Captain Frank is, Starr, Sec ., 
Masonic Club of Nevers, 
Nevers, France. 


Dear Captain Starr: 




General Pershing has received your letter of April 

10th, requesting his acceptance 

of honorary membership in the 

Masonic Club of Nevers, and 

directs me to inform you that 

it is with pleasure that he 

accepts same. 

Sincerely yours. 

Captain, A.G.D., 

Private Secretary. 


organized in April, 1918, and ran continuously until May or June of 1919, when 
possession of their Club rooms was surrendered by the fen members still remaining 
in Nevers. Only four or five members were left at this Post by that time. The 
requirement for Club membership was proof that the Entered Apprentice Degree 
had been conferred on the applicant in a regular Lodge of Free Masons. A nominal 
fee for membership was charged. The meetings were of a "get-together" type, and 
programs of a most pleasing nature were prepared and rendered. Occasionally 
there were musical programs, and generally refreshments were served. The 
refreshments consisted of chocolate, doughnuts, cakes and fruit. Music was 
furnished by the Engineers' Band. 




The same characteristic that will appear in other Clubs was the custom here, 
namely short talks on Masonry by well-informed brethren. One of the especially 
interesting things about this Club was, that when refreshments were left over after 
the Club had been regaled, the local inhabitants, who were usually standing outside 
listening to the music, would be invited in to dispose of the surplus. 


The programs seemed to have been greatly enjoyed by the members, and furnished 
them with topics for conversation upon adjournment. No distinction in rank was 
permitted to mar the harmony of these gatherings, and all met upon the level and 
were glad of the opportunity. 


The Club rooms remained open all day. Usually someone was in charge to look 
after visitors. A generous supply of books, magazines and papers were on hand, 
together with writing materials for the use of members and guests. 


From the fees and other financial resources a tidy sum was left in the hands of the 
treasurer. From this fund service was rendered to needy and worthy Masons and 
thereby was performed a most worthy fraternal service. 


A member of the Club, a Major-Chaplain (whose name, sad to say, is not on 
record), was in the habit of holding Christian services in a small church in Nevers 
each Sunday. It was the sole Protestant Church in the city, and it was having a hard 
struggle to maintain an existence. This coming to the attention of the Masonic 
Club, at the suggestion of a member, shortly before the Club disbanded, the funds 
remaining were voted to be given to this church for the purpose of having 
memorial windows of stained glass placed in the church to the memory of 
American Masons who served in France. A committee was appointed to make a 
thorough investigation, consisting of Bros. Butler and Starr. Capt. Starr went to 
Paris, placed the memorial sum on deposit to be paid to the firm after the work had 
been done. These windows were not installed till after the Americans had returned 



home, and so the kindly memorials they gave to our Protestant friends of Nevers 
were never seen by those who made them possible. 


While the movement looking toward the windows was on, it was suggested that the 
Club put on an entertainment and raise their gift to generous proportions. The idea 
was adopted and to commemorate the occasion, small aprons were made for 
distribution to friends and Masonic patrons. These were cut out of thin white 
leather, and were three inches wide and two and a half inches in depth. Upon the 
flap was printed, FIRST AMERICAN MASONIC CLUB, A.E.F.," and on the 
body of the apron, " NEVERS, FRANCE, FIRST ANNIVERSARY, APRIL 1, 
1919. LT. EDGAR BUTLER, PRES. 


This entertainment was a huge success. The aprons were auctioned off to the 
highest bidders. This occasioned great merriment, and was productive of a 
substantial sum. When the plungers had had their innings, the price came down, 
and the residue of the stock was disposed of at the price of five francs each. 


The officers of the Club forwarded one of these small aprons to General Pershing 
together with a membership card in their Club. A reply was returned to them 
expressing appreciation for the gift. 


From the report of the Overseas Masonic Mission, page 175, we read: 


On April 14th (1919), Bro. Lay visited Nevers and the American Masonic Club at 
that place. He learned that the Club had raised a fund of over 5,000 francs for the 
placing of art glass windows in the Protestant Chapel at Nevers, as a memorial to 
the American Masons in the A. E F., and attended the regular meeting of the Club 
on April 1 5th. 



On page 179 of the same report is the following: 


The fund raised by the American Masonic Club at Nevers for stained glass 
memorial windows in the Protestant Chapel at Nevers was turned over to the 
Mission. The glass was ordered and under its auspices and supervision was 
installed. 


Among the papers read before this Club was one by Bro. Charles E. Smith, Y. M. 
C. A. Secretary, Camp Stevenson, France. Its title is as follows: "Points of Interest 
concerning the French Masonic Fodge and Fodge Rooms of the Grand Orient of 
France Focated at No. 36, rue de l'Oratoire, Nevers (Nievre), France." In this paper 
are some data of sufficient value to the Masonic student to warrant reproducing it 
here. 


The first point of interest is the inscription on a plate on the exterior of the 
building, which, literally translated, is: CHAMBER OF THE DUCOY or 
NEVERIANS, 1405-1789; CREATED BY PHIEIP OF BURGUNDY. 
DEPARTMENT AF (STATE) PRISON, 1789-1862. INITIATIVE SYNDICATE 
OF NEVERS, 1862-1912. 


Within this building to the rear is a room which was used for Masonic purposes. 
Suspended from the ceiling a short distance from the station of the Venerable 
Master is the letter "G." The room was originally used as a Chapel for the Counts, 
and later for the prisoners. It has been the Masonic Lodge Room since 1884. 
Descending to the basement you enter what proved to be the cell or dungeon which 
was at one time a room of torture. Hinges with chains attached, which were used to 
chain prisoners to the wall, when the building was used as a prison house, are still 
intact. On the ceiling are inscriptions freely translated as follows: 


If curiosity has brought you here, pass on. 



If you fear to have your faults revealed, you will fare ill with us. 

If you are capable of deceit, tremble; someone will find you out. 

If you care for distinction among men, pass on; they are not known here 


According to the French and other continental rituals, the candidate is first 
introduced into the Chamber of Reflection, and the above sentences are usually 
inscribed prominently on the walls, to give the keynote to the aspirant's 
meditations. He has also to write answers to several questions, and to give briefly 
his ideas about the fraternity and the motives that have led him to seek initiation. 


The old dungeon of this historic building was obviously well adapted for this 
peculiar and impressive part of the French initiatory rites. 


This Lodge was organized in or about 1789. 


The following notice referring to the Club appeared in the New York Herald, Paris 
Edition, in 1918: 


Masonic Lodge at Nevers, France, 
January 8, 1918. 


New York Herald, 
Paris, France. 


Gentlemen: 



Please publish the following notice in your Lost and Found column: 


FOUND: Masonic identification tag, belonging to Bro George N Neill, member of 
Pittsburgh Lodge, No. 221. Bro. Neill can secure tag by corresponding with Capt. 
Frank A. Starr, Secretary, Masonic Club, Nevers, France. 


Yours very truly, 
F.A. STARR, 


Capt., Commanding 118th Co., T. C., 
Secretary, Masonic Club, Nevers, France. 


In 1929 I communicated with the Secretary of the above Lodge to discover 
whether or not Bro. Neill had ever recovered his tag. 


A reply from the secretary of the Lodge informed me that Bro. Neill was no longer 
a member of the Lodge and his present address is not known. I am sure we would 
all be very glad to learn what became of the tag, and of Bro. Neill. 


The rosters display the signatures of 295 members. Several pages of another 
register book torn from it are found among the Club records without designation. 
One hundred and seventy-six names are found thereon. They are not duplicates of 
the first list. Should they prove to be additional members of this same Club then its 
total membership must be placed at 47 1 . However, there was another Club at 
Nevers for a time, the "Consistory Masonic Club of Nevers," and this may prove to 
be its membership list. 



All in all, the brethren stationed at Nevers proved themselves active and united in a 
common zeal for the Craft and for works of beneficence and mercy. They cared for 
the sick and unfortunate of the Craft upon call and are one of the links in the 
golden chain which is lengthening year by year through all lands and among all 
races. 


Bro. Starr tells us of an interesting testimony which I wish to pass on to the Craft at 
large. He says in a letter to me dated February 15, 1929: 


Our Commander of Military Police in Nevers, who attended our meetings 
regularly, often stated that in all his dealings with disorderly, drunken or rough 
soldiers, at no time, to his knowledge, was one of them a Mason. 


The highest credit should go to Bros. Butler and Starr for their willingness to assist 
these scattered relics of their former Club at Nevers, France. 


— o — 


The Real Cagliostro His Memorial to the French Parliament 


By BRO. CYRUS FIELD WILLARD, California (Continued from March) 


ON the 19th of September, 1780, 1 arrived at Strasburg. A few days after my 
arrival, having been recognized by the Count Gevuski, I saw myself forced to 
accede to the solicitations of the City and of all the Nobility of Alsace, and to 
dedicate my talents in medicine to the service of the Public. I can cite among the 



acquaintances I have made in this city, M. the Marshal de Contades, the Marquis 
de la Salle, the Baron de Frasilande, the Baron de l'Or, the Baron Vorminser, the 
Baron de Diederik, Madame the Princess Christine and many others. 


All those who have known me at Strasburg know what have been my acts and 
work there. If I have been slandered in obscure lampoons, the newspapers and 
some fair authors have rendered me justice. Let me be permitted to quote some 
passages from a book printed in 1783, having for its title, "Letters on Switzerland." 
The estimable author of these letters expresses himself thus in Vol. 1, page 5, and 
following pages: 


This singular and astonishing man is admirable by his conduct and by his vast 
learning. His countenance announces understanding and expresses genius, while 
his eyes of fire read to the depths of one's soul. 


He arrived from Russia about seven or eight months ago, and appears willing to 
settle in this city at least for some time. No one knows from whence he came, who 
he is, or where he goes. Liked, loved dearly, respected by the governors of the 
place and the principal people of the city, he is adored by the poor and the common 
people, and hated and slandered by certain people (doctors), Receiving neither 
money nor presents from those whom he has cured, he passes his life in visiting the 
sick, and above all the poor, while aiding them with remedies which he distributes 
free to them, and helping them with his purse so that they may have food. 


He eats very little and mainly the pastry of Italy. He never goes to bed and sleeps 
only two or three hours, sitting up in an armchair, and in fact is always ready to fly 
to help the unfortunates, no matter what hour it may be, having no other pleasure 
than that of assisting his fellow man. 



This incredible man maintains a state much more astonishing, for he pays for 
everything in advance, and no one knows where he derives his revenues nor who 
furnishes the money. 


You will understand, Madame, that they have made violent jests at his expense; he 
is the anti-Christ at least; he is five or six hundred years old; he possesses the 
philosopher's stone and the universal medicine. In short he is one of those 
intelligences whom the Creator sometimes sends on earth clad in a mortal 
envelope. 


If that is so, it is certainly an intelligence worthy of respect. I have seen very few 
souls as compassionate as his, nor a heart as good and tender. No one has more wit 
or learning than he has; he knows all the languages of Europe and of Asia and his 
eloquence astonishes and carries away even those who speak the least good of him. 
I say nothing of his marvelous cures; volumes would be necessary for that while all 
the newspapers will tell you of them. You should know that of more than fifteen 
thousand sick persons whom he has treated, his most furious enemies can reproach 
him with only three deaths, in which, moreover, he had no more part than I have. 


Pardon me, Madame, if I stay a few moments more on this remarkable man. I have 
just come from his assembly room. How you would cherish this worthy mortal if 
you had seen him, as I have, run from poor person to poor person, dress their 
disgusting wounds, alleviate their pain, console them with hope, dispense to them 
remedies free, overwhelm them with favors; in short, heap on them gifts without 
any other purpose than that of helping suffering humanity and to enjoy the 
inestimable pleasure of being on earth the image of the beneficent Divinity. 


Figure to yourself, Madame, an immense hall, filled with these unhappy creatures, 
nearly all deprived of any help and extending towards Heaven their feeble hands 
which they could scarcely raise to implore the charity of the Count. 



He listens to one after another, forgets not one of their words, goes out for some 
moments and returns soon loaded with a multitude of remedies which he freely 
dispenses to each of these unfortunates, while repeating to them what they told him 
of their illness and assuring them that they will soon be cured if they faithfully 
execute his orders. But the remedies alone would not be sufficient: they must have 
bread to acquire the strength to support them: few of them have the means to 
procure it for themselves so the purse of the Count is shared among them and it 
would seem that it is inexhaustible. 


Being more happy to give than to receive from them, his joy is manifested by his 
tenderness. These unhappy ones, penetrated with gratitude, with love and respect, 
prostrate themselves at his feet, embrace his knees, call him their Savior, their 
Father and their God The good man is moved to pity, tears flow from his eyes; he 
wishes to hide them but he has not the power to do so. He weeps and the assembly 
melts in tears, delicious tears which are the luxury of the heart and of which the 
charms cannot be expressed unless one has been happy enough to shed similar 
ones. 


This is but a very feeble sketch of the enchanting spectacle I have just enjoyed. 


The testimony which this author renders to the truth has nothing exaggerated in it. 


One can question the curates of the parishes; they will tell of the good I have done 
for the poor of their district. One can question the corps of artillery and the 
different regiments which were then in garrison at Strasburg; they will tell of the 
numbers of soldiers I have cured. They can examine the apothecary with whom I 
dealt; he will tell of the quantity of medicine I have had him make for the poor 
people and which I paid him for each day in ready money. They can question the 
innkeepers; they will tell whether the inns and furnished hotels would suffice for 
the great concourse of strangers whom I attracted to Strasburg. One can question 
the jailers; they will tell how I have conducted myself towards the poor prisoners 
and the number of them I have had set free. 



Let the chiefs of the city, let the magistrates, let the entire public say if ever I have 
caused any scandal and whether in my actions they have found one single thing 
contrary to the laws, to good morals or to religion. 


If during my stay in France I have offended a single person, let him stand forth and 
bear testimony against me. 


This is not intended to glorify myself. I have done good because I felt I ought to do 
it. But, after all, what benefit have I received for the services I have rendered the 
French nation? In the bitterness of my heart shall I say it: libels, lampoons and the 
Bastille ! 


For nearly a year I was at Strasburg when one evening on returning home, I had the 
agreeable surprise of finding there the Chevalier d'Aquino. (NoteAThe reader is 
asked to remember that it was the Knight of Malta, dAquino, whose acquaintance I 
had made at Malta and who accompanied me on my first travels in Europe. He had 
learned from the newspapers of my being in Strasburg and had made the voyage 
there expressly in order to see me and renew the ties of our former friendship.) 


The Chevalier dAquino had seen the chiefs of the city and was able to tell them 
what he knew of my stay at Malta, and the distinction with which the Grand 
Master Pinto had treated me. 


Shortly after my arrival in France, M. the Cardinal de Rohan had sent the Baron de 
Millinens, his master of the hounds, to tell me that he wished to know me. As long 
as it was only a matter of curiosity as to myself with the Prince, I refused to gratify 
it. But soon after when he sent to tell me that he had an attack of asthma and 
wished to consult me, I went in haste to his episcopal palace. When I gave him my 



opinion as to his malady, he appeared satisfied and begged me to come to see him 
from time to time. 


In the eourse of 1781, M. the Cardinal did me the honor to come to my house in 
order to consult me on the illness of his relative, the Prince de Soubise. He was 
attacked with gangrene and I had had the good fortune to cure of the same malady 
the secretary of the Marquis de la Salle after he had been abandoned by all the 
doctors. I asked some questions of M. the Cardinal about the illness of the Prince, 
but he interrupted me by earnestly praying me to accompany him to Paris. He put 
so much courtesy and politeness into his solicitations that it was impossible for me 
to refuse him. 1 departed with him, leaving with my surgeon and my friends the 
necessary orders so that my sick people and the poor might not suffer in my 
absence. 


When we arrived at Paris, M. the Cardinal wished to take me right to the Prince de 
Soubise, but I refused, telling him that my intention was to avoid all causes of 
altercation with the Faculty [of Medicine] and that I wished to see the Prince only 
after the doctors had declared his case hopeless. 


M. the Cardinal was kind enough to agree to this and came back to me to say that 
the Faculty had declared he was better. I declared to him then that I would not go 
to see the Prince as I did not wish to usurp the glory of a cure which was not due to 
my own work (1). 


The public having been informed of my arrival, there came so many people to see 
and consult me that I was occupied every day, during the thirteen days I remained 
in Paris, in seeing the sick, from five o'clock in the morning until nearly midnight. 


I dealt with an apothecary, but gave away at my own expense a great deal more 
medicine than he sold. I call all persons who have had recourse to me as witnesses 
to this fact. If there is one single one of them who can say that they have ever made 



me accept the smallest sum of money, or presents, then I will consent to being 
refused any kind of confidence. 


Prince Louis (de Rohan) took me back to Saverne, gave me many thanks and 
begged me to come to see him as often as possible. I returned to Strasburg 
immediately, where I recommenced my customary work. 


The good that 1 did brought me in return various kinds of libels and lampoons, in 
which I was treated as anti-Christ, the Wandering Jew, Man of Fourteen Hundred 
Years, etc. 


Having become tired of so many injuries and insults, I made the resolution to leave 
Strasburg. But various letters which the Ministers of the King had the kindness to 
write regarding myself, caused me to change this resolution. 


It is important in this trial, 1 believe, to put beneath the eyes of the Judges and of 
the public these recommendations from those in so much more honorable stations 
than myself, since I have not solicited them directly or indirectly. Some are as 
follows: 


Copy of a letter written by the Count de Vergennes, Minister of Foreign Affairs, to 
M. Gerard, Pretor (Judge) of Strasburg. Dated at Versailles, March 13, 1783. 


I am not personally acquainted with M. the Count de Cagliostro, but all reports, 
during the time he has resided at Strasburg, are so favorable to him that humanity 
requires that he find there respect and tranquillity. His quality of foreigner and the 
good in which he excels so constantly and which he does so persistently, are 
vouchers which authorize me to recommend him to you and to the town-council 
over which you preside. M. de Cagliostro asks only tranquillity and safety; 



hospitality assures him these. Knowing your natural disposition, I am persuaded 
that you will be eager to make him enjoy them and such other pleasures as it is 
possible for him to procure. 


I have the honor to be, Monsieur, your very humble and very obedient servant. 
(Signed) DE VERGENNES. 


Copy of the letter of M. the Marquis DE MIROMENIL, Keeper of the Seals, to M. 
Gerard, Pretor of Strasburg. Dated at Versailles March 15, 1783. 


The Count de Cagliostro has employed himself with zeal since he has been at 
Strasburg in comforting the poor and unfortunate and I have knowledge of several 
actions of this Foreigner which were full of humanity and which deserve that you 
accord him a special protection. I recommend to you therefore to procure for him, 
in all that concerns you and the town-council over which you preside, that 
protection and all the tranquillity which a Foreigner should enjoy in the dominions 
of the King, especially when he renders himself useful there. 


(Signed) MIROMENIL. 


Copy of the letter written by the Marquis de SEGUR to M. the Marquis DE LA 
SALLE. Under date of March 15, 1783. 


The good conduct, Monsieur, that has been assured me that the Count de 
Cagliostro has constantly maintained at Strasburg, the estimable use that he has 
made of his learning and talents in that city, and the multiplied proofs of humanity 
that he has given to individuals attacked by various maladies who have had 
recourse to him, warrant that this Foreigner shall have the protection of the 
Government. The King charges you to see that he be not disturbed at Strasburg 



when he may judge it fitting to return there, but also that he may experience in that 
city the attentions which the services he renders to the unfortunate ought to procure 
for him. 


(Signed) SEGUR (2). 


The tranquillity which these ministerial letters secured for me was not of long 
duration. But it was on these letters and the orders of the King that I was pleased to 
consider France as the end of my travels. Could I believe that two years later the 
sacred rights of hospitality, so solemnly recognized and so nobly expressed in the 
letters written in the name of the King, would be invoked in vain by my unhappy 
wife and myself ? 


Having been persecuted by one class of men for a long time and these attacks 
beginning again, 1 decided to leave Strasburg, firmly resolved to expose myself no 
longer to the malicious attacks of this envious class. (3) I was in this humor when I 
received a letter from the Chevalier d' Aquino, in which he informed me he was 
dangerously ill. I left Strasburg immediately, but in spite of all the haste I was able 
to make I arrived at Naples only in time to receive the last sigh of my unfortunate 
friend. 


A few days after my arrival I was recognized by the Ambassador of Sardinia and 
several other persons. Seeing that I would be again persecuted for taking up 
medicine once more, I made the resolution to go to England, and traversed the 
southern part of France with this purpose in view, arriving at Bordeaux on the 8th 
of November, 1783. 


Being at the theatre in that city I was recognized by an officer of cavalry, who 
hastened to inform the town-council who I was. The Chevalier Roland, one of their 
number, had the courtesy to come in the name of his fellow-members to offer my 



wife and myself a place in their box at any time that we might like to come to the 
theatre. 


The town-council and the public having given me the most distinguished reception 
and solicited me most earnestly to dedicate myself, as at Strasburg, to the service 
of the sick, I allowed myself to be persuaded, and began to give consultations and 
distribute remedies and sums of money to the poor. The crowds of people became 
so great that I was obliged to ask the town-council for soldiers to maintain order in 
my house. 


It was at Bordeaux that I had the honor of making the acquaintance of M. the 
Marshal de Mouchi, M. the Count de Fumel, M. the Viscount de Hamel and other 
persons worthy of trust, who will testify as to the manner in which I conducted 
myself in that city. 


The same kind of persecution which had made me leave Strasburg followed me to 
Bordeaux, and from that city I took my departure, after eleven months' residence, 
for Lyons, where I arrived during the last days of October, 1784. But I remained 
only three months in the latter city, and then left for Paris, where I arrived January 
30, 1785. At first I stopped in one of the furnished hotels in the Palais-Royal 
district, and a little later I went to live in a house in the Rue St. Claude, near the 
Boulevard. 


My first care was to declare to all the persons I knew, that my intention was to live 
quietly and that I did not wish to occupy myself any more with medicine. I have 
kept my word and have refused stubbornly all solicitations which have been made 
to me in this respect. 


Princ Louis (de Rohan) has done me the honor to come to see me from time to 
time. I remember that one day he proposed to me that I make the acquaintance of a 
lady clled Valois de la Motte, and it was for this purpose: 



"The Queen," said the Cardinal de Rohan to me, "is plunged in the most profound 
melancholy because some one has predicted to her that she would die in her 
approaching confinement. It would be one of the greatest pleasures to me if I were 
able to succeed in disabusing her of this idea and restore calm to her imagination. 
Madame sees the Queen daily and you would do me a great favor, if she should ask 
your opinion, if you would say to her that the Queen will be happily delivered of a 
Prince." 


I consented willingly to what M. the Cardinal asked of me, since in obliging him I 
found myself indirectly exercising a happy influence on the health of the Queen. 


Going next day to the hotel of the Cardinal I found there the Countess de la Motte, 
who, after saying many civil things to me, spoke to me thus: 


"I know at Versailles a person of great distinction to whom someone has predicted, 
as well as to another lady, that both of them would die in confinement. One of 
them is already dead and the other is waiting with the greatest anxiety the time 
when she is to be delivered. If you are able to know, truly, what is to happen or if 
you believe it possible to be informed on it, I will go to Versailles tomorrow to 
make a report to the person interested on it. This person," she added, "is the 
Queen." 


I answered the Countess de la Motte that all such predictions were follies and she 
should say to this person, moreover, to recommend herself to the Eternal, that her 
first confinements had been fortunate and this one would be so likewise. 


The Countess de la Motte was not content with this reply; she persisted in trying to 
obtain from me something more positive. 



I remembered then the promise made to the Prince de Rohan, took a very grave 
tone and said to the Countess de la Motte in the most serious manner possible: 


"Madame, you know that I have some knowledge of medicinal physics; and I 
possess some on Animal Magnetism. My opinion is that an innocent person can 
work in such a case with more power than any other. Thus if you wish to know the 
truth, begin by securing an innocent person." 


The Countess answered: "Since you have need of an innocent person, I have a 
Niece who is exceedingly so. I will bring her here tomorrow." I imagined that this 
innocent Niece was a child of five or six years and was very much astonished on 
finding the next day at the hotel of the Prince that it was a young lady of fourteen 
or fifteen years, taller than myself. 


"Here," said the Countess to me, "is the innocent one of whom I have spoken to 
you." I had need to compose my countenance not to burst out laughing. But after 
all I succeeded in holding in and said to the young lady, Mademoiselle de la Tour: 


"Mademoiselle, is it indeed true that you are innocent?" She replied with more 
assurance than frankness, "Yes, sir." 


"Well, Mademoiselle, I am going in an instant to know if you are; so recommend 
yourself to God and to your innocence. Place yourself behind that screen, close 
your eyes and wish to yourself the thing you most desire to see. If you are innocent 
you will see what you wish to see, but if you are not innocent you will see nothing. 



Mile, de la Tour placed herself behind the screen and I remained outside with the 
Prince, who was standing by the side of the chimney, not in ecstacy as Mile, de la 
Tour has claimed, but with his hand on his mouth in order not to trouble our grave 
ceremonies with an indiscreet laugh. 


Mile, de la Tour being then behind the screen, I began to make some magnetic 
passes which lasted for some moments and then I said to her: 


"Strike one stroke on the ground with your innocent feet and tell me if you see 
anything?" 


"I see nothing," she said to me. 


"Well, Mademoiselle," said I to her, and giving a hard blow to the screen, "you are 
not innocent then." 


At these words the Demoiselle de la Tour, stung by this remark, exclaimed "That 
she saw the Queen." 


I saw then that the innocent niece had been instructed by the aunt, who was not so 
innocent either. Wishing to see in what manner she would further play the role, I 
asked her to give me a description of the phantom that she saw. she answered that 
the lady was enceinte, that she was clad all in white, and she detailed her features, 
which were precisely those of the Queen. 


"Ask this lady," I said to her, "if she will be happily delivered?" 



She replied that the lady nodded her head and said that she would be delivered 
without any vexatious consequences. 


"I command you," I said to her finally, "to kiss respectfully the hand of this Lady." 
The innocent one kissed her own hand and came out from behind the screen, well 
content to have persuaded us as to the matter of her innocence. 


The aunt and the niece ate some sweetmeats, drank some lemonade and withdrew 
by a private stairway, a quarter of an hour later. The Prince saw me home and 
thanked me for what I had been kind enough to do in order to oblige him. Thus 
was finished a comedy as innocent in itself as it was laudable in its motive. 


Three or four days later, being at the house of M. the Cardinal, and the Countess de 
la Motte being there, they begged me to renew the same sport with a little boy of 
five or six years, and I thought that I ought not to refuse them this slight 
satisfaction. Little did I imagine that a social joke would be denounced to the 
Public Prosceutor later as an act of sorcery, a profanation, and a sacrilege on the 
mysteries of Christianity. 


The Prince having caused me to become acquainted with the Countess de la Motte, 
asked me what I thought of her. I have always had the opinion that I was somewhat 
of a judge of physiognomy, and so I replied to the Prince that I regarded the 
Countess de la Motte as a cheat and a schemer. The Prinee interrupted me, saying 
that she was an honest woman but in dire distress from poverty. I observed that if it 
were true, as she had told him, that she was the special protegee of the Queen, she 
would soon enjoy better fortune and she would not need to have recourse to any 
other protection. 


The Prince and I remained each in his own opinion. He left a short time afterwards 
for Saveme, where he made a stay of a month or six weeks. On his return he came 
to see me at my house more often than usual. I saw that he was uneasy, pensive 



and distrait. I respected his secrecy, but every time that the question of the 
Countess de la Motte came up, I said to him with my usual frankness: 


"That woman is deceiving you." 


About fifteen days before he was arrested he said to me: 


"My dear Count, I am commencing to believe that you are right and that Madame 
Valois is a cheat." Then he related to me, for the first time, the story of the 
Diamond Necklace, and made me aware of the suspicions that he had formed and 
of the fear that he had that the necklaee had not in fact been delivered to the 
Queen, all of which made me persist more than ever in my first opinion. 


The next day after this conversation, the Prince told me that the Count and 
Countess de la Motte had sought shelter with him on account of the fear they had 
as to the consequences of this affair and they had begged him to give them letters 
of recommendation for England or for the neighborhood of the Rhine. 


The Prince asked my opinion and I told him there was only one course to take and 
that was to deliver this woman to the Police, and then go and relate all the facts to 
the King or his Ministers. The Prince objected and said that the goodness and 
generosity of his heart was opposed to so violent an expedient. 


"In that ease," I replied, "you have no other recourse than God. He must do the rest 
and I hope He may." 



M. the Cardinal de Rohan, not being willing to give the Count and Countess de la 
Motte the letters of recommendation that they wished, they departed for Burgundy, 
and I have not heard anyone speak of them since then. 


On August 1 5th I learned, as did all Paris, that M. the Cardinal de Rohan had been 
arrested. Some persons warned me that as I was a friend of the Cardinal I might be 
arrested also. Convinced of my own innocence, I replied that I was resigned and 
would wait patiently in my house the will of God and that of the Government. 


On August 22d, at half past seven in the morning, a Commissaire, an exempt 
[under officer] and eight men of the police came to my house. The plundering 
began in my presence. They forced me to open my secretaries and writing desks; 
and elixirs, balsams and precious liqueurs all became the booty of the Bailiffs who 
were entrusted with the duty of escorting me. 


I begged the Commissaire, M. Chenon, junior, to permit me to use my carriage, but 
he had the inhumanity to refuse me this slight relief. They dragged me away on 
foot, with the greatest exposure, half-way to the Bastille, when a hackney coach 
approaching, I obtained the favor of being allowed to get into it. The terrible 
drawbridge was lowered and I saw myself a prisoner. 


My wife suffered the same fate. Here I stop, shuddering, and will conceal what I 
have suffered. I will spare the feelings of the reader by refraining from depicting a 
picture equally painful and revolting. I shall permit myself only one word, and 
Heaven is my witness that this word is the expression of the truth. If anyone would 
give me the choice between the last pain of execution and six months in the 
Bastille I would say without hesitation: "Lead me to the scaffold." 


NOTES. 



(1) Later on the Prince was given up by his doctors, and his case declared hopeless. 
Cagliostro then took charge and under his ministrations the patient made a 
complete recovery 

(2) The Marquis de Segur was at that time Minister of War 

(3) The well known Baron de Gleichen, in his book, Souvenirs says that it was the 
members of the medical profession almost exclusively who carried on this 
persecution of libel and slander against Cagliostro. They did not like his curing 
people of diseases which had proved insusceptible to their science, and above all 
they objected to his doing it gratuitously. 


(To be concluded) 


— o — 


BUREAUCRATIC DESPOTISM 

Red-tape, Technicalities and Delay in the U. S. Veterans Bureau 


BY BRO. LEONARD G. COOP, Missouri 


IN the March issue of "The Builder," under the caption "The Broken Men of the 
Great War," a short summary was given on matters pertaining to the Veterans 
Bureau and the disabled veterans, illustrated with a typical and concrete case 
(Joseph G. Bolland). 


For the benefit of the reader who did not see the article above noted a brief digest 
of the claim may be in order, which will then be followed with the subsequent 



happenings in this particular case further to illustrate Veteran Bureau methods and 
stupidity. 


Mr. Bolland (name is fictitious to save the family embarrassment) was a normal 
boy prior to service, he served his country faithfully and well, official records show 
that he was wounded in action. 


He was treated by competent physicians from almost the day he was discharged for 
a mental condition which was undoubtedly caused from his experiences overseas. 


One of the doctors who treated him, who had been the family physician for many 
years prior to the World War, gives very positive medical evidence (in affidavit 
form) which shows a serious mental disability existing practically from the day the 
veteran left the service; this physician was himself formerly employed by the 
Veterans Bureau, and made the affidavit while a member of the Rating Board in 
1924. 


Other doctors, practicing in the community where this veteran resided and who 
treated him at different times, have all given the Bureau the same testimony, the 
only dissenting opinion in his entire folder is the statement of one doctor who saw 
him for but a short time in 1923 at a general hospital, he knew nothing about the 
boy's history, and from the report in his folder quite apparently made a diagnosis 
largely upon what the veteran himself told him; and at that time he was suffering 
from a mental disorder. 


After being discharged from this hospital, where he was a patient but a few days, 
he repeatedly tried to secure treatment from the Veterans Bureau, and finally wrote 
a letter to the writer of this article, stating he could not go on without treatment, 
and that he intended to end his life unless he could get some relief. 



Treatment was denied by the Bureau; and in desperation he blew his head off with 
a shotgun, his last letter being a pitiful appeal for medical aid. 


The veteran's folder was then sent to Washington and efforts were made to secure 
compensation for his estate, but to no avail, the Bureau going so far as to say in 
their decision of June 25, 1924: 


"Evidence in the file does not show presence of a compensable rating - cause of 
death Gun Shot Wound in head by own hand - not due to service." 


The case lay dormant for five years when the writer again took it up and induced 
the aged father to permit another effort to clear his son's name from the stigma that 
had been placed upon him by the doctor in 1923, who gave the diagnosis of 
constitutional psychopathic inferior. 


This boy's pre-war history is so much at variance with such a diagnosis that the 
Bureau physician who knew him well both before and after service makes a very 
positive statement, which is on file, protesting such a conclusion. 


The Bureau has been given every opportunity to make investigation of this case, 
the Director has been written to repeatedly, and the whole claim was carefully 
discussed with the Director's special personal representative, who called on the 
writer last January. 


Numerous letters, much publicity, and efforts of prominent people have been made 
to have the Bureau correct such an injustice, the only result has been a letter dated 
Feb. 8, 1930, from Mr. H. H. Milks, Chief of Awards of the Veterans Bureau in 
Washington, which states in part: 



. . the evidence in file - has been carefully reviewed and it is now held that the 
cause of the death of your son is DIRECTLY DUE TO AND PROXIMATELY the 
result of mental disease, which disability was held as incurred in service" 


Mr. Milks then goes on to explain, by devious and complicated methods peculiar to 
the Bureau, that no compensation can be paid to the estate. 


The question is asked Mr. Milks, that if this disabled veteran died from a disability 
contracted in the service, and he filed his claim in 1920, and there is no misconduct 
complication, why was he not justly rated under the laws in existence at the time of 
his death? Surely their own physician's statement, who was intimately familiar 
with this boy's entire history and condition, proves beyond the question of a doubt, 
that the veteran did suffer from a serious mental condition from the day of his 
discharge from the army. 


As a sort of sop to the parents and also to have something to show the public that 
the Bureau was trying to be magnamimous, they offer the parents the princely sum 
of $20 per month dependency allowance for the loss of their son. 


This has been refused by the bereaved parents, for they hold such an offer as an 
insult. 


This Masonic family at present has from the Veterans Bureau, as its contribution to 
the memory of one who did his part willingly, and finally died (the primary cause 
of his death occurring in the service of his country ) only the stigma of an official 
diagnosis of constitutional psychopathic inferior. 



It will be quite interesting to see the final outcome of this distressing case when 
suit, now pending for insurance benefits, is brought to trial in the Federal Court. 


A substantial proportion of the Bureau's handling of claims is an outrage on the 
generous and sympathetic American people. I quote the words of one of the 
Bureau's own executives: 


". . . Bureau's negligence constitutes a crying miscarriage of justice and will subject 
the Bureau to ridicule and contempt by all thinking people...." 


It would be difficult, if not well nigh impossible, to bring this doctor who gave the 
diagnosis in 1923 to account, but it should not be held impossible to hold strictly 
accountable every official in the Veterans Bureau from the Director down, who has 
been responsible for subsequent decisions and ratings up to date in this most 
pathetic case. 


It is precisely such inexcusable carelessness (putting it charitably) or official 
maladministration of a trust (to put it accurately) which offsets the many good 
things that the Bureau has accomplished, and which brings the organization into 
ill-repute throughout the country. 


The next illustrative case, which is here presented, is that of a nephew of a 
prominent Illinois Mason, and is particularly distressing, as the veteran is still 
living, though with but little to live for. 


His name is Wm. J. Shackelford, and in addition to his many other disabilities, he 
is now blind, and quite sensitive about permitting his condition to become public 
property. 



He is, and has been, in a hospital at one of the Soldiers Homes, and even the 
Bureau has considered him as "permanently and totally disabled" since March 26, 
1927. 


He only consented to allow his case to be used after much persuasion, and with the 
promise that his present location be withheld. 


The Veterans Bureau has cause to know this case full well, for a large number of 
prominent persons in different parts of the country have voiced vigorous protests 
against the almost criminal delay, and the treatment accorded this blind, and 
otherwise disabled, veteran who had an excellent record in the Air Service. 


A brief review of his claim, taken from official records (unless otherwise so stated) 
is as follows: 


Enlisted in the Air Service August 9, 1918, in practically perfect physical and 
mental condition. 


He had formerly been employed by Mr. Glenn H. Curtiss when the airplane 
business was yet in its infancy, and if this article happens to be read by Mr. Curtiss 
he may remember the young man who was with him when his first seaplane was 
launched in San Diego, California. 


Mr. Shackelford was hospitalized three times for the "flu," during service in 1918 
and also for bronchitis. 



In June, 1919, his right leg was severely injured in an airplane accident. The 
official records show that he was in the hospital for 35 days for this injury. 


December, 1919, he was again severely injured in an airplane crash, right leg 
broken, multiple cuts on face and head, also internal injuries. 


The above are all of official record, with exception of an adequate record of the 
internal injuries, and undoubtedly his personal statement, and his present condition 
abundantly indicate that he suffered such injuries. 


His eyes commenced to give him trouble after the airplane crash, and competent 
eye specialists claim that his head wounds could have been, and very probably 
were, the primary cause of his present blindness. 


He consulted a physician soon after discharge regarding the condition of his eyes, 
but the doctor has since died and there are no records available, although the son, 
who is a lifelong friend of the veteran, and also a physician himself, distinctly 
remembers his father advising the veteran that he should go to an eye specialist. 
This statement is on file with the Bureau. Such evidence of course is irrelevant, 
immaterial, and absolutely of no consequence in the eyes of the Bureau; and 
judging from the remarks that the writer has heard hundreds of times in similar 
cases, it certainly will be sneered at in the Central Office of the Bureau in 
Washington. 


The veteran who had an unusual amount of pluck, had an aversion to asking aid of 
anyone; he endeavored to make his way without assistance after being discharged 
from the Air Service. But after honest and earnest efforts had to give up entirely, 
and when his funds were exhausted he applied for relief to the Bureau, and filed a 
claim in 1926. 



Mr. Shackelford served two enlistments in the Air Service. Character marked as 
"Excellent" on both of his discharges. He passed an examination for a commission, 
and was commended by Brig. Glen. Wm. A. Mitchell. 


He now suffers from the after-effects of the following injuries, which are directly 
or indirectly due to injuries or illness contracted in the service "in line of duty": 
right knee crushed, right leg broken, internal injuries, left arm broken, six ribs 
fractured, chest trouble, frequent severe headaches, entirely blind in right eye, 
practically no sight in left eye. After a great amount of effort on the part of friends 
who became interested in him, his claim was finally allowed at one of the Bureau 
Regional Offices January, 1929, THREE YEARS AFTER HE HAD FILED HIS 
CLAIM. 


Due to Bureau procedure it was necessary that his folder be then sent to the Board 
of Appeals in Chicago, 111., later it was forwarded to the Central Office of the 
Bureau in Washington for further review, where it has been ever since. IT IS NOW 
15 MONTHS SINCE THE REGIONAL OFFICE MADE A COMPLETE AND 
EXHAUSTIVE STUDY OF THE CASE AND GRANTED COMPENSATION, 
AND YET NO FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE BUREAU IN 
WASHINGTON UP TO DATE OF WRITING THIS ARTICLE (MARCH 20, 
1930). 


If any final decision has been made, it is unknown to the writer, and it is known 
that the veteran has not received any compensation. 


Inlet us look for a moment as to what has happened to the veteran during the past 
1 5 months; this of course does not enter into Bureau calculations, for those 
responsible for the delay are steadily receiving good salaries, enjoy easy hours, 
have their day and a half off each week, besides holidays, and 30 days annual 
vacation; also sick leave, etc., etc. 



Being without funds he was forced to return to a Soldiers' Home, a little later he 
was transferred to a Veterans Bureau Hospital for treatment, where he was a 
patient for about seven months. 


His condition being chronic, with little or no hope for recovery, he was discharged 
from this Bureau Hospital and again returned to the Soldiers' Home for domiciliary 
care. 


He had only been there a short time when he was sent for another examination to 
the Mayo Clinic; after this examination he was returned to the Home, where he has 
been in the Hospital ward ever since. 


Unless this veteran had had unusual intelligence and marked staying powers, the 
numerous examinations to which he has been subjected since 1927 would have 
undermined his resistance to such an extent, that even if he had had no disabilities, 
the psychologic effort of being repeatedly told that he was disabled might well 
have brought on something that is quite familiar to all neuro-psychiatric specialists, 
namely, hypochondriasis. 


Some idea of the examinations to which he has submitted since Dec., 1927, may be 
gained from the following brief resume; it does not comprise all, but will be 
sufficient to indicate, even to the lay mind, that this veteran has been examined 
beyond all reason. He now revolts at any more; who can blame him? 


December 19, 1927 - Special eye examination at Bureau Clinic. Diagnosis at that 
time "Optic atrophy - nothing can be done to relieve this man's condition " 


January, 1928 - General examination at Soldiers' Home. 



April, 1928 - Special X-ray studies at Soldiers' Home. 


October 17, 1928 - Special eye examination by outside specialist. This physician 
inadvertently stated that he had a "beginning optic atrophy." This will be referred 
to later 


October 23, 1928 - Exhaustive study of eyes by the Bureau consulting eye 
specialist, a physician of national reputation. 


October 23, 1928 - Complete X-ray studies by an outside specialist. 


October 24, 1928 - Complete and thorough general examination by an outside 
physician of standing and repute. 


October- 29, 1928 - Special eye examination at a nationally known clinic. 


October 30, 1928 - Special chest examination by a Board of three Bureau 
physicians. 


November, 1928 - Examination by nerve specialist of the Bureau. 


November, 1928 - Complete X-ray studies by the Bureau. 



November, 1928 - Special orthopedic examination by Bureau specialist 


November, 1928 - General physical examination by the Bureau. 


1929 - Complete physical and mental examination, including X-ray laboratory, 
general, orthopedic, etc., at a Bureau Hospital where the veteran was a patient for 
seven months. 


October, 1929 - Special and general examination at a nationally known clinic. 


October, 1929 - Examination at a Soldiers' Home. 


This list, with others not mentioned, will indicate that he has been very nearly 
"examined to death," and when the Bureau desired yet another one recently relative 
to his scars, he rebelled, as complete information was already in his folder, the 
special examination made for this purpose was most exhaustive as the writer can 
testify to (himself being present when it was made), it covered the length, width, 
and position of every scar. 


It is quite likely that the Bureau will deny, or further delay, their decision on this 
claim because of the veteran's refusal to submit to more examinations. As a matter 
of fact he has come to the point where examinations only upset him, and he 
believes that further co-operation is futile. 


There is practically no disagreement between any of the doctors, Bureau or 
otherwise, in their diagnosis of this totally disabled, blind veteran, furthermore 
there is no question of any misconduct disease. 



A recent letter from the Bureau, which again denies compensation or service 
connection on his eye disability, gives the reason for denial as being the fact that 
the outside eye specialist on October 17,1928, stated in his conclusions that the 
veteran had a "beginning optic atrophy. " This is so absurd and far fetched as to be 
ludicrous, were it not so tragic for the veteran himself. 


The argument set forth by the Bureau has been answered 

by this doctor (whose statement had been made the basis for Bureau denial) in no 
uncertain terms, and any school boy with but a high school education could have 
readily seen that the one word detrimental to the claim, out of scores of pages in 
his folder, that is, the word "beginning" in the phrase "beginning. optic atrophy," 
referred to previously, was clearly a clerical error, and was not borne out by this 
doctor's findings in this same report. As, for instance, it is said later - 
"DISABILITY AT THE PRESENT TIME IS 95% - HISTORY WOULD 
SUGGEST TRAUMATIC ATROPHY OF OPTIC NERVE - " (This was an 
examination for eyes only). Thus the plain intent and meaning of this doctor's 
report was nullified by the inadvertent use of the word " beginning. " 


Due to absurd technicalities such as is thus shown above (as well as others) and 
constant procrastination by the Bureau (never intended by a grateful republic, nor 
by law) Mr. Shackelford HAS WAITED FOUR YEARS, AND UP TO DATE OF 
WRITING THIS ARTICLE HAS NEVER RECEIVED ANY COMPENSATION 
OR ANY INSURANCE BENEFITS. 


The foregoing case has been discussed in some detail. However, a little reflection 
will indicate what the feelings of this discouraged and embittered man must be, 
who has been forced to put up with such outrageous treatment, and who even now 
is in a hospital, dependent upon the charity of his friends for even small personal 
necessities. 



Furthermore, this case has been given at some length to illustrate the necessity for 
a very decided change in the attitude of the Bureau, and its methods, particularly in 
the central office in Washington. 


The writer can cite a large number of instances, which have been thoroughly 
investigated, to show that there is imperative need for a drastic, nation-wide protest 
from all ax-service men and all others interested in those who made the Armistice 
possible. 


It is wondered what good purpose will be served by adding a further plethora of 
new laws for veterans' relief when those already in existence are flaunted in the 
face of the people and the lawmakers of the country, as illustrated by the Bolland 
and Shackelford cases as shown in this and the previous article. 


A suggestion for a "cure" was mentioned in my article in the March issue of THE 
BUILDER, and it is still contended that the method indicated might be used to 
good advantage, make an issue of these two claims, and see that those responsible 
for such decisions are punished, one or two cases thoroughly investigated, with 
definite action, will, in my opinion, do much to correct the conditions complained 
of. 


One of the proposed bills, relating to veterans' relief was discussed in the last issue 
of THE BUILDER, and it is again suggested that the reader send for a copy of H. 
R. 91 12, presented by Representative Robert G. Simmons of Nebraska, for it is 
believed that this is constructive legislation which if faithfully carried out will 
bring about changes for the benefit of all concerned. 


— o — 



EDITORIAL 


R.J. MEEKREN, Editor in Charge 

BOARD OF ASSOCIATE EDITORS 

LOUIS BLOCK. Iowa 
ROBERT I. CLEGG, Illinois 
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, Pennsylvania 
A.L. KRESS, Pennsylvania 
F.H. LITTLEFIELD, Missouri 
JOSEPH E. MORCOMBE, California 



ARTHUR C. PARKER, New York 
J. HUGO TATSCH, Iowa 
JESSE M. WHTED, California 
E. E. THIEMEYER, Missouri 
DAVID E.W. WILLIAMSON, Nevada 

MASONIC CLUBS IN THE A.E.F. 


WITH this issue we begin a new series of articles by Bro. Charles E. Irwin, who 
himself served overseas as a Chaplain. This deals with the various Clubs of 
Masons formed by and for members of the Craft in the American Expeditionary 
Forces in the World War. Naturally there were many more of these than there were 
of Army Lodges, for they could be formed spontaneously without any 
authorization from a Grand Lodge or Grand Master. For this reason the task of 
collecting information about them has been much more arduous, and the 
difficulties in some ways much greater. Bro. Irwin knows of the existence of a 
good many of which he knows nothing; more than the name. Very likely there are 
yet others of which no rumor has come to him. He has collected material relating 
to some forty, and of these it is planned to give an account of twenty or so in the 
succeeding months. These will naturally be typical, and those with the most 
interesting features will be chosen. But it is desirable that as complete records as 
possible may be made, and to this end, each of our readers who has any 
information to give, or who knows of any other brother who had anything to do 
with an Army Club of this kind, is urged to communicate with us. In a few years 
more it will be too late in many cases. 


The material, documents, photographs, relics of one kind and another that Bro. 
Irwin has been gathering for a good many years is to form a permanent collection. 
It will be handed over to some permanent Masonic organization as a whole - 
probably to one of the larger Masonic libraries - and will be at the disposal of those 



interested in the Masonic aspects of the history of the Great War in perpetuity. This 
is peculiarly a case where the catch word, "Do it now," should be followed. 


* * * 


THE DISABLED VETERANS. 


THE articles by Bro. Coop in the March issue of THE BUILDER, judging by the 
letters we have received since it appeared, has roused a really remarkable amount 
of interest. Some samples of these letters will be found in the Correspondence 
Columns. It would seem that the men who suffered in the War have not been 
forgotten by the public at large, and that there is an instant reaction to any hint that 
some of them, for whatever cause, are being denied the assistance that it was the 
intention of the nation they should receive. 


While it should not be necessary to do so, it may be as well to say here that THE 
BUILDER takes no responsibility whatever for Bro. Coop’s statements. That rests 
entirely on his own shoulders. And also we shall be very glad to afford space to 
anyone who wishes to controvert what he asserts. There are always two sides to 
every question. However, we certainly should not have given Bro. Coop a hearing 
had we not been assured of his responsibility. We are convinced that he is working 
disinterestedly for a group of disabled veterans who have been denied, on 
technicalities, the assistance that was morally their due, and in particular for a 
number of individual cases. After trying to help them through the regular official 
channels and having become convinced that by these means nothing would ever be 
accomplished, he resigned his position in order to be entirely free to use other 
methods, one of which is publicity. 


Let us say that the sort of thing that Bro. Coop is seeking in some measure to 
remedy is not peculiar to the United States, or to the present decade. It happens, 
and has happened, wherever relief of the sick, wounded and destitute is organized 



on a large scale. It happens especially when the organization is created by the 
State. Government departments tend notoriously to develop forms and procedure to 
an undue extent, and the power of discretion vested in officials tends continuously 
to be limited by precedents. The same kind of thing exactly has happened in other 
countries in regard to the treatment of disabled veterans. There must, of course, be 
rules and regulations, and these cannot be so perfectly framed that they will not, if 
rigidly applied, work injustice in some cases; letting some in who should not be 
aided and denying others who should be. There should therefore be someone, and 
there usually is someone, in theory, with discretion to override technicalities in 
these hard cases. 


Again officials must not be wholly blamed for the "official attitude." They are 
usually good, kindly, decent citizens in their private lives. But they are so 
constantly meeting the fictitious and fraudulent claims of the parasitic class, which, 
like the poor, we have always with us, that in self defense they adopt an attitude of 
suspicion toward all claims. And they are subject to political pressure always. An 
economy campaign, for example, might result in the chiefs of the Bureau being 
told to curtail expenditures as much as possible. How could they otherwise do so 
except by making it harder for claimants to get their cases allowed? 


During the War a certain prison camp in Germany was used for convalescent 
wounded prisoners discharged from hospitals. This naturally led to there being a 
very large percentage of men unfit for work. In 1917, some executive in Berlin, 
observing this high percentage, sent orders to the medical officer in the camp, that 
he had altogether too many sick. He took the hint, ordered a medical inspection, 
and passed everyone indiscriminately as fit for the heaviest manual labor. The 
theory being that whether they were or not, they would not appear on paper as in 
the disabled categories. One man without a foot was so passed; another was carried 
into a hospital that night and was dead before morning. This is an exaggerated 
example of the kind of thing that may happen anywhere, at any time, when delicate 
human adjustments are interfered with by outside influences with entirely different 
aims in view. 


What actually are the facts in the present case we do not know, and do not presume 
to guess. But it is common experience in all countries, because it is so human, that 



government departments tend always to become autonomous, despotic, and in the 
eyes of their officials, ends in themselves, to which the functions they are supposed 
to fill come to be regarded as subordinate. 


If the Veterans' Bureau has developed along these lines it is no cause for surprise, 
however much it may call for amendment. The number of proposed changes in and 
additions to the law creating the Bureau which are now being considered in 
Congress proves that there is some ground for dissatisfaction, and we are inclined 
to think that Bro. Coop is right in believing that they may well make matters 
worse. What really seems to be called for is a reviewing authority, entirely free 
from political pressure of any kind, to take care of the hard cases. Such a body was 
found necessary in Canada, where similar conditions existed, and has been the 
means of affording relief to many who were technically debarred, but whose 
claims were morally justified. 


* * * 


PACIFISM. 


THE first thought of those with any regard at all to the proprieties of their mother 
tongue is that this word is a monstrosity, and that it may be as well that it should be 
attached to a peculiarly disgusting exhibition of cowardice and that thing and name 
be dropped into the bottomless abyss of oblivion. Unfortunately the word insists on 
floating like a cork, and a by-product of the war has become an additional horror of 
the peace. 


In regard to cowardice, in itself it is a thing to be pitied rather than despised. There 
is a small percentage of people, a few men and some women, who simply are 
unable to understand fear, that is fear of physical danger. They are like fighting 
cocks or bull terriers, or other pugnacious animals. But the great majority of people 
are naturally and inescapably afraid in the face of danger, and the great majority of 



them again are quite capable of overcoming that fear, provided some adequate 
motive exists. In fact both the coward and fearless are in the nature of pathological 
cases, they are abnormal. Naturally, however, considering the history of the race, 
the one is despised and the other given that honor and worship due to heroes. 


The kind of cowardice, however, that did fill all normal people with disgust, was 
that of the man who robbed himself in the virtues of the conscientious objector, 
and whose chief motive was not so much his fear, but his desire to be allowed to 
stay at home and make financial hay while the war-time sun was shining. With the 
customary confusions of thought fostered and concealed by using one word for 
several things, the obloquy rightly attached to these creatures was carried over to 
people who rather deserved honor because they would not fight. There were many 
such men, who were prepared to face risk of death, and did face it, and who 
suffered greatly, materially and morally, for their convictions. It was easy in war 
time to think them pigheaded and mistaken, it was still easier to cover them with 
abuse and believe them hypocrites and cowards, but it should be possible in peace 
time to do them justice. 


Here as elsewhere we need clear thinking, the effort to do justice to those against 
whom we are prejudiced; "to render to every man his just due without distinction" 
as we are taught, and to seek diligently for the truth even if we are fearful it may 
not fit in with some of our pet ideas. Very difficult of course, most difficult indeed, 
yet nevertheless the duty of every Mason in such measure as he may. 


We are in the habit of considering ourselves and our country as civilized, and as 
one of a number of countries in the world in the same category, in contra- 
distinction to peoples, races and tribes whom we class as uncivilized, barbarous or 
savage. But what exactly do we mean by civilized ? In derivation it distinguishes, 
not race from race, but the town dweller from the rustic. Thus it implies not only 
material, but mental differences, and possibly moral ones as well - in the widest 
sense of the word moral. Civilization includes, then, the luxurious conveniences 
and other physical amenities with which our present culture is so richly endowed, 
but also, and really far more essentially, the knowledge, the saver fare, and 
intelligence which makes the material advantages possible, and in a sense worth 
while. It would take us too far afield to discuss the matter at all fully here, but the 



things that distinguish the really civilized community are, collectively, social 
justice, security of property and person, and individually, ability to meet and deal 
with other people politely (another word signifying a characteristic of the citizen or 
townsman) without needless friction, quarreling and bullying, and with it scope for 
the development of personal inclinations and abilities. The more civilized a people 
is the greater the degree of personal liberty, mental and moral, there will be, within 
the bounds of the conventions and regulations whose only purpose is to make it 
possible for numbers of people to go about their business without interfering with 
the rights of others to do the same. 


The point of all this is that though the nations of the world we call civilized are 
such, to some extent, in their internal economy; they are no more than barbarian, at 
the very best, in their relations as state to state. That this condition of affairs is 
disguised to a very large extent does not make it any less real. The barbarian ideas 
of aggression, of plunder, of utter selfishness, exist in full force, though veiled 
under the politeness, and perhaps real friendliness, of the individuals who represent 
the different countries in their dealings with one another. The crude ideas that the 
gain of others must be our loss, and that the only way we can increase our wealth is 
to take away that of others is still in full force in almost everyone's mind. The most 
intelligent of us realize its utter fallacy in individual affairs, but few consider it in 
the relations of collective units. 


Wherefore it is that nations, as individuals in all barbarous cultures, go armed to 
the teeth and feel insecure unless they have their weapons at hand. It is almost 
within the memory of those living that civilized men bore arms as part of their 
dress. And men do not wear swords or carry pistols for nothing. But is it not 
possible, that just as individuals have learned to disregard the "point of honor," and 
to laugh at the trifles that once demanded of every man, who would not be thought 
lacking in courage, to fight, that nations composed of men who have learned to live 
without deadly weapons among themselves, should, as such, learn to do without 
them collectively. 


It is easy to dub everyone who thinks that this is not beyond the wit and wisdom of 
mankind to accomplish, a "pacifist," and thereby damn him as a traitor, a coward 
and a bolshevist, but it is hardly fair. But whether fair or not those who clamor for 



"adequate protection" in every country are unwise. Security based on military 
preparation has always been a bruised reed, a support apt to pierce the hand of him 
who leans upon it. If the history of the world teaches any plain lesson it is this. 
Rights of nations are parallel to rights of individuals, they are either limited by the 
rights of others or they inevitably clash. For one nation to seek a position of 
absolute security in this way means that no other nation is secure. It means this 
inexorably. We may be satisfied of the purity and benevolence of our own 
intentions, but we doubt those of others. Can we in commonsense, to speak nothing 
of justice, ask them to put an implicit faith in their neighbor that we refuse to ours? 


* * * 


SUPERSTITION AMONG MASONS. 


ON another page will be found a letter from a correspondent about a chain letter 
that has come under his notice. We agree with him that discussing the subject will 
probably have little effect, for those who are moved to pass the thing on either 
through fear of the misfortunes threatened to all who break the chain, or in hope of 
the good luck that is promised those who duly carry out the magical rite - for it is a 
magic charm or incantation - are naturally those who never read any Masonic 
books or periodicals, and are probably not even aware that there are any such. 


Whether it is the same letter or not we do not know, but in the last ten years or so 
something of the sort has been cropping up here and there, almost continuously, 
and probably most of the Masonic journals in the country have at one time or 
another ridiculed or condemned those who help to perpetuate this chain of 
superstition. It is obvious that such a thing may go on forever, as long as the right 
kind of soil remains for its seeds to grow in. Just as a single plant louse on a rose 
bush may gender millions of descendants in a few days, under favorable 
circumstances, so this letter business may flare up whenever it comes into the right 
milieu. While, on the other hand, it is as hard to kill entirely as a weed that runs 
underground. 



Those who permit themselves to be affected by its promises and threats never 
make any arithmetical calculations on it. We do not vouch for the absolute 
accuracy of the number, but if the chain were propagated without any break for ten 
removes, or generations, of letter writers, and there were no duplications, there 
would be 4,486,684,401 written in the last series. At the eighty seventh remove, 
which is the number of the series of the letter that was sent to us, the figures would 
be staggeringly astronomical. 


That the motives of those who follow the instructions thrust upon them are 
superstitious is certain. There can be no other. It is a vague fear of bad luck -on the 
one hand, and the hope of good fortune on the other. Probably the fear is in most 
eases the stronger motive. 


If it were a request that the recipient should send nine cents toward some altruistic 
object, and ask nine others to send nine cents each, and get nine more to do 
likewise, and so on, it would fall flat. It would die in the first or second stage - and 
yet how much money might be raised this way, say for tubercular relief, did people 
obey chain instructions in a good cause. It is the personal fear or hope which keeps 
the thing going. 


And this raises a question. Chain prayers and the like have been passing from hand 
to hand in the profane world for many years No one can say how old they may be 
in some form or other. They may go back to ancient Babylonia for all we know. 
But would Masons be found to do it in any other country but America? We doubt 
it. From what we know of the character of the Masonry of other countries, and the 
intellectual standards required of candidates, we doubt it very much. 


Is it not rather symptomatic, a minor symptom undoubtedly, but nevertheless 
pointing in the same direction as others ? Masonry is supposed to be a dispenser of 
light, initiation is professedly a path of illumination. Moral, intellectual and 
spiritual illumination. What kind of light have those brethren received who write 



chain letters for fear of bad luck if they do not? Were they ever susceptible of real 
initiation at all? In any ease the fault is less theirs than that of the organization as a 
whole. Which means that all, in some measure, must shoulder part of the 
responsibility. 


— o — 


Chronicle and Comment 
A Review of Masonry the World Over 


Fraternal Old Folks Homes. 


According to a recent report of the United States Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 
the Oddfellows have forty-seven Old Peoples' Homes in this country. The 
Freemasons have thirty-eight, while the Knights of Pythias come third in order 
with twelve. These three societies together have 87 per cent of such institutions. 


The Question of Investigation. 


In a report to the Grand Lodge of California, Bro. Jesse M. Whited, Associate 
Editor of THE BUILDER, discusses certain features of the process of investigating 
applicants. He notes a tendency to lay all the blame for the admission of unworthy 
individuals upon the Investigating Committees, while at the same time these 
committees are not impressed with the exceedingly important nature of their 
function, or the grave responsibility laid upon them. 



Bro. Whited suggests additional machinery, a standing committee through which 
all applications must pass. In some places this has been done, officially or 
unofficially. In one Canadian lodge all proposals are unofficially and privately 
considered by the Past Masters; there is no by-law or regulation concerning this, it 
is merely a custom. If the Master and Past Masters approve, the petition is then 
presented to the lodge, and goes through the usual process. But the official 
investigating committees never report unfavorably, and no application has been 
blackballed for many years. 


Investigation is necessary, if the Craft is to hold to its high standards, but it is a 
matter of convenience how the investigation is done. It seems certain from 
psychological reasons, and the conclusion is supported by experience, that 
duplication of machinery means the practical atrophy of one part or the other. Such 
a special committee as Bro. Whited proposes, or such an informal investigation as 
just described, will generally be followed by the reference to the regular committee 
of investigation becoming a pure formality. The only real cure is to arouse the 
members of the lodge to their personal and individual responsibilities And this 
should begin, as Bro. Whited says, with the presenting of applications. Younger 
members of the lodge might well be discouraged from exercising their rights in this 
regard for a year or two. Or at least, to talk the matter over with the Master or other 
senior members before acting. This would give an opportunity to impress upon the 
young brother his personal responsibility to the lodge and to the Craft as a whole, 
when he proposes a profane to become a Mason. 


The Universal League of Freemasons. 


The annual Congress of the Universal League of Freemasons is to meet at Geneva 
this year. August 21st is the date set, and it will last for four days. An interesting 
program is promised. 


Masonic Signs Among the Arabs. 



The Oklahoma Mason has the following item: 


An interesting story of how by use of Masonic signs his paternal grandfather was 
saved from being killed by Arabs after having been wrecked on the Arabian coast 
is told by Gilbert Hart, of this city, a member of Phoenix Lodge of Namaqualand, 
No. 2082, O'okiep, South Africa. The story goes as follows: 


The elder Capt. Gilbert Hart was in command of a whaler cruising the Indian 
Ocean some time in the fifties or sixties. After a tropical hurricane his ship was 
wrecked on the Arabian coast, a desert region with practically no shelter from the 
elements or wild beasts. The crew was partially wiped out in the wreck, and were 
entirely helpless against a party of Arabs, who came upon them and captured the 
few things they had salvaged from the ship. The Arabs were intent upon killing 
every man of the whites, but the Captain as a last resort gave the Masonic sign of 
distress. Immediately slaughter was stopped, the Americans were treated as friends 
and taken with the greatest care to the nearest port, Aden, where they embarked for 
America. 


We suppose, when Bro. Gilbert Hart is said to be of "this city," that McAlester, 
Okla., where the Oklahoma Mason is published, is the one intended. It would be 
interesting to know more of this alleged adventure. Such stories are frequently 
published, and republished, but only in one instance have we been able to get first 
hand evidence of anything of this kind. Specifically we should like to know 
whether Bro. Hart received the story directly from his grandfather, or indirectly 
through other members of his family. Every successive stage in the transmission of 
evidence greatly increases the chances of inaccuracy and unconscious exaggeration 
of some points and suppression of others, even without any conscious desire to 
heighten the effect, or to tell an interesting story. 


Educational Programs in Georgia Lodges. 



The Board of General Masonic Educational Activities of the Grand Lodge of 
Georgia, of which R. W. Bro. Raymund Daniel is chairman, is urging the 
reappointment of Educational Committees in each lodge. A questionnaire is being 
prepared with a view to the preparation of plans of co-operation between lodges in 
such matters. 


To what extent the previous work has proved successful is not indicated. It is a 
very difficult task everywhere to move the mass of the brethren out of the rut of 
bad habits and the misapprehensions that have become stereotyped. Masonry is not 
the continual repetition of dramatic ceremonies. An uninstructed Mason, whatever 
degrees he may have "taken," is still at the threshold of his apprenticeship. 


Finances of the United Grand Lodge of England. 


It will seem strange to American Masons, to whom Grand Lodge dues are taken as 
part of the eternal order of nature, to learn that the Grand Lodge of England has no 
other source of income than the fees for Warrants, Certificates, Registrations and 
so on. The large sums of money raised for what our English brethren speak of as 
"the Institutions" are strictly separate from Grand Lodge funds proper. It is a matter 
for wonder that the Grand Lodge has been able to function so long and so 
efficiently under an arrangement which has not been materially modified since the 
earliest days of the Grand Lodge system of organization. 


It is expected that proposals will be made to increase the fees materially and to 
collect an annual per capita tax from the lodges. One shilling (twenty-five cents) 
has been suggested, which, while it seems very small will bring in a very 
considerable sum for administrative purposes. 


A Significant Omission. 



The London Freemason gives the following interesting excerpt from the by-laws of 
Collagen Lodge, No. 4733, which it says is "in the best spirit of the Craft." 

Collagen Lodge is a new lodge, having been founded in 1925. 


"As the Founders desire to preserve this Lodge in lustre and dignity, to cultivate 
and practise the Royal Science of Freemasonry with the zeal of those who 
fervently believe that it is founded on the purest principles of piety and virtue, they 
have reasonable hope that the Brethren will strive to work diligently and 
harmoniously together to further the best and truest interests of Freemasonry, and 
therefore they have omitted any mention of pecuniary mulcts or penal laws, being 
persuaded that all such enactments are unnecessary among the Brethren of the 
Collagen Lodge." 


The Salvation Army and Secret Societies. 


It may be remembered by some of our readers that four years ago an order was 
issued by the head of the Salvation Army forbidding any officers of the Army to 
join a secret society. No organization was named, but it was fairly clear from the 
phraseology of the edict that Freemasonry was especially intended, and it was so 
interpreted, both by officers of the Army and others. 


As a sequel to this we learn, from the London Masonic News, that an "incident" 
occurred at Chatham in Kent, in February last. It seems that General Higgins, the 
present head Or the Salvation Army, paid an "official" visit to Chatham, and the 
use of the hall of the town council was granted for the proceedings. But those in 
charge advertised that the Mayor, Bro. H. F. Whyman, would act as chairman, and 
that he would be supported by the Mayor of the adjoining town of Gillingham, and 
the Mayor of the City of Rochester, who also happen to be Masons. 


This was done without the knowledge or consent of the three brethren mentioned, a 
sufficiently discourteous thing in itself. 



Bro. Whyman, as soon as the matter came to his attention, definitely refused to be 
present. He said that as a Freemason of forty-eight years standing, in a community 
in which there lived more than three thousand members of the Craft, he did not feel 
he could officially welcome the head of an organization which had so poor an 
opinion of the Craft. In his attitude the other two mayors concurred. 


The grounds especially given in the Army order above referred to were that 
"officers" were obligated to give their whole time, thought, energy and emotion to 
the object of saving souls, and that membership in a Fraternal society, while 
possibly innocent in itself, was a distraction from the one object to which officers 
had devoted their lives. 


Masonic Work in Hamburg 


From the Hamburgher Logenblatt we learn that the citizens have approved a bill 
providing for a loan of 1,880,000 ReichMarks to the five Masonic lodges in the 
city, for the enlargement of the Masonic Hospital in Hamburg. Today the hospital 
has seventy- five beds if all are used.. Room for 152 more beds will now be made. 
The X-ray department, operating rooms, confinement department, a sunbath and 
dwellings for janitors are to be newly rebuilt. The bathrooms and the heating plant 
are to be enlarged and brought up to date. Not having the money for these 
improvements, the five lodges asked the city for the support which was granted. 
The capital pays 4 per cent and is to be redeemed with 2 1/2 per cent premium, 
beginning July 1, 1932. 


The Senate of Hamburg states that it is in the interest of the state to increase the 
number of beds in private hospitals in order to relieve hospitals operated by the 
state. It would seem that anti-Masonry has as yet little influence in Hamburg. 



Some Sidelights on the Italian Situation. 


De Broederkelen publishes a communication from Bro. Gonsalves, a Netherlands 
Freemason resident in the South of France, where he is in close touch with Italian 
affairs. The following paragraphs are of especial interest. 


On the occasion of the marriage of his son the king of Italy granted an amnesty to 
prisoners, but limited to major criminals. Those who had been condemned by a 
"special tribunal" did not benefit by this amnesty. And the "constitutional" king of 
Italy leaves the great hero of the World War to die in prison, the Brother Luigi 
Capello, ax-general in chief of the III Army Corps . . . 


The Pope is not willing to have a monument to the wife of Garibaldi erected in 
Rome. This does not astonish us. The Pope conforms to the tradition of 
intolerance, which is the basis of Vatican politics.... 


In the Piedmonese Alps the Foresters still exist, and form a Protestant sect, which 
has features of especial interest to Freemasons. In spite of interdiction of il Duce, 
Mussolini, they continue to use the French language to speak and write between 
themselves. Their journal l’Echo des Vallees issued its last number January 14, 
being suppressed by the Dictator. 


The Foresters were persecuted in the year 1200, and were obliged to seek a refuge 
in the Alps, but they have never consented to give up their language or their 
convictions.... 


Have these "Foresters" anything to do with the origin, real or imagined, of the 
Carbonari? 



Some Amazing Statements. 


In the South Australian Freemason for February last, is an address by the Rev. 
John Baptist Reeves, O. P., explaining "Why Catholics Stay Out of Freemasonry." 
From internal indications it might seem that the address was given in England, but 
this is not certain. Mr. Reeves is very temperate, almost friendly, in his language, 
which makes a curious contrast with the following paragraph: 


All English Masonic Lodges by law, if not always by sympathy, are united to the 
Grand Orient, which is professedly and bitterly anti-Catholic. If English Masonry 
has become too indifferent to Catholicism to carry on the war to which, by its 
origin, it is pledged [italics ours] is that any reason why the church should treat it 
as though it were not Masonry at all? Should she encourage Catholics to enlist in a 
corps which, however cooled from its first fervour, is still part of a world- wide 
army whose constitutions are definitely anti-Catholic ? 


It would hardly have seemed possible that so much misinformation could have 
been crowded into so few sentences It is a greatly enlarged edition of the famous 
definition of a crab. There is not a single statement in it that is not the diametrical 
opposite of the truth, there is not an implication that is not false and misleading. 
Yet Mr. Reeves is evidently speaking in perfect good faith, and is, we feel sure, 
quite innocent of any intention to be unfair. He goes on to remark: 


If English Masons as a body would formally declare that they were radically 
different from Continental and historic Masonry [again the italics are ours] the 
Catholic Church would begin to regard them differently. She would begin to regard 
them as no longer Masons. So would Masons themselves the world over. 



The italics are still ours. Could anything more absurdly wrong-end-to have been 
imagined ? The tail wagging the dog, the nail driving the hammer, the baby 
begetting its father are alone in the same class. Historic Masonry is British 
Masonry. Historic Masonry, as an institution, has always been neutral, or rather 
indifferent to, religion. Anglo-Saxon Masonry has proclaimed formally and 
informally on every possible occasion, and through every possible medium, in 
season and out of season, that it has severed all connection with such bodies as it 
holds to have departed from the "original plan." What more it could have done is 
very hard to see. Finally there is no Masonic constitution, whether Anglo Saxon or 
European, whether of a Grand Lodge or of a Grand Orient, that so much as 
mentions any church; nor is there anything in any Masonic ritual practiced in any 
country which obligates Masons to oppose anyone or anything, or to obey anyone - 
beyond the narrow limits of the internal economy of the lodge itself. That is, just 
such subordination as must exist in every society, club, corporation, or any group 
of people that is not merely a crowd or a mob. A Mason is obliged to obey the 
moral law, but this surely cannot be what is intended. 


The Mystic Shrine and World Peace. 


Bro. Leo V. Youngworth, who is Imperial Potentate of the "Ancient Arabic Order" 
of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine in North America, recently said in an address: 


"There are 600,000 Shriners in North America, and if they could be mobilized as a 
militant force in creating a sentiment for world peace, a real task will have been 
accomplished," he said. "Right must ultimately triumph and since peace is right, 
peace must triumph. The intelligence of the peoples of the earth must be poured 
into the channels of peace and harmony and thus war will vanish." 


It is strange that it should be from the playground of American Masonry that the 
idealistic movements have their origin, and find an environment favorable to their 
growth. 



O 


THE LIBRARY 


The books reviewed in these pages can be procured through the Book Department 
of the N.M.R.S. at the prices given, which include postage, except when otherwise 
stated. These prices are subject (as a matter of precaution) to change without 
notice; though occasion for this will very seldom arise. It may happen, where 
books are privately printed, that there is no supply available, but some indication of 
this will be given in the review. The Book Department is equipped to procure any 
books in print on any subject, and will make inquiries for second-hand works and 
books out of print. 


MAD ANTHONY WAYNE. By Thomas Boyd. Published by Charles Scribner's 
Son. Cloth, illustrated, bibliography, index, 351 pages. Price, $3.50 net. 


ANTHONY WAYNE: is one of the Revolutionary characters who is believed to 
have been a Mason, but concerning whom we have no definite information to this 
effect. All I have been able to ascertain about him from a Masonic standpoint is 
limited to some references, for which I am indebted to my intimate friend and 
colleague, Bro. Wm. L. Boyden, Librarian of the Supreme Council, 33d, A.A.S.R., 
S.J., Washington, D.C. He informs me that Wayne is referred to as "Brother" by 
McClenahan in his History of Freemasonry in New York, Vol. 2, page 61, and Vol. 
3, pages 528-29, and that the Grand Lodge of New York dedicated the monument 
over his grave in 1857. 


The book before me has all the good external qualities one associates with books 
published by Scribner's. They are in keeping with the story that the author tells. 
Wayne was emotional and impetuous; stirred by the impending rebellion, he takes 
a place upon invitation of Benjamin Franklin, on the Colonial Committee of 
Safety, and leaves his young wife and three-year-old son to answer the call to 



public service. Martial blood in his veins did not permit him to sit in conferences; 
he did attend to his duties there, it is true, but he was also busy raising a regiment 
in Chester County, Pennsylvania. He became its colonel, and before long was 
facing the British Army in Canada. Promotion to brigadier-general followed in due 
course, though he was deprived of a major-generalship by a less deserving officer 
being advanced to that grade - a story not uncommon in the annals of the service. 
Had not the brave Arnold met a similar fate? But Wayne remained loyal, while 
Arnold's treason became a by-word. 


Wayne's career in the Revolutionary Army is too well known to be repeated here - 
Brandywine, Monmouth, Stony Point and Yorktown are so closely associated with 
his name that any school boy can tell the story. The story ends with Wayne's entry 
(1782) into Charleston, S.C., so hard upon the heels of the evacuating British 
troops that they complained, "You come too fast for us . . . you come too fast." 
Wayne relinquished his commission the following summer and returned to civilian 
pursuits, becoming a member of the minority party of the Pennsylvania 
Legislature. Here he encountered a situation that has a modern ring to it: 


Another perplexing condition was the attitude of the smaller politicians, the people 
who had risen during the war, toward the officers of the disbanded army. 
Throughout the conflict many of the Congressmen and others had feared the 
revolution, if successful, would end in military control under its generals. And now 
they were equally jealous of the Society of the Cincinnati, the organization in 
which the officers of the war planned to perpetuate their friendships gained upon 
the field. 


A gift of a plantation from the grateful people of Georgia took several years of 
close attention. He borrowed heavily, in the hopes that his slaves and the rice crop 
would enable him to rehabilitate himself. His close friend, General Nathaniel 
Greene, a Georgia neighbor, died from sunstroke while endeavoring to further his 
agricultural interests. Wayne became a citizen of Georgia in 1788, giving up his 
Pennsylvania citizenship, which had brought him nothing. He became 
Congressman from Georgia in 1791, defeating General James Jackson, the 
previous incumbent of the office, only to lose it because overzealousness of friends 



developed into frauds, causing the House to reject Wayne - but with no dishonour 
upon him - as not duly elected. 


Bitter, disappointed and downcast, a door opened for his abilities. Indian troubles 
in the Northwest, accompanied by the defeat of Harmar and St. Clair, brought the 
appointment of Wayne as major-general and commander-in-chief of the army. The 
experiences of the period, involving the vicious attributes of pacifism and 
unpreparedness, hold lessons very applicable in the present hour of rising 
communism, bolshevism and all the ills that follow in their wake. 


The campaigns of Wayne in the Northwest brought peace. He was the White 
Captain who never slept, the soldier who outwitted the Indians at every turn and 
who administered stinging defeat at the Battle of Fallen Timber, so recently 
commemorated by a special postage stamp. Returning to Philadelphia after a treaty 
of peace with the Indians, he was feted, wined and dined. The John Jay treaty with 
England sent him back to the border after some months to take over the frontier 
forts and posts. A return journey to the federal seat of government, to oppose 
preposterous charges filed by a subordinate, Wilkinson, hastened what was to be 
his final illness; Wayne died at Presque Isle, in Lake Erie, December 15, 1796. 


Lives such as Wayne's, fraught as his was with struggles, rebuffs, hardships, 
disappointments, yet ultimate triumph withal, are an inspiration to those of us who 
are the heirs of what our forefathers bequeathed us in character, nationalism and 
high ideals. They strengthen us in our hours of depression, and carry us on in the 
face of the forces which would undermine and destroy our nation. The foes within 
are no longer native Indians, but the foreign vipers whom we have taken to our 
breasts, and who repay us for a liberty and freedom denied them in their own lands 
by trying to inject the doctrines of communism and kindred evils into our social 
and economic system. J. H. T. 



MARSHAL NEY; BEFORE AND AFTER EXECUTION. Compiled by J. Edward 
Smoot, M. D. Published by the Queen City Printing Co., Charlotte, N. C. Cloth, 
table of contents, profusely illustrated, index to documents, xii and 460 pages. 

Price $5.00 net. 


TWO generations ago almost every one in the United States was familiar with at 
least the names of the Napoleon's marshals. Lives of Napoleon and histories of his 
campaigns were still eagerly read by boys, and the memory of the aid given by 
royalist France to the revolting American Colonies still east a glamour over the 
constant wars waged by the First consul, who made himself Emperor. But today 
there may be some question in the minds of readers, if not just who Michel Hey 
was, at least what happened to him. A reference to a standard encyclopedia will 
inform the inquirer, that Hey rose from the ranks to become one of Napoleon's 
most trusted generals. That he was the real hero of the fatal Moscow campaign. 
That after Napoleon's abdication in 1814, he was reconciled to the restored 
Bourbon regime, but when Napoleon returned from Elba he went over to his old 
master, with the troops under his command - an act, technically at least, of treason; 
for which, after the final defeat at Waterloo, and with the second return of Louis 
xvii, he was tried before the Chamber of Peers and condemned to death. It is 
further recorded that on December 7, 1815, he was shot in the Luxembourg 
Gardens. 


Now while it would seem that this has ah been implicitly accepted in Europe from 
that time to this as a final statement of facts, it appears that in America, in North 
Carolina particularly, there have always been rumors that the execution was a piece 
of stage work, that the actors only played a role, that Ney only pretended to be 
dead, and that a few days later he was on a ship bound for America in company 
with two other men, General Lefebvre-Desnouettes and Pasqual Lueiani, the latter 
a cousin of Napoleon's mother. That the two latter came to America is certain, and 
the descendants of Lueiani are still living. Desnouettes returning to Europe in 
1823, was drowned when the ship he was in was wrecked on the coast of Ireland. 


Dr. Smoot is not the first to write on the subject. The Rev. James A. Weston wrote 
a book, now very scarce, Historic Doubts as to the Execution of Marshal Ney. Just 
when this was published does not appear, though Dr. Smoot makes very copious 



extracts from it. But at least, from these extracts, it appears that there was a 
continuous tradition that Ney lived for many years in North Carolina and finally 
died there. 


Dr. Smoot believes that he has definitely proved that this tradition was based on 
fact. As to that the present writer would not care to say more than that he has 
presented a very strong ease. It might have been made even stronger, or rather, 
more effective, by a different arrangement of the material. There is much that 
seems rather irrelevant to the main issue, though interesting in itself; which was 
probably the reason for inserting it. 


That the first chapters should recount the life and career of Marshal Ney is natural 
and proper. The author's prejudices in favor of France and Napoleon are obvious, 
and also natural. But there is another side to these questions, and to the historical i 
student some of the comments will prove either irritating or amusing, according to 
his disposition. Two points might especially be noticed. According to the 
authorities followed bar Dr. Smoot, chiefly Guizot's France one judges in this ease, 
the rupture after the Peace of Amiens, was all England's fault, "in demanding 
Malta, which," as he puts it, "according to the signed treaty, had been returned to 
the Knights of St. John, its rightful owners." Now this is no place to go into an 
exceedingly complex historical question, but a few points may be recalled. It was 
Napoleon himself who had taken the Island from the Knights, the English had 
taken it from him. England was perfectly willing to restore it to the Order of St. 
John, if the Order was permitted to be powerful enough to maintain its sovereignty 
and independence, but objected to French domination in disguise. The English 
government of the moment was a peculiarly inefficient and stupid one in a period 
when English governments were distinguished for stupidity, under a rather stupid 
king, and there is no doubt that Napoleon jockeyed the British ministers into a false 
position. 


The second point is the description of Sir John Moore's brilliant and daring strategy 
in the Peninsula campaign in 1808. Once again Dr. Smoot may be excused, 
because very few historians, even yet, do justice to it, although it has been cited in 
military textbooks, almost as a stock example, of the havoc a small force can do if 
it can cut the line of communications of its opponents. As one military writer has 



tersely put it, Sir John Moore with thirty thousand men, disorganized completely, 
and in reality defeated, so far as the ends of the campaign were concerned, an army 
of three hundred thousand, commanded by Napoleon himself. However mad the 
adventure seemed to the world at large, Napoleon was under no misapprehensions 
as to Moore's object or of his success. 


But this is entirely aside from the main theme of the book. We must now come to 
America, where in 1816 there appeared a man who called himself Peter Stuart Ney, 
who after 1819 engaged in the occupation or profession of teaching country 
schools, for the most part in the western counties of North Carolina, up to 1846, 
when he died, rather suddenly it would seem, of some unspecified complaint, and 
was buried in the churchyard of what is known as the Third Creek Presbyterian 
Church. 


About this mysterious individual certain facts may be accepted without question. 
He was a French refugee, he had been a scholar, and not only a soldier, but an 
officer of high rank, and one whose many sears witnessed to long service in the 
European wars. And he was accustomed to mingle in the highest and most 
cultivated society. All these things were obvious even to casual acquaintances. 


In addition to this, his height, physique, complexion, color of hair and eyes were 
all consistent with his being Marshal Ney, and he was also a splendid horseman 
and a most skillful fencer, for both of which the Marshal was noted. 


This Peter Stuart Ney was very reticent about his past life, but he seems to have let 
fall now and then, to those he knew best, various hints as to who he was, and 
occasionally when, as it appears he sometimes was in the last years of his life, 
under the influence of liquor, he made some direct categorical assertions that he 
was Marshal Ney. And on his deathbed he is reported by respectable witnesses to 
have replied to a requests that he reveal the secret of his identity by saying, "I am 
Marshal Ney of France." 



It is very certain that the friends of Peter Ney believed him to be the Marshal, and 
for that matter people generally wherever he had lived for any length of time. Dr. 
Smoot, bom and brought up in this locality, inherited the tradition, and naturally 
his treatment of the evidence is that of an advocate. This has had some 
disadvantages, for it has caused him to neglect a full discussion of the bearings and 
implications of the evidence he has collected, as well as to ignore almost 
completely possible objections and counter arguments. Practically the only one 
mentioned is that based on the scholastic acquirements of Peter Ney. The latter 
knew at least sufficient of mathematics and of the Latin and Greek languages to 
ground his pupils in their mdiments. While on the other hand it is asserted that 
Marshal Ney, whose father was a cooper, and of peasant origin, and who left 
School before he was fifteen, was practically an illiterate man. Dr. Smoot's reply to 
this is on the whole acceptable, though it is possible that those who have raised this 
objection have exaggerated both the lack of education of the Marshal, and the 
emdition of Peter. And between 1783 or thereabouts, when Michel Ney left school, 
and 1819 when Peter Ney began to teach school, there is a considerable gap. 
Whatever his schooling, Miehel Ney must have had an unusual mind, and to such 
ordinary rules do not apply. 


But between the two men stands the execution. Marshal Ney was certainly tried for 
treason against the Bourbons, condemned to death and shot. It is very hard to 
believe that this was all a make-believe. The execution was in a sense a public one, 
though the place and the hour at which it took place were not those which had been 
given out. However so much dodging of publicity as this amounted to could be 
explained by the feet that popular feeling was against it. Here especially one must 
find fault with the presentation of the ease. The accounts of how this affair was 
stage-managed - if it was so managed - are scattered all through the book. Where 
we would naturally expect to find all the evidence pieced together in a connected 
narrative, with some attempt to fill the gaps and to discount difficulties, there are 
only a few allusions, and a general assumption. After relating the Marshal's life up 
to the execution, the author proceeds in Chapter xi to defend his hero's patriotism, 
and then in the next proceeds to the alleged flight to America. This inadvertence 
may be due to the feet that the execution is the part of the story most deeply 
wrapped in mystery, but for that very reason it called for full discussion, for it is 
the gap that must be bridged to connect Peter Ney with the Marshal. 



Later on we get more details, in the depositions of various witnesses and in the 
quotations from Weston's work. Roughly the story is that a squad of Ney's own 
men were assigned to shoot him. That when he gave the word to fire he dropped, 
while the men aimed high, or else that their muskets were loaded with blank. In 
one account he is said to have been provided with a bladder of red fluid to simulate 
blood. It is also hinted that the Masonic Fraternity and the Duke of Wellington had 
some part in the affair. Whether there is any proof of Ney's Masonic status outside 
of this assertion is not known to the present writer, but it is not in itself at all 
improbable that he was a Mason. The Duke of Wellington was certainly one; that 
is, he had been initiated in Ireland as a very young man. But he had so little interest 
in the Craft that in later life he seems to have entirely forgotten all about it. In any 
ease it is not likely that in his position he would have wanted to know anything 
about such a plot, even though he may have been sympathetic, and willing 
unofficially that the evasion should be carried out. One great difficulty is that it 
could not have been arranged without the knowledge and complicity of a 
considerable number of people. And it would be most remarkable that none of 
them should ever, in later years, when it was quite safe, have let the secret out. Yet 
apparently nothing ever emerged in France, it is said that when the Marshal's grave 
in the cemetery of Pere la Chaise was opened nothing was found but an empty 
coffin. 


The reader must make his own judgment, but the tale is a most interesting one 
whether true or not. It is a pity, a very great pity, that DT. Smoot could not have 
had the assistance or collaboration of someone who had served an apprenticeship 
to the trade of bookmaking, for it is on one side a trade, as Robert Louis Stevenson 
always insisted. With better technical arrangement of the material, and in the 
present vogue of biography, the work might quite well have been made a "best 
seller." But the author has devoted much time and labor to the difficult task of 
collecting evidence, much of which in a few years would have been irrevocably 
lost, and in doing this he has performed a most meritorious service to those 
interested in a most intriguing historical problem. S. B. 



BOLIVAR, THE LIBERATOR. By Michel Vaucaire; translated from the French 
bay Margaret Reed. Published by Houghton Mifflin Co. Cloth, Illustrated, index, 
197 pages. Price, $3.50 net. 


MORE and more the attention of North Americans has been directed to our 
neighboring South American republics. Merchants and bankers found this 
necessary when desirable accounts were laid in their laps as a result of the 
European upheaval brought about by the World War. The efforts of General John 
J. Pershing toward the settlement of the TacnaArica dispute and the visits of 
President-elect Herbert Hoover and Lindbergh also contributed their part. From a 
Masonic standpoint, we have had our thoughts directed to South America by the 
official visit to that continent by R. W. Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins, P.G.W., President 
of the Board of General Purposes, United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and 
Accepted Masons of England, of which we shall learn more when his book, 
English Speaking Masonry, appears this winter. 


Three books on Simon Bolivar, the Liberator of South America, have appeared this 
year. The first I have had the pleasure of reading is the Houghton-Mifflin 
publication by Michel Vaucaire, whose work the translator, Margaret Reed, has 
very faithfully presented in English. The imprint of Houghton-Mifflin on a book is 
a hall mark of merit, and is assurance that the volume deserves consideration. The 
present work is no exception to this statement. 


The reader will soon realize that the book is not written by a native of the United 
States; it has the verve, flair and style of a Continental European. The volume 
starts out with a dash and vigor that is maintained throughout the entire book; there 
is no background sketched in by which the reader unfamiliar with South American 
history can orient himself Yet perhaps this is as it should be, for the subject of the 
work was such an unusual and tempestuous mortal himself that the conventional 
method of biographical treatment would not do justice to the man. A gibe at the 
United States - of which more later - adds to one's wish that he knew more of 
Bolivar in particular and South America in general, because one should like to 
verify the assertions and representations of the author by reference to other 
sources. Be that as it may, the book is worth reading, even though we may have 
some doubts in our minds on certain phases of treatment given. 



My attention was attracted to the Vaucaire work because I knew that Bolivar was a 
brother of the Craft, as was also Miranda, another patriot of Latin America. 
Contrary to what seems to be the accepted practice among biographers of great 
men, Vaucaire actually mentions Bolivar's Masonic membership. The passage is 
worth quoting, not only for the single feet it presents, but also as an illustration of 
the author's style: 


One afternoon, when he had gone into his cabin to arrange the many things which 
he had brought from Europe, Bolivar came across his Freemason’s diploma. He 
unrolled the great printed sheet, which showed a curtain hanging in an antique 
temple. It bore the different symbols, level, trowel square, compass, the three 
points and the mallet, also crouching sphinxes. Bolivar recalled his introduction to 
the Lodge at Cadiz, whither he had been drawn by curiosity rather than conviction. 
He had taken oath to accept no legitimate government in his country save one 
elected by the free vote of the people, and to strive with all his might to establish a 
republican system. 


He laughed over the Masonic ceremonies in which he had taken part, and where he 
had met too many tricksters and not enough fanatics. In Paris he had been raised to 
Master. Take it altogether, this association, with its childish airs of mystery, might 
yet have a practical use. He replaced the certificate at the bottom of a trunk and 
thought no more about it. 


This was about the year 1 806, just prior to Bolivar's arrival at Boston, en route to 
his native land of Venezuela. He had visited Rome during the winter, where he 
refused to kneel and kiss the slipper of Pope Pius VII, who smiled placidly. 
Bolivar's independence is also shown in one Of his later proclamations, wherein he 
declared: "Venezuela is a Christian country; it Is therefore necessary to convoke an 
ecclesiastical assembly to pronounce on the free practice Or the Faith and on all 
religious questions." 



The exploits of Bolivar cannot be told in a few words; it is little wonder that it 
takes thirty-two volumes to embrace the documents which he wrote in his short 
life. Married at nineteen, he was bereft at twenty-one; though devoted to the 
memory of his Teresa, his life was filled with many amours, one of his mistresses 
forsaking her English husband, James Thorne, to accompany the Liberator into the 
field, and to remain with him to his death; an idealist, yet a brilliant military 
tactician; a Dictator by wish of the people, he was also devoted to the concept Of a 
government by the people. Yet note this fact - one in which many a Mason feels 
inclined to concur when considering the antics of Grand Lodges in executive 
session - unduly influenced by zealots blind to everything but their own worship of 
crossed f s and dotted i's - Bolivar "knew that an absolute democracy was much 
more dangerous than the worst despotism." He favored a Senate of educated men, 
for he had learned from his experiences in the field how a people suddenly freed 
from oppression are unaccustomed to power. 


Bolivar was active from 1810 to 1822 in the struggle for South American 
independence from Spain. He not only freed his own country, Venezuela, but also 
New Granada (Columbia), Chile, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia - though it must not 
be forgotten that Jose de San Martin inaugurated the campaign for Chilean and 
Peruvian independence. Bolivar established schools, hospitals and encouraged 
newspapers and journals. Yet later he found it advisable, we are told, to prohibit 
"all Masonic lodges, veritable hotbeds of conspiracy. Secret societies were 
forbidden. The universities, which were becoming centers of opposition, were 
closed. Bolivar revised the list of studies and excluded every branch that might, 
among feather-headed young people, give rise to ideas harmful to the 
commonweal. They were replaced by the history of the Catholic religion, and 
additional courses in Latin and Canon Law." It makes one wonder what kind of 
Lreemasonry was practiced in South America in those days. 


One is tempted to relate some of the terrible experiences which were encountered 
by the patriots in their struggle for independence; as we read of the horrible 
atrocities, we feel thankful that the history of the Thirteen Colonies is free from 
such strife and hatreds. Anglo-Saxon temperaments could never have consented to 
the blood-curdling horrors which Bolivar encountered and also perpetrated. 
Quartering, hanging, burning, flaying and similar tortures are mild when compared 
to some of the things the author relates. To set them down in this review would be 



impossible, the book should be read to get the story. Let it suffice to say that whole 
towns were wiped out, and buildings and bodies burned; worshippers were 
massacred in the presence of the Holy Sacrament; prisoners were put to cold steel, 
as powder and bullets were scarce; all patriots over seven were ordered killed when 
captured. Liberty was secured at a terrible price. 


In June, 1 826, Bolivar summoned the American republics to a Congress to be held 
at the Isthmus of Panama. Commenting upon this, the author says: 


The United States would consent to be present only if Bolivar would renounce his 
projects on Cuba and Porto Rico, which the Washington Government did not wish 
to see become independent republics, but preferred to seize from Spain at a later 
date. Neither would the United States hear any talk of the abolition of slavery; she 
wished to keep her distance from these states, the rebels of yesterday. 


The conference was a lamentable failure. 


At Washington the papers spread a hundred lies about Bolivar's intentions. Plots 
were discovered in Mexico hatched under the influence of the United States. There 
was a universal feeling in South America that this first-bom republic, which sought 
to have helped the younger ones, was, on the contrary, only trying to encourage 
discord and to foment difficulties so as to intervene at the appropriate moment. 


This quotation is included for whatever it may be worth. It has a value to us 
because it is the viewpoint of a European; but more so, it reflects the spirit which 
animates similar utterances that have come to our ears in recent times. It gives 
pause for serious thought. 



Simon Bolivar has been well termed the George Washington of South America. 
With the irony that is so commonly a part of a great man's life, the Liberator was 
both honored and despicably used by those whom he served the most. Today, with 
a century behind him for reflection, the South American republics cannot honor 
Bolivar too much. Truly, indeed, the story of his life has much of interest for us; it 
holds both admonition and inspiration. J. H. T. 


* * * 


QUAKERS IN ACTION; RECENT HUMANITARIAN AND REFORM 
ACTIVITIES OF THE AMERICAN QUAKERS. By Lester M. Jones, with an 
Introduction by Rufus M. Jones. Published by the Macmillan Co. Table of 
Contents, illustrated bibliography, xx and 226 pages, price $2.10. 


“QUAKERS IN ACTION," written as a doctorate thesis, is a sketch of the reaction 
of American Quakerism to the impact of the World War and of its resultant activity 
in Europe and the United States. The outbreak of the conflict in 1914 came as a 
greater shock to the Friends than to any other section of the community as a result 
of their peculiar tenets. Basically opposed to the settlement of disputes by armed 
force, American Friends appear to have accepted the comfortable view, so lucidly 
expressed by Norman Angell in the Great Illusion and so widely held during the 
early years of the twentieth century, that the ramifications of modern industry and 
commerce had rendered war between the great powers impossible, and to have 
relaxed their insistence upon the principle of peace to such an extent that they were 
becoming "just one more Protestant sect" with little or nothing to distinguish them 
from other Protestant bodies. From this state of lethargy they were aroused by the 
challenge of the war to a revival of their spiritual and religious life and a 
reconsideration of the attitude to the world at large which might best reveal and 
commend to others their view of human relationships, and especially of the 
unchristian character of the decision of disputes by resort to physical force. This 
reconsideration of their position led the Quakers "to supplement their traditional 
attitudes to the problem of war and other conflict groups, which were often 
negative and passive, by positive and constructive efforts to get at the underlying 
causes of war and to destroy the seeds of conflict in economic, racial, and 



international relations before they have a chance to germinate." These positive and 
constructive efforts are, as the title indicates, the subject of Dr. Jones' thesis. 


As they studied the question in the light of the great conflagration it became clear 
to the Friends that the real cause of war was the spirit of self-seeking and mutual 
animosity in which individuals and groups approached their various problems. The 
positive and constructive effort which the Quakers sought must therefore be to give 
an example of the conduct of human relations in a spirit of service and brotherly 
love which might, by its contrast with the visible results of the war spirit, 
commend the better way to the heart and conscience of warsmitten humanity. 
Accordingly in April 1917, coincidently with the entry of the United States into the 
struggle and the feverish war preparation which resulted therefrom, a small group 
of Friends met, appropriately, in Philadelphia, and adopting as their motto "in time 
of war prepare for peace," began to organize a service of healing. 


Even while the war still raged the Friends undertook to assist in the work of 
reconstruction in the devastated areas of France, especially in getting the land 
under cultivation and restocking the farms with a view to increasing the food 
supply. But it was in the post-war period that their real opportunity came. Then 
they were able to extend their activities to Germany, Austria, Poland, and Russia, 
and to prove that they were ready, not merely to assist their country's allies, but to 
regard all who needed help as their brethren, regardless of racial, religious, or 
political distinctions. In Germany their chief service was the supplementary 
feeding of the children to counteract the disastrous influence of underfeeding and 
restricted diet, with the consequent prevalence of tubercular trouble. In Austria 
they rendered aid to children under school age, to the professional and pensioned 
classes on whom the war and currency inflation had pressed most heavily, and to 
agricultural settlers, and organized the fight against tuberculosis. In Poland their 
chief activity was connected with the re-settlement of the returning refugees and 
their re-establishment on the land. In Russia the Friends again encountered the 
refugee problem and rendered most devoted and efficient aid in coping with 
disease and famine. Everywhere they sought, not merely to bring help to the needy, 
but to reveal the feet that they were actuated not by sentimental or charitable 
feelings alone, still less by partisan motives, but by the basic principles of service 
and brotherly love. 



Then when their work in Europe was concluded, the Friends turned their attention 
to conditions in their own country, realizing, as Tennyson realized and pointed out 
in Maud, that a state of nominal peace may be in reality one of veiled but even 
more deadly and soul-destroying conflict in the social and economic spheres. A 
committee of fourteen, the Social Order Committee, was selected and divided into 
groups to study the most obvious and pressing problems of American life. These 
groups were to investigate the Women's Problems, the Farmers', Educators', 
Property, and Business Problems, and the list of topics indicates the range and 
thoroughness of the investigation. On the findings of this committee the Friends 
will seek to base a positive and constructive programme to give effect to their 
principles; and already a beginning has been made in the extension of relief to the 
women and children of the West Virginia mining districts and in the business life 
of the Friends themselves. 


In reading the book one is inclined at first to feel that the author has not made the 
most of his subject; that the treatment is too restricted and restrained, the barest 
outline of facts and figures being given for the various fields of activity and the 
human element, the characters of the several actors in the story, omitted; while the 
style, though clear, is lacking in literary grace and charm. Reflection, however, will 
modify this view. Although the title of the book is Quakers In Action, the real 
subject is that of the SPIRIT OF QUAKERISM in action, and as Rufus Jones 
points out in the Introduction "the sympathetic reader . . . will catch many hints of 
the informing spirit and will feel that the book contains the story of this new 
philanthropy." It is, perhaps, fitting that in a book dealing with such a subject the 
human element should be avoided and literary graces eschewed, that the new spirit 
of the Society of Friends should be expressed through the plainest of Yeas and 
Nays. 


To a freakish humor it might appear a quaint commentary on Quaker principles 
that this new spirit and new humanitarian activity among the Friends should be the 
direct outcome of war. That the Quakers should be aroused from a state of apathy 
and a comfortable acquiescence in life as it was by the impact of the European 
conflict might seem to lend weight to the Bemhardian view of war as a healing 
medicine employed by God to refresh the jaded spirit and renew the failing 



idealism resulting from long-continued peace. But such ideas, though they may 
flash momentarily across the reader's mind, will not survive a sympathetic study of 
the volume. The United States suffered 

comparatively little from the war, it is on the other side of the Atlantic that its 
effects may be gauged, and the pictures of war affected Europe given by Dr. Jones 
is not one of a refreshed spirit and a renewed idealism but of stunted diseased 
childhood, of dull apathy under a burden of evils that has crushed and not arouse 
the life of the spirit. Such energies as survived the long strain of the war had 
perforce to be devoted to securing a bare subsistence, and the urgent need for 
reconstruction tended to emphasize material considerations as the dominant idea in 
life. The spiritual and ideal elements are the contributions of the advocates of 
peace not of the proponents of war. 


As Dr. Jones points out, the actual achievements of the Friends, though of very 
considerable magnitude in themselves, were relatively small in comparison with 
the need and the other efforts to relieve that need; it is the motive that actuated 
those achievements that is great and important. The ideas by which the Friends 
were inspired were not new in themselves. They were drawn from the Scriptures, 
and were set forth centuries before the Christian era in Buddhist parables like the 
story of Dighavu and such of the Buddhist maxims collected in the Dhammapada 
as the 5th, that "hatred does not cease by hatred at any time, hatred ceases by love," 
and the 223rd "Fet one overcome anger by love, let him overcome evil by good. 

Fet him overcome the greedy by liberality, the liar by truth." What the Friends did 
was to make these ideas effective within the range of their activity, and offer to 
Europe and the United States the spectacle of men and women basing their actions 
upon the principles of service and brotherly love. History works slowly, and the 
effect of this vision of the Quakers In Action may not be visible for generations, 
but one cannot lay down the volume which chronicles their doings so simply and 
unaffectedly without the feeling that a wonderful force has been liberated upon the 
world. E. E. B. 



BUILDING THE AMATEUR OPERA COMPANY. By Ralph H. Korn. Published 
by Karl Fischer, Inc. Cloth, table of contents, illustrated, 76 pages. Price, $1.50 net. 


THIS is a companion and continuing handbook to How to Organize the Amateur 
Band and Orchestra, which was reviewed in THE BUILDER for June last year. 
The author is an enthusiast, though his enthusiasm keeps its feet firmly on the 
ground. One might say that his text is the saying ascribed to Wagner, addressed in 
the first place to his own people: "If you want an art of your own you can have 
your own art," but which Mr. Kom thinks is equally applicable to America. And 
why should it not be? In Wagner's day music in Germany, and especially operatic 
music, was Italian, just as American music is European. Whether the parallel 
would work out to the end lies hidden in the possibilities of the future, but it is at 
least reasonable to suppose it might. 


The author insists that all art is based on and receives its impulse from the interest 
and love of the amateur. Much as professionals of all kinds may consciously or 
unconsciously look down on the amateur, yet without the latter's support and 
patronage in mass the professional would be without profession and livelihood. 
But the contention goes further. It is the amateur who does the pioneering, who 
breaks the ground, who lays the foundations, and from whose ranks the first 
professionals come. 


The book is written in a similar vein to the former one, in intimate, familiar style, 
with humorous comments and asides. Nevertheless all the whole complex business 
of organizing orchestra, chorus, ballet and the rest are fully, if briefly, covered. For 
those who love real music, and who would like to see a school of American 
composers come into existence, and an appreciation of opera made general 
throughout the country, the book may be recommended. Even if they have not 
themselves the faintest idea of starting anything themselves, it will give them a 
new view of possibilities, and this in turn may lead more or less indirectly to a 
bringing of the desired state of affairs to pass. Americans are the richest people in 
the world, and on the whole know least how and on what to spend their wealth. 
While art, whether musical, pictorial or plastic, is not necessarily an antidote to 
materialism, yet it is a refinement Of life, it does open more avenues of interest and 
enjoyment, and it may be made to serve the highest spiritual aspirations. 



This was the opinion of the ancient Greeks, and it may be we have to learn from 
them here as in so many other things. 


— o — 


SPURIOUS LODGES IN COPENHAGEN. 


Translated From the Nordiske Frimurer-Tidende. 


WITH the kind assistance of a Danish Brother the Editor has from time to time 
tried to account for the connections of the various illegal so-called Masonic Lodges 
and Grand Lodges which have from time to time appeared in Denmark, partly with 
some success, inasmuch as our Danish Brother has several times found it necessary 
to present charges through the N.F.T. But it has not always been very easy. There 
has been a buzzing of elaborate foreign names, especially when they were needed 
to show the genuineness of these Masonic societies; it has not been clear to the 
Editor whether it could be shown that they had been legally chartered by Italy, 
Switzerland, France, England or the United States. So far as can be remembered, 
all these countries have at least been named. One thing seemed nevertheless 
certain; not one of the sources could lay claim to be considered regular. 


The Editor has received from a Danish Brother some copies of the Danish 
newspaper, Morgenbladet, wherein one, Mr. A. Henry Heimann, over his name 
and under the heading, "Spurious Freemasons in Copenhagen," has written a whole 
series of articles about Freemasons. This newspaper heads the articles with a 
caption of its own, "Morgenbladet exposes a large Masonic Order in the city. It is 
founded on spurious charters." The author informs us that in Denmark there is also 
a branch of the international organization, "Le Droit Humaine" (or Universal Co- 
Masonry) but his criticism is not directed against this association, which admits 



both men and women, for they honestly and truly admit that they are not 
recognized by any regular Masonic organization. But the other orders he does not 
handle with silk gloves. Space does not permit any extensive report here, but the 
author mentions among other things that the "Danish Grand Lodge" and its charters 
are purely and simply frauds. In its organ - it has its own, Frimurer-Tidende - this 
[Grand] Lodge explains the genuineness and origin of its charters much as follows: 
It grants full Sewers to create a "Highest Council" of 33d of the old and ancient 
Scottish Rite in Denmark - pertaining both to the Cerneau system as well as to the 
system of Morin, in addition to several other Masonic Rites and Systems. All this 
authority, contrary to all Masonic rules, is given to one individual person (who 
appends the high-sounding term "Kadoseh," i. e., Holy, to his good northern name 
Hansen). The best thing about the patent is its title: "Grande Oriente Italiano degli 
Antichi ed Accettatis Liberi Muratori, Zenith di Roma." But Italian Freemasonry 
did not recognize it. The Grand Lodge is furthermore in possession of a patent 
from a not entirely unknown lodge-manufacturer, Theodore Reutz, who, on his 
part, had it from the rather doubtful American "Grand Master," Harry Leymour 
[Seymour?], and also from a defunct organization in Spain. But the Danish Grand 
Master is not satisfied with this. He is also Master of the following "Patents" and 
"Rites": Order of Asiatic Brethren; Knights of the Light in Denmark, 8th degree; 
Ordo Templis Orientes; Fratemitas Lucis Hermetica; The Martinist Order; den 
Korbralistiske Orden [Kabbalistic Order?] of Rosenhuset; Order of the Knights of 
the True Light, 7th degree; Ordo Cure Rosoe Crucis, 9th degree; Societas 
Alchemica in Denmark (7); Grand Lodge of the Rite of Lindenborg, 6th degree; 
Den gamle Illuminatorden (?) 12th degree. These glorious orders together form the 
"Danish Grand Lodge," says the author. This is considerable, thinks he, and it is 
not surprising that Mr. Hansen-Kadoseh "has the right to wear angel wings and to 
glide on the rainbow." 


The whole thing is a curiosity; but it is a crime that people should be fooled into 
paying big fees to join this "Order." 


But this will have to be enough. The Order threatens the rather outspoken author 
with prosecution. If the threat is carried into effect, there may be occasion to speak 
more about these events. The author is said not to be a Freemason, but he pays due 
respect to the two rightful institutions, the Danish Grand Lodge, and the three 
Humanitarian lodges working under the Hamburg Grand Lodge. 



O 


THE QUESTION BOX 
and CORRESPONDENCE 


THE PROBLEM OF THE DISABLED VETERAN 


I believe the needy soldiers of the recent war will be greatly benefited by such 
articles as the one appearing in THE BUILDER, March issue, entitled "The Broken 
Men of the Great War." 


Is it asking too much to request further information on government aid to our 
veterans? 


MRS. C. L., Missouri. 




Permit me to express my appreciation of the article captioned "The Broken Men of 
the Great War" in the March issue of THE BUILDER. 


I believe that such articles will help to obviate the reproach implied in the phrase, 
"Lest We Forget." 



May we have further articles on our crippled soldiers. 


E.C., Missouri. 




Having carefully perused the article on "The Broken Men of the Great War," I 
believe the article worthy of much consideration and well worth while. Different 
persons who had read the article stated that you were to be congratulated for giving 
space and services to the cause and join me in hoping that we may hear more on 
the same subject. E.L.B., Missouri. 




The March number of THE BUILDER is exceptionally fine. I appreciated the 
article of Bro. Coop on disabled veterans for he is only touching the rim of one of 
the darkest pictures following the war. Incompetency in the U.S.V.B., due to the 
employment of second-rate physicians, is true, and bureaucracy, due to politics, 
has de-humanized the Bureau. Every claimant is regarded as a "panhandler" as 
soon as his feet cross the threshold. The aim seems to be, make it as nearly 
impossible as you can for any claim to pass. It is the "pound of flesh" over again. 


All the other articles maintain the high standard of THE BUILDER. C. F. J., 
Pennsylvania. 



THE ORIGIN OF THE ODD FELLOWS 


In a recent discussion about fraternal organizations and their borrowing from the 
Masonic Fraternity, it was stated by one brother that the Odd Fellows were 
founded as a result of a split in a Masonic lodge in Manchester, England, about the 
beginning of last century. I questioned this, and asked his authority. He said he had 
seen it so stated in a Masonic magazine. I seem to have some recollection that 
there was something about this in THE BUDDER a few years ago, and that it was 
there said that the Odd Fellows were first organized in London about the year 
1740. Can you tell me anything about this? H. W. W., Illinois. 


The question was asked as to the origin of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows 
in THE BUILDER for 1923, page 319. It is there stated that "the first lodge of Odd 
Fellows was Loyal Aristarchus, No. 9, meeting in London, organized in 1746," and 
goes on to mention the tradition or rumor that the Odd Fellows were organized "by 
a number of disgruntled London Masons in 1730 or 1740, largely for convivial 
purposes." 


The Manchester Unity, however, which did come into being at "about the 
beginning of last century," undoubtedly did have much to do with the later 
expansion of Odd Fellowship, and there is perhaps some excuse for its being 
regarded as the origin of the various orders existing today. 


A recent paper read by Pro. Col. F. M. Rickard in Quatuor Coronati Lodge, 
confirms the earliest record of the Odd Fellows organization as being dated in 
1745, and mentions the tradition about the "disgruntled London Masons." The 
author seems to be of the opinion that at first the Odd Fellows were formed into 
independent clubs, without any central organization. Whether these clubs had any 
common bond, of usages, ceremonial and the like, as the independent Masonic 
lodges had before the adoption of the Grand Lodge system, there is no way of 
telling, but it is very possible. It is also very probable that the first of these clubs 



antedated the first existing record. Finally, Bro. Richard is apparently inclined to 
suggest that Odd Fellowship had an independent root in the past in the various 
societies and guilds for mutual help in sickness and ill-fortune that undoubtedly 
existed in previous centuries. 


* * * 


"FORCED CHARITY” 


In THE BUILDER for November, 1929, 1 note under the leading "Forced Charity" 
an editorial article in which you mention that a correspondent asserts "that a large 
percentage of the funds [for the English Masonic Charitable Institutions] are 
brought forth by social pressure exercised by lodge officers upon those who do not 
seem to be inclined to contribute as liberally as they should." 


The writer of the article does not, I am glad to say, agree with this statement and I 
can assure you in a long and wide experience as a Charity Representative and as 
one who has mixed freely with brethren in all parts of England, I have never heard 
any brother complain of being unduly pressed to give to any of our institutions or 
other charities. 


J.G.W., England. 


If there is any undue pressure upon American Masons for financial contributions it 
is not for charitable purposes, but to pay for magnificent and luxurious temples. 
Masons are builders, naturally, but Speculative Masons are presumed to be 
properly more interested in a "house not made with hands - “ 



FREEMASONRY IN THE CIVIL WAR. 


In addition to the information given in the March number of THE BUILDER, I 
should like to submit the following taken from the History of Freemasonry in Ohio 
from 1791, by John G. Reeves, 33d Grand Historian of Ohio, page 154 of volume 
3: 


"In Winchester there was a regular Lodge of Masons, Hiram Lodge, No. 21, 
officered by Confederate Soldiers or citizens on parole, to whom the desire of 
Major McKinley was communicated. His petition was received, he was elected, 
and on May 1, 1865, the degree of E. A. was conferred upon him by J.B.T. Reed, a 
Confederate Chaplain, who was Master of the Lodge, and on the following 
evenings the F.C. and M.M. degrees were conferred upon him. 


"After his return home Major McKinley took a dimit from Hiram, No. 21, and 
affiliated with Canton Lodge, No. 60, Canton, Ohio, and when Eagle Lodge, No. 
60, Canton, Ohio, was organized, he became one of its charter members, and 
continued his membership therein until his death." 


And on page 153: "On application of Eagle Lodge, No. 431, of Canton, of which 
Bro. William McKinley was a charter member, the name of the Lodge was 
changed to William McKinley Lodge, No. 431." 


HERMAN BAULING, California. 



CHAIN LETTERS. 


I am enclosing a copy of a ridiculous chain letter that has appeared in our locality 
recently. This is one of three received within two weeks. It is amazing to think of 
the foolishness and superstition of those who "fall" for this kind of thing. What a 
dreadful waste of time and energy it is. Would an editorial on the subject do any 
good? Probably not. H. P. H., Ohio. 


The letter contains a brief prayer which is well enough in itself, though a little 
indefinite. It is said to be written in "compliance with a Masonic request." It is 
added that "It is said by Masons in the ancient times that all who did not pass the 
prayer would be in danger of misfortune," and the recipient is exhorted: "Do not 
break the chain." 


In a kind of postscript, it is said the chain was begun by "an American Colonel in 
the army of France and must go three times round the world without a break." It 
has been "translated in all languages." Each recipient must send his nine copies 
within twenty-four hours. One gentleman of the name of Dubellich Love owes his 
fortune to following these instructions. A Mr. Dealsyde of Victoria “obtained the 
first prize in the National lottery” by the same means, while we are warned by the 
fate of Franciscus Montle Lours, who "did not take this seriously," and, sad to 
relate, "his firm was ruined nine days after receipt of the present letter." 


Last of all follows a list of names of those who have passed it on, beginning with 
one Lean (the American Colonel of the army of France?) and ending with 
McCausland, who signs the present exemplar. Too many of these are good Anglo- 
Saxon surnames. There are some German ones, a few French, some that might be 
Italian or Spanish, and a number of extraordinary nondescripts, which are probably 
misspelled. There are eighty-seven in all. It is perhaps a waste of space to describe 
this amazing document at so much length, but as a curiosity of Masonic folklore, if 
it may be so termed, it seems to have some claim to be recorded. 



HISTORY OF THE ALBANY SOVEREIGN CONSISTORY 


In the "Historical Sketch of Albany Sovereign Consistory," by Bro. Isaac Henry 
Vrooman, Jr., which appeared in THE BUILDER last month appears the following 
statement: 


A Grand Council of Princes of Jerusalem was established at the same time, but 
unfortunately there are no early records available. 


I enclose a brief sketch taken from the Masonic Mirror, Boston, May 5,1827, the 
original of which is in my possession, which seems to provide a new link in the 
history of this interesting subject. It will be noted that the Mirror took it from the 
Albany? Masonic Record. 


J. F., Ohio. 


The account of the establishment of this Council mentioned by our esteemed 
correspondent is as follows: 


Copied, verbatim from the Masonic Mirror, Boston, May 5, 1827. 


(From the Albany Masonic Record) 



Unitas Concordia Fratrum. 


LUX EX TENEBRIS. 


The Grand Council of Princes of Jerusalem which forms the subject of this notice, 
was originally established by authority emanating from Thr. III. Br. Henry Andrew 
Francken, D. G. Inspector General, &c., who received his high powers from Thr. 
III. Br. Stephen Morin, appointed the 27th Aug. 1761 Inspector General over all 
lodges &c. &c. in the new world, by the G. Consistory of S. Princes of the R. S. 
convened at Paris at which presided the King of Prussia by his deputy Chaillon de 
Johnville. The authority of this G. Council has been duly recognized by the 
Supreme Council of the 33rd, &c. for the United States of America. 


This G. Council is now in a flourishing condition, owing principally to the 
exertions of Thr. III. Brs. Giles F. Yates and James M. Allen. 


They held their annual convention at the G. East in the City of Albany, on the 8th 
day of the 1 1th month Shevat 5587 (5th of Feb. 1827). Bro. G. F. Yates declined a 
reappointment as G. Sov. The election of officers then took place and the result 
was as follows: 


John W. Bay M. D. of Albany, Esq. M. G. Sov 


James M. Allen, M. D. of Skaneateles, Onondaga County, E. Sub. G. Sov. 


John G. Van Deusen of Palatine, Montgomery county, M. En. G. Warden. 


D. F. Lawton, of Saratoga Springs, En. G. Counsellor. 



Giles F. Yates, A. M. of the city of Schenectady, III. G. Chancellor. 


Rev. Nathan N. Whiting, A. M. of Ballston, Saratoga County, III. G. Priest. 


Eli Savage, of New Hartford, Oneida county, III. G. Recorder. 


Nathaniel Calkins, of New Hartford, Oneida county, III. G. M. Finances. 


Alinos Matthews, of Mayfield Montgomery county, III. G. M. Ceremonies. 


Samuel H. Drake, of Saratoga Springs, III. G. Herald. 


Loris Putnam, of Saratoga Springs, III. G. Pursuivant. 


Collins Odell, of Mayfield, Montgomery county, III. G. Guard. 


At this convention there was a full representation of the five Lodges of Perfection 
under the jurisdiction of this G. Council, and Warrents passed the seal of said 
Council for the creation of a new Lodge of Perfection at Clarkson, county of 
Monroe, and for another at Amber, county of Onondaga. Of the former III. Bm. 
Simon B. Jewett, Esq. of Clarkson, county of Monroe, Elihu Mather, Esq of 
Gaines, Orleans county, and Gen. Jacob Gould of Rochester, and Samuel B. 
Bradley, M.D. of Greece, Monroe country were appointed officers; and 111. Bm. 



David S. Van Rensselaer, Killin H. Van Rensselaer, and Samuel Selkrig, Esqs, of 
Amber, County of Onondaga, were appointed officers of the latter. 


A system of "Mandates and Decrees" for government of this G. Council, and of the 
Lodges and Councils under its jurisdiction, was unanimously adopted. 


Virtus junxit more non separabit. 


* * * 


THE DECLINE OF THE WEST 


In the January number of THE BUILDER is a review of Oswald Spengler's great 
book, The Decline of the West, signed by E.E.B., and I cannot refrain from 
offering some reflections upon his estimation and criticism of the work because its 
perusal shows that the writer is a person of a quite exceptional education and 
apparently of scientific importance. I feel entitled therefore to regard his attitude as 
one corresponding to the views of the highly intellectual part of the American 
public, and seeing that not even a man of E.E.B.'s lofty conception is able yet to 
estimate properly the consequences of the Great War, I must try to rectify his ideas 
just in a few lines, and before the very same public. 


Spengler does not see the "Decline" only, but in literal translation of his title the 
"Destruction," of Europe, the Occident; and in feet he deals with the "destruction" 
of occidental, European, civilization. In order to understand the trend of his 
thought, it is necessary to know, what lucky America did not know, and 
consequently did not care for, when it left the Central Powers a prey to the 
political, economical and military ambitions of individuals and nations; and this 
fundamental point is the absolutely incontestable feet that Germany and Austria, 



with their bodies and brains, formed a wall against Asiatic unculture, and brought 
European culture in general as well as in its detailed results, to those Asiatic 
peoples, which only geographically, but most certainly not ethnographically or 
culturally, belonged to the circle of European civilization; and which still do not 
belong to it. This wall has been torn down by the war and by the treaties of peace. 


I am learning from my American friends, and from the reading of your authors, 
that America is beginning to remember that her people are Europeans, and that 
consequently her spiritual and cultural fate is tied to ours. There are two classes of 
Americans able to understand Spengler thoroughly: those who acknowledge 
themselves to be of this European race threatened and shaken to the roots of its 
civilization by the powers of Asiatic un-culture let loose upon Europe; and those 
who come over to live in Germany or Austria long enough to see how fearfully 
hard we and our children are fighting daily and hourly, and in every smallest detail 
of daily life, against the destruction of our civilization. And then you will see that 
the struggle is not at all limited to a sort of local particularism, or to the differences 
between South-Germans and Prussians. We fight for European civilization, and I 
write these few lines with the intention to point out the following conclusion: 
Masonry is an important part of civilization, and so we European Masons are 
fighting against the destruction of culture. It is a fight, in which America is much 
more involved than she is aware of! 


B.L.F., Austria. 


This letter, from a country which in some ways has suffered the most severely 
from the after effects of the war, will be of interest to all who read the review of 
Spengler's great work that our correspondent refers to. The point of view is well 
worth considering. 



FREEMASONRY IN EGYPT: A CORRECTION. 


There was a word omitted in my article on "Freemasonry in Egypt" last month, 
which changed the sense of an important sentence entirely. This was on the first 
page (p. 66), second column, at the end of the third paragraph. The sentence should 
have read "The Prince was not disciplined on account of his ignorance of Masonic 
law, etc." His name did not appear at all in the lists of the brethren suspended, and 
so on. On page 67, in the last line of the second paragraph of the second column, a 
wholly unnecessary and gratuitous "been" was somehow inserted, which makes 
nonsense of the concluding sentence. 


R.C. Wright, Oregon 


We regret these two errors. The first was a mistake in the copy and the second was 
overlooked in the proof reading.