A Journal for the Masonic Student

Published Monthly by the National Masonic Research Society


Vol. 14 No. 4 – April 1928



Dr. Leo Cadius

(Concluded from March)

THIS series of articles is written by a member of the Roman Church.

He is still a member of that Church and has no desire to leave it.

The articles do not touch on any matter of faith or doctrine, and while severely critical of the administration are in no sense an attack upon the church itself.

His purpose in writing them is the hope that the abuses he describes and the conditions which foster them may be removed.

Our purpose in publishing them is to give our readers an intimate inside picture of the actual working of the ecclesiastical machinery which may help them to judge to what extent the doubts and apprehensions that exist in the minds of many American Freemasons are well founded.

It is the author's opinion that the reforms he proposes would not only be to the advantage of Roman Catholics but would largely remove the suspicions of so many thoughtful non-Romanist American citizens.

NEEDLESS to say, only a non-Catholic Congressman could introduce the above suggested bill — let us call it the anti-autocracy bill — into the House: namely, that the federal government request the Vatican to re-organize the hierarchy in conformance to the demands of modern democracy and international justice and to retract such doctrinal tenets as are obnoxious to the freedom of conscience. A Catholic Congressman sponsoring this bill would be promptly advised by the Vatican to withdraw it, under penalty of excommunication. He could, however, help the good cause by endorsing the bill. He would have to act at once, though, before the pope had time to threaten with excommunication any Catholic supporting this measure.

If those American Masons who fraternize with the Knights of Columbus, approached the local chapters of the Knights in this matter, they would most probably meet with a sympathetic reception. It would be the mission of the Knights to explain to the Catholic public, secretly of course, that the measure was not intended against the Church, but was an act friendly to the Catholics. Its object is to free them from the yoke of the absolutistic Italian Oligarchy. Present conditions will inevitably lead to a clash, disastrous to the Catholics and hurtful to the nation. Why not tackle the problem now in an amicable, open above-board manner?

Let Congress and the state legislatures take the initiative and set the stone rolling. Let the question be afterwards submitted to the voters in a practicable and acceptable form.

Vox populi, vox Dei! "The voice of the people is the voice of God!" It was at one time an honored maxim in the Catholic Church. But that was long, long ago.

The attitude of American citizens who accept titles of nobility from European rulers has frequently been the butt of unfavorable criticism in the daily press. The enactment and enforcement of a law prohibiting the acceptance of such titles under penalty of forfeiture of American citizenship would no doubt prove popular.

Such a law should certainly include His Eminence the Cardinal. The cardinalate is not strictly a clerical dignity. Laymen have held it in days past, frequently in exchange of political or financial considerations. A cardinal belongs to the nobility. At European courts, he is assigned the rank of a prince. The titles of Papal Count, Knight of St. Gregory and similar offices in the papal court also might be proscribed as incompatible with the American brand of democracy.

And what about the Monsignore? The American priests will laugh at this question. The Monsignore is harmless. He is a priest who is permitted to wear some of the insignia of a bishop; particularly a purple gown. But he has no episcopal powers. He is in the same relation to a bishop as "near-beer" is to beer. He looks like a bishop, talks like a bishop, walks like a bishop, but he lacks the authority and power of a bishop. The "kick" is missing. "It is exclusively a matter of millinery," to quote the late Archbishop Feehan of Chicago, who refused his clergy permission to accept the honor. Formerly it was awarded in recognition of merit. Of late it has been distributed so promiscuously as to become the laughing stock of the rest of the clergy.

The Catholic clergy all over the world is getting tired of this ecclesiastical peacockry. But the Vatican needs the not inconsiderable fees for issuing the Monsignore diplomas since the Peter's Pence from impoverished Europe has dwindled down to next to nothing. Thus a flood of purple millinery has been released on money flushed America. It is one of the "horrors" of the world war. The country will survive it.

If Congress enacted a law proscribing, under penalty of the loss of American citizenship, all titles of foreign nobility and near-nobility, including the cardinalate, papal throne assistant, prothonotary apostolic, the plain monsignore, papal count and all papal knighthoods, 95 per cent of the American Catholic clergy would applaud. They would do the applauding with mitten-covered hands, though, to muffle the sound, lest the Italian taskmasters and their American overseers should hear it.

Needless to say, the ancient and strictly ecclesiastical titles, such as archbishop, bishop, dean, and the academic degrees should not be affected by such a law.


The Catholic religious orders, monks and nuns, have to their credit splendid achievements in the dissemination of science and education, sound Christian morality and civic virtues. In addition, their good and holy lives, lives of continuous self-sacrifice and unremitting devotion to the highest Christian ideals, are in themselves an inspiration and a source of edification.

Nevertheless, if the American Government should ever find it necessary, for the protection of American ideals, to go on the warpath against the selfish Italian Oligarchy, it may have to consider the advisability of closing all the educational institutions conducted by these orders. The monks exercise a great influence at the Vatican. A timely intimation to them that their schools are imperiled will induce them to use pressure on the autocracy. The Jesuits alone own in the United States over forty universities and colleges. Some of them can boast of a very large attendance. For instance, Fordham University in New York has an enrollment of over 6,000 students; Marquette University in Milwaukee, 5,000 students. These religious orders would leave no stone unturned to save their institutions.

It would seem, also, to be high time that the legislatures of the American states occupied themselves with the corporations sole of the Holy Roman Church. The Catholic citizens ought to be afforded an opportunity of learning something about the disposal of their church funds.

Such corporations ought to be abolished. They might be converted into Directorates of Five, or Boards of Five Trustees, to consist of the bishop, his vicar general and three lay members. These three lay members could be appointed by a Diocesan Finance Committee of Fifteen, seven priests and eight laymen, elected by the diocesan clergy and laity in secret ballot. To this Committee of Fifteen the Directorate of Five could be accountable. If a diocese should refuse, by order of the Vatican, to comply with such a state law, the State should assume temporary control of the diocesan finances. There is an immediate need of a campaign of education to enlighten the American public on the papal peril, but such a campaign should beware of two pitfalls.

First. It should steer clear of all anti-Catholic bias. Barring a few non-essential theological idiosyncrasies, there is nothing wrong with the Catholic religion. Nor should such agitation attack the institution of the papacy. It is an essential part of the Catholic religion.

Second. Though directed against the usurping Italian Autocracy, such a campaign should be free from any aspersion on the Italian race. The latter is in no way responsible for the selfishness of the Autocracy which is even at this very day opposing the unity of the Italian people. Every cardinal, when receiving the red hat, promises under oath to uphold the papal claim to secular power. The secular power means the disruption of Italy.


This propaganda against the Italian Oligarchy ought to be made international. The immediate aim should be the temporary establishment of national churches. These should unite then into a world church, elect a pope, a Bishop of Rome, who would temporarily take up his residence in one of the smaller countries of Europe, such as Switzerland or Belgium; or, if parts of Italy joined in the secession, in some Italian city. That would give the Roman hotel-keepers and merchants something to think about.

I am fully aware that I am advocating a schism in the Church. We are living in the midst of a world upheaval. National self determination is in the air. Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia and other nations, oppressed for centuries, have become independent republics.

As the reader may remember, Italy, the pope's own country, entered the world war avowedly for its national aspirations. This was the very expression, and the only pretext it used. His Holiness, Pope Pius XI, then known as Monsignore Achille Ratti, is said to have been one of the most ardent of patriots. What is sauce for the goose, ought to be sauce for the gander. Other people have also national aspirations. They clamor for no territorial aggrandizement, as did the Italian government in 1915, but they have a right to demand a just share and representation in the government of the Catholic World Church.

This demand should be submitted to the Holy Father in the form of a petition. If he sees fit to ignore it, the Catholics should emphasize it by withholding the Peter's Pence.

This suggestion will, no doubt, shock the pious ears of ultra-Roman American Catholics. If they will consult the pages of church history, they will find that more than once the faithful had to exercise pressure on the ecclesiastical authorities in the interest of religion. The conclave of Viterbo, 1268-1271, furnishes an illustration. The fifteen cardinals who convened upon the death of Clement IV, were divided into two camps, a French and an Italian. The conclave had lasted already over two years and still there was no agreement in sight. The people of Viterbo lost patience. They induced the local authorities to shut the cardinals up in the episcopal palace. The captain of the city, Ranieri Gatti, uncovered the roof of the palace to see, if by chance, the inclemency of the weather would hasten the warring factions to reach a decision. This drastic measure had the desired effect. Theobald Visconti, Archdeacon of Liege (he was not a cardinal, not even a priest) was elected to the papal chair. He took the name of Gregory X. The conclave had lasted over two years and nine months. To prevent the recurrence of so scandalous a delay, the new pope promulgated a new constitution governing the papal elections. According to this, the cardinals were to be kept in close confinement during the conclave. If after three days of balloting no decision had been reached, they were to be given only one dish at dinner and supper for the next five days. Thereafter, the menu was to be reduced to bread, wine and water. This argumentum ad stomachum, or appeal to the stomach, proved a great accelerator. For the next conclave, in January, 1278, lasted only one day.

If the Catholics throughout the world want to obtain their just share in the government of the Church, they will have to use coercion against the Italian Autocracy. If the refusal of the Peter's Pence should not yield the desired results, there will be but one alternative left: rebellion against the papacy. The responsibility for such a step, which means a split in the Church, would rest on the selfish Autocracy.

What the world wants today is peace. What the world is doing today is preparing for another, more destructive war. Into the recent war the world was plunged by surprise. Into the coming war, it is going with the eyes wide open. Sane statesmen, like David Lloyd George and William Howard Taft, and other thinking observers everywhere are unanimous that only a moral regeneration of the human race based on religion can avert a world catastrophe. Justice, social, economic and international justice, is the foremost need of the day. The pope is recognized as the greatest potential moral force today. How can a world peace founded on justice be expected, with Social and International Injustice sitting in the very chair of St. Peter?

The organization of the Roman Catholic hierarchy on principles of justice and fair play is the key to world peace. It is the most important problem before the world. It is everybody's business.

The Special Privilege that is still occupying the Chair of St. Peter, has no desire to vacate. It has to be dislodged by force. The Catholics will have to rise in rebellion. They will have to renounce allegiance to the Italian Autocracy and elect a new pope in a fair international election.

This intimation is no doubt most offensive to pious Catholic ears. But, as a French proverb has it, you cannot make an omelette without breaking the egg. You cannot have world peace without a just pope, and you cannot seat a just pope without deposing the Italian Autocracy.

The whole difficulty could be easily solved, if the pope of his own accord reorganized the government of the Church along the principles of international justice and of democracy — democracy, as far as the original constitution of the Church permits. It permits a degree sufficient to satisfy the spirit of our times. Mentally enslaved as our modern Catholics are — there prevailed quite a different spirit in the Middle Ages, Dante is an illustration — they are too timid to even petition the Holy Father for such a reorganization. As long as they are willing to submit to his absolutism, he will not think of making free citizens out of them.

Salvation can only come from the non-Catholics. Our Protestant brethren could offer up public prayers that God in His infinite mercy may infuse into the mind of the pope a sense of international justice, a gift so urgently needed in the interest of world peace. Mentally emancipated Catholics — there are a few of them — may utter for the same purpose private prayers in the secrecy of the innermost recesses of their homes.

Uncle Sam is still a free enough man and a big enough man to safeguard his ideals of democracy, freedom of conscience and national self-respect.

He is still a free enough man for that. He will not be in a generation or two hence, unless he builds his protecting wall now.


Let us assume now that a movement should be launched to emancipate the American Catholics from the yoke of Italian Autocracy in the Vatican. It would gain in momentum, if a similar movement was started also in other countries. In Czecho-Slovakia the ground is well prepared for it. Immediately after the world war a large organization of Czecho-Slovak priests was formed that aspired to a certain amount of self-determination. It has been checked temporarily, but it is far from being crushed.

In France the nationalistic tendency known as Gallicanism has never been fully eradicated. It needs but a spark to flare up again.

However, it is in Germany where the most important battles would be fought. Of all the Catholics in the world, the Germans are intellectually the most emancipated or, if you prefer, the least enthralled. That they are enthralled to some extent by the Italian Autocracy must be admitted. All Catholics are, everywhere.

German Catholicism, aroused to united action by the Bismarokian persecution misnamed the kulturkampf, has, roughly speaking, held its own amid the incessant and well-conducted onslaughts from rationalism, Protestantism, kaiserism and most of all from socialism. It has succeeded in keeping about ninety per cent of its adherents loyally attached to the Church. It has won for itself an honored position in the German intelligentsia. It has acquired valuable experience in social welfare work and in the advancement of socio-economic justice; so much so, as to prompt Doctor Stoecker, the Kaiser's court preacher, to exclaim: "The Catholic Church has solved the social problem splendidly." He meant the Catholic Church in Germany. For in the Latin countries she has been, until very recently, conspicuously inert.

No matter from what point of view it is regarded, German Catholicism stands forth as a practical, complete, eminently successful philosophy of life. After the spectacular collapse of November, 1918, it was the one solid rock that saved the Empire from chaos and utter ruin. German Protestants have gratefully acknowledged this.

If the German Catholics can be induced to take up the cudgels against papal absolutism, it will mean the death knell of the Italian Autocracy. For by their achievements they have secured for themselves a certain prestige among their co-religionists the world over that has not been entirely obscured even by the blind hatred of the world war. They have not only the intellectual equipment for the task — as for that matter have many Catholics in other countries — but I believe. a certain predisposition for it.


In the United States, the entire daily press and nearly all the large reviews, magazines and other periodicals show the most profound respect for the power of Zambo. They dare not print a word that would displease him.

On the European continent, particularly in Germany, the vastly larger and more influential portion of the press has been more or less outspokenly anti-Vatican all along.

An American Catholic who advocates the overthrow of Zambo's throne has to consider himself fortunate if he can find a little Protestant weekly or a socialistic publication that will publish his article. In Europe, with the possible exception of Great Britain, he will have the pick of the large publications at his disposal.

While the greater section of the German press may have been anti-Vatican chiefly through religious prejudice, it cannot be denied that the Vatican has been guilty of indiscretions that irritated even leading German Catholics of the strictest and most orthodox type.

An example is furnished by the septennate question. In 1887, Bismarck introduced into the Reichstag a program of military appropriations to be extended over a period of seven years (septennate). The Catholic or Centre party which held the balance of power, opposed it. The crafty chancellor asked Pope Leo XIII to use his influence with the obdurate Centrists. The Pope complied with his request. In consequence, the appropriations were approved, despite the protests of the great Centrist leader, Ludwig Windthorst, who opposed the Pope's policy. Windthorst, in his despair, is said to have relieved himself in the following strain: "There we are! we German Catholics have always repudiated the accusation that we are being dictated to by the Vatican! And now the Pope meddles in a purely internal affair of the empire that has nothing to do with religious interests! He wants to prove that our adversaries are right, that we are Ultramontanes! Is he out to destroy the Centre party?"

"Ultramontanes" was one of the uncomplimentary epithets applied to the German Catholics, because they were believed to receive their political instructions from across the Alps, that is from the Vatican. The Centrists always indignantly denied this allegation, declaring with Daniel O'Connell, the great Irish patriot: "We take our religion from Rome, but not our politics."

The late English publicist, W. T. Stead, based on this one case of papal interference in German affairs the rather extravagant claim that whenever the Kaiser wanted an additional army, he had to obtain first the Pope's permission.

To this same Pope Leo XIII, whose wonderful diplomatic acumen was so highly extolled by the Catholic press, is ascribed the remark: "As the Italian race once ruled the world through the military might of ancient Rome, so it now rules the world through the Catholic Church." He may have been falsely quoted, but he might just as well have made that remark. His actions bore it out and approved Catholic theologians accord the Roman Pontiff a divine right to world rule.


The German Catholics made a somewhat spectacular change of front at the end of the world war. Let me quote from a well-written article by Doctor von Boetzlaer in Der Fels, a Catholic monthly published in Frankfort-on-Main. In No. 9, vol. XIV (1921), of Der Fels Doctor Boetzlaer reproduced the following climax from a speech delivered by the Jesuit Cohauss at the National Convention of the German Catholics at Aix-la-Chapelle, 1912:

Authority possesses something sublime, something enchanting. Where authority appears adorned with purple and crown, a sacred tremor pervades the multitude; all noise is muffled; reverentially everybody makes room. The faithful Christian beholds in the legitimate Kings something of the divine splendor; he recognizes the Anointed of the Lord. And because he fears the Majesty of God, he also pays to God's representatives on earth the tribute of reverential obedience. Where the fear of God reigns, there also the Kings reign; there they stride with dignity through the masses of the people. And because we Catholics hold dear the faith in God, for that reason we are also loyal to our Kaiser. They have denounced us as second class patriots. When the opportunity will arrive when the thrones will totter, it will be seen that we Catholics are not second class, but first class patriots. We stand loyally by our Imperial House, because we stand loyally by the House of God.

The patriotic effervescence of the good Jesuit was received with an explosion of thundering applause. It will be remembered that in 1912 the Jesuits were still exiles from Germany, exiles by order of the Kaiser's government. They were forbidden to establish community houses, to teach, to do parish work. They were tolerated as individual residents, but subject to expulsion at any moment.

Doctor von Boetzlaer then recalls the joint pastoral letter of the Catholic Bishops of Germany, dated Nov. 1, 1917:

True to its past, the Catholic people will discountenance any attack on our reigning houses and our monarchic constitution. We shall always be ready to defend the altars and the thrones against external and internal enemies; against the revolutionary powers that want to erect a visionary future state on the ruins of the existing order; against those secret societies that have vowed the destruction of altar and throne.

On June 30, 1918, the leaders of the Centre (Catholic) party issued a manifesto containing the sentence:

"We believe in a strong monarchy."

That was when the Kaiser was still in power.

Less than five months later, in November, 1918, after the flight of the Kaiser, when the Monarchy was abolished and the Republic proclaimed, Herr Spahn, the leader of the Centre party, endorsed the new republican constitution with the following declaration:

According to Kant, the Republic is the best form of Government. The German Empire is a Republic in which the sovereignty is invested in the German people. Our political conditions are the result of historical development. The past and the present have been severed by the revolution. But the German nation has remained undivided. As pillar of our constitution has remained Rousseau's principle of the sovereignty of the people.

That was a rather sudden transition from the "divine splendor of the throne" and "the strong monarchy" to the adoption of the French atheist Rousseau's principle of the sovereignty of the people.


Like their American co-religionists, the German Catholics at their conventions and banquets never fail to assert their "unswerving loyalty and fidelity to the Holy See." The American Catholics usually add a paean to the "Paternal heart of our Holy Father that is ever afire with love and solicitude for his children." This last effulgence is not in vogue in Europe. It is an American specialty, a bouquet thrown in with the Peter's Pence.

A bill, similar to the one suggested for our Congress, could be introduced into the Reichstag to the effect that in the German elementary schools only such religion may be taught as conforms to national self-respect.

The question then will be debated whether the Catholic religion conforms to German national self-respect. Over two-thirds of the members of the Reichstag are non-Catholics. Unlike their colleagues in the United States Congress, they entertain not the slightest fear of the Vatican. One reason for this lies in the entirely different alignment of political parties in Germany.

Let us suppose that the Reichstag passed a resolution suppressing the Catholic religious instruction in the elementary schools unless the Vatican revised the Constitution of the Catholic Church along the lines of international justice and national self-respect. What would the German Catholics who form one-third of the population of the Empire do? Would they persevere in their "unwavering loyalty and fidelity to the Holy See" or would they qualify it to an "Unswerving loyalty in all things that are just and reasonable?"

I believe that they will choose the latter course. They will repeat the performance of November, 1918. As they then suddenly discovered that the Kaiser was not the Fatherland, they will also at once discover — what many of them have known all along — that the selfish scarlet-robed Italian clique in the Vatican is not the Roman Catholic Church, but rather an incubus on the Church. They will petition the Holy Father to comply with the request of the German government. If he should snub their petition, they will take steps towards the establishment of a temporary German Catholic National Church that would renounce its allegiance to the Pope until he condescends to recognize the principle of national self-respect and international justice.

If the government of the United States in the interest of the American ideals of democracy and national self-respect forwarded a similar request to the Vatican the Zambo Brotherhood would no doubt raise a tremendous howl. But I am convinced that if the government stood firm, ninety-five per cent of the American Catholics, after having recovered from their shock, would with a sincere heart endorse the action of the government in its palpably just demand, even to the extent of forming temporarily an American National Church. The Zambo Brotherhood would submit with a Scowl, but it would submit. That breed is not made of the stuff that is willing to become a martyr for any cause, be it religion or country. It caters to the side that is in power.

That experiment could be repeated successfully throughout the world, leaving the Italian Autocracy in the end isolated. It would probably not require an extraordinary large sum of money to launch such a movement.

The Italian Autocracy could advance against it no other theological reason than its unenunciated dogma, which it however regards as first and foremost: "Jesus Christ has founded a world church to serve as an instrument for the aspirations of the Italian race to world rule, and as a productive milk cow for an absolutistic Italian clique."


In a large work entitled Daniel and the Revelation the Adventist, Uriah Smith, accuses, on page 161, the papacy of having put fifty millions of Christian dissenters, such as Waldenses, Albigenses, Protestants, etc., to death. The Catholic reader will smile at this "mild" exaggeration and, no doubt, the average nonCatholic reader will also shake his head in wonderment at this strange imputation.

In his book, Concerning the Stability and Progress of Dogma, the Jesuit Lepicier, professor of theology at the College of the Propaganda in Rome, while admitting that Catholic rulers have persecuted and slaughtered heretics, asserts: "There is no example in history of the exercise of the right of the sword by the Church herself." He means to say that no pope or papal commission has ever ordered the execution of a heretic.

Uriah Smith and Father Lepicier represent two extremes. The first turns mole hills of papal religious intolerance into mountains. The latter wants to whitewash the papacy altogether. Lepicier seems to have overlooked a long list of victims of papal intolerance; for instance, the ex-Dominican Giordano Bruno, who in 1600 was sentenced to death, for heresy, by a papal tribunal and burned at the stake in Rome by papal executioners. Nor can the Church be absolved from complicity in the execution of Jan Hus and Girolamo Savonarola. The latter, incidentally, was not a heretic, but merely an over-zealous reformer, or rather, a too daring and too persistent critic of the abuses of the papal court. The great historian, Dollinger, in his Prophesies and the Prophetic Spirit, page 163, comments: On the 23rd of May (1498) he was executed, according to the judgment of the Pope, as a heretic; according to the opinion of his Order (Dominican) and of his numerous disciples, as a witness to the truth. An office was dedicated to him as a sainted martyr and persons who were themselves canonized at Rome, such as Catharine Ricci and Philip Neri, have honored and invoked him as such.

About a quarter of a century ago the late Jesuit historian, Emil Michael, declared in a lecture at Innsbruck, Austria: "Scandals among us Catholics must not be minimized." He merely emphasized anew a principle followed by other leading modern Catholic historians, such as Ludwig von Pastor and Johannes Jansen, who in their monumental works laid bare with perfect candor the past errors and misdeeds in the Catholic fold. They have not injured the Catholic cause thereby. At any rate the Vatican has seen fit to bestow special honors on them.

In 1900, the Calvinists erected in Geneva, Switzerland, a monument to Michael Servetus, the Spanish Unitarian, who was by reason of his religious convictions put to death in that same city by the order of John Calvin. In thus honoring the martyred heretic, they intended to expiate a crime perpetrated in a dark, bigoted age by their fanatical co-religionists.

This emphatic condemnation of a wrong committed in the name of their religion has no doubt raised our modern Calvinists in the esteem of their fellow Christians and of all right-minded people. It has strengthened the cause of religious tolerance. It means a step closer to Christian unity.

Let us hope that some day the Vatican will consider it a good policy to follow the edifying example of these Calvinists by rearing a monument in expiation of acts of religious intolerance perpetrated by Catholics. It would decidedly tend to allay the apprehension of future acts of Catholic intolerance, it would promote good will among men, if the Pope erected on the square of St. Peter in Rome a statue of St. John the Evangelist, the Apostle of Love, with the inscription: "This monument has been erected by the Catholic Church in memory of the unfortunate victims of Catholic religious intolerance."

Some time in the spring of 1926, the Rev. S. Parkes Cadman, President of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, was quoted by the daily press to the effect that: "Before Christian Unity can be attained, there will have to be many a prominent funeral."

The press did not inform us as to what funerals the distinguished gentleman had in view. He might have appropriately mentioned Protestant Individualism and Papal Absolutism. But while Protestant Individualism only hurts the Protestants themselves by leading to endless divisions, Papal Absolutism outrages the Catholic flock and at the same time menaces the freedom and religious peace of the world. The government of the Roman Catholic Church could stand a thorough overhauling in conformity with the demands of international and social justice. This reorganization could be effected without violating a single dogma of the Catholic faith. There is not the slightest prospect of the Vatican renouncing any of its usurped rights. The Italian clique that has now for over four centuries monopolized the government of the Church has no intention whatsoever of relaxing its throttling hold on the Church. It has recently stripped the American Catholics of the last vestige of a representative form of government. It has only last year deprived the Irish clergy of the right of nominating their bishops. The Italian Autocracy is an insatiable glutton for power. It is ever tightening its strangling grasp on the Church. It will crush any Catholic who dares to protest against it.

As regards the people of the United States, if they want to prevent their country from becoming a papal satrapy, they will have to force their government to take protective measures. In conclusion we may adopt the warning of the Elder Cato, Ceterum censeo omnem autocrattam esse delendam, for the rest I hold that every despotism should be destroyed.

* * *


Bro. J. Hugo Tatsch, Associate Editor, Iowa

RECENT researches in American Craft history of Colonial times brought in their wake a number of Franklin references which bear upon his Masonic activities in France. Among the notes are several which warrant the title of this brief article.

Franklin, as is well known, represented the struggling Colonists at the court of France, and left that country for America in September, 1785, after a sojourn of eight and one-half years. He fraternized abroad with his Masonic brethren to such an extent that he was elected Venerable Master of the Loge les Neuf Soeurs of Paris, May 21, 1779, and was re-elected for another year. R. W. Bro. Julius F. Sachsel is authority for the statement that "In the year 1782, Franklin served as Venerable (Worshipful Master) of the Lodge," which may be correct as far as the word "served" is concerned; yet I doubt it. The elected incumbent of the oriental chair for 1781-1783 was the Marquis de La Salle, forty-six years of age when he took office and was very evidently capable, physically and otherwise, of discharging the duties of his office. A list of officers for 1783,, which carries his name as ex-Venerable, gives him the title of Lieutenant Colonel, commanding a battalion of the garrison at Vermandois. Franklin had, however, officiated as Senior Warden at a Lodge of Sorrow, held Nov. 28, 1778, in honor of Voltaire, in whose initiation (2) he had assisted the previous April 7, 1778. Voltaire had died May 30, 1778.

The medal depicted herewith was not described by Ernst Zacharias in his Numotheca Numismatica Latomorum, a work which appeared in 1840 as a series of eight pamphlets; but it is mentioned as No. 36 in Theodore Merzdorf's Die Denkmuenzen der Freimaurerbruederschaft (Oldenburg, Germany, 1851). The next reference to it that I have been able to find is its inclusion as No. XII in a list of thirty-nine "Medals of Franklin," in an article by this title in Volume VII, "American Journal of Numismatics," January, 1873, by W. S. Appleton. It is described as follows:

[BENJAMINUS FRANKLIN; bust of Franklin, facing the left.] Rev.

LES MAC∴ FRANC∴ A FRANKLIN M DE LA L DES 9 SOEURS O∴ DE PARIS 5778. 5829 PINGRET F.; the masonic emblem of Jehovah in a triangle surrounded by rays, with a serpent coiled in a circle, and around this a pair of compasses and a square, entwined by olive branches; above, are seven stars; at the left, a mallet, and at the right, a trowel. Bronze, size 26.

This medal is also listed as No. LIX in William T. R. Marvin's The Medals of the Masonic Fraternity Described and Illustrated (Boston, 1880). The statement is made therein that the Provincial Grand Lodge at Rostock, Germany, has a specimen of this medal in lead; also that "The obverse of this medal was muled with another reverse, not Masonic, and published by Durand, 1819, in the 'Series Numismatica.' The die of the Masonic reverse cracked, and the Medal is rare." This medal is XI in Appleton's list of Franklin medals.

Marvin goes on to say:

From the abbreviation M, on this Medal, the Lodge is thought by some to have been claimed the honor of having Franklin for its Master; but we know of no authority for that supposition, and it is more probable that the letter is an abbreviation for Member. He was a member of a Lodge in Philadelphia, when he went abroad as Ambassador. Those interested in pursuing the subject further will find a full statement of what is known in regard to it in the "American Quarterly Review of Freemasonry," Vol. 1, page 217.

As we have seen, Franklin was Master in 1779 and 1780 of the Lodge of the Nine Sisters of Paris, as shown through various sources, but most conveniently through Louis Amiable's Une Loge MaƧonnique d'Avant 1789: La R. L. Les Neuf Soeurs (Paris, 1897). The account referred to by Marvin in Albert G. Mackey's "American Quarterly Review," is an article by Rob Morris entitled "Two Well-Known Masons," and treats of Washington and Franklin. It incidentally gives an interesting account of Voltaire's initiation. Morris' article, let it be said for our brethren in Germany who may chance upon this article, also appeared in "Latomia" (Freimaurerische Vierteljahrschrift), Volume XVI, Part I, page 20 (1859). Still further notes about the Franklin medal are to be found in "Latomia," Volume XXV, pages 281-2.

It is in this last cited issue of "Latomia" that we find an interesting comment upon the date "5829" which appears on the medal under discussion. Morand, in his Catalog de livres manuscr. et imprim. sur la Fr. M. (Paris, 1856), page 22, No. 367, gives the date as 1829, which when considering the cutter of the dies, A. J. P. Pingret, who was born at Brussels in 1798, must be correct. Another theory is that the medal is a reissue, otherwise, why would the Masonic date 5829 appear upon the reverse of the medal? At least, such other restrikes of various Masonic medals are known to exist.

The Medaillenwerk, Band IV, of the Hamburgische Zirkel-Correspondenz (Hamburg, 1902) lists this medal as No. 470; it is from photogravure illustrations in this volume that the present illustrations are taken. The notes call attention to Merzdorf's error in attributing the date 1778 (5778) in the medal, and state that this refers to the lodge, and not to the issue of the medal. It should be said that the name of the die cutter, printed as "Firgret" in the Hamburg publication, is incorrect; it should read "Pingret," as given in a previous paragraph. A footnote to Vol. IV states that the orthography is subject to probable corrections owing to existing uncertainty based upon illegibility. The name has been verified by my personal examination of the medal itself, of which the Iowa Masonic Library has a specimen, obtained with the Bower Collection in 1882. Bro. Bower paid $6.02 for it at the sale of the Marvin Collection in New York, June 21, 1881.

The obverse of the medal described also appeared on one described as No. XI in Appleton's list, previously cited. It is not Masonic, but is described as follows:



Marvin describes this medal as follows:

LVIII. Obverse, Bust of Franklin, facing the left. (This medal is IV in Appleton's List of Franklin Medals. See Journal of Numismatics, Vol. VIL, p. 49.) Below in small letters, BERNIER. Legend, BENJ. FRANKLIN MINIST, PLENT. DES ETATS UNIS DE L'AMERIQ. SEPT. MDCCLXXXIII. Reverse, On a rocky hill a circular temple, within and near which are Nine Muses at work. At the right, F. B. Legend, DE LEURS TRAVAUX NAITRA LEUR GLOIRE. [From their labor springs their glory.) In exergue, DES NEUF SOEURS. Silver and bronze. Size 19. This Medal is very rare.

A specimen is in the Library of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania at Philadelphia.

I have not been able to find any illuminating references to this medal, but it is my conjecture that it was struck about the time of the treaty of peace between England and the Colonies, signed at Paris, Sept. 3, 1783. Franklin was one of the signers. A medal commemorating the signing of the treaty was sold at auction in New York, Oct. 13, 1884, and from a reproduction of it in the Bangs' catalog of that date, it is apparent that Franklin is depicted thereon with three other men.

An illustration of the reverse of the Franklin medal issued by the Lodge of the Nine Sisters, also appears on page 155 of the Amiable book cited. The obverse depicts Nicolas-Christien de Thy, Count de Milly, who succeeded La Salle as Master of the Lodge in 1783. De Milly died September, 1784.


(1) Benjamin Franklin as a Freemason, by Julius Friedrich Sachse, Litt. D., Librarian of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1906, page 107).

(2) The date of Voltaire's initiation is erroneously given in many instances as Feb. 7, 1778. This is due to a misinterpretation of the words "second month of the year 1778." The Masonic year, in this particular instance, began March first, not January first; consequently the second month was April of the vulgar computation. My authority for this is Amiable (op. cit. p. 64), who says, in speaking of a date: "The original should have said the second month, and not the fourth, since the Masonic year begins March 1, conforming to a very ancient tradition."

* * *


Bro. R. J. Meekren

THE question whether the mathematical instrument should be called "Compass" or "Compasses" when referred to in the Masonic ritual, is one that rises sporadically in the American Craft; usually to be answered "yea" or "nay" by some severe ritualist with all the finality of a pontiff speaking ex cathedra. The question seems trivial to many of us, and it may be considered a waste of time and space to discuss it. Yet when a triviality is thrust upon us by some authority saying thus it is or is not, as the case may be even the most long suffering may be stirred up to rebel, and to refuse the burden of the yoke our own "doctors of the law" would fasten upon our necks.

At bottom, it would appear, this question of whether an unaccented duplicate sibillant syllable should or should not be pronounced rests upon the widespread belief that there is, or was, or at least ought to be, an absolute authentic and correct ritual, complete and unalterable in every word, period, semi-colon and comma. There certainly has never been such a thing, and it is impossible to believe that there ever will be.

In his article in the January number of THE BUILDER, Bro. Pfrimmer exhaustively and overwhelmingly demonstrated that the general usage of the English speaking world at large, and of the Anglo-Saxon Masonic world in particular, is to say "Compasses." But it is not at all likely that a mere counting of noses will convince those who abide by "Compass." Nor can we condemn them for this. They may be, like Athanasius contra mundum, in the right after all, and the majority wrong. The question cannot be wholly determined by popular vote. It has been said, slightingly, of the great Arian controversy in the early Church that it was merely a question of a single iota, the letter "i." It is true that the words homoousios and homoiousios are very like each other in form, and differ only by one letter, yet there is a very real difference in meaning, the difference between same and similar, between identity and likeness. In our own hairsplitting contest however there is no difference of meaning, we are all in perfect agreement about the thing referred to, the question is purely grammatical. And the real question would seem to be is anyone in the wrong? Excepting, perhaps, those who insist that others are.

Bro. Pfrimmer has given us the facts concerning present day usages. The Committee on Ritual of the Grand Lodge of Montana, to whose report on the question, Bro. Pfrimmer refers, based their conclusion on a survey of the historical evidence. In this the present writer agrees with the committee. The Masonic ritual contains many archaic expressions and obsolete verbal forms, and we may well object to needless emendations made with the idea of "correcting" the ritual. The committee says:

In the final analysis, this Grand Lodge is not called upon to consider the literary usage of the word. It is interested chiefly in Masonic usage. Our ritual teems with words and expressions that have long since passed out of every day speech.

With this every brother who has any feeling at all for the antiquity of the institution will agree. It would be well if those authorities who have changed "heal" into "hail" and have invented some modern phrase or other to take the place of the perfectly correct (if obsolete) phrase, "an oblong square," will take good heed to this and govern themselves accordingly.

It must be said to begin with, that an absolutely exhaustive examination of all Masonic references to the mathematical instrument the designation of which is in question would be a task presenting very great difficulties, and no matter how much time was spent upon it there would still remain uncertainty whether every reference had been noticed. The following series of quotations is to be taken as representative only, and not as a complete list. The earliest reference of a Masonic character that I have been able to find is the well known inscription at Melrose Abbey, which may be dated approximately about the end of the 15th century. There are a number of different versions of it current, due presumably to parts of it being defaced; the following is perhaps the most correct:

Sa: gays: ye compas
evyn aboute truith & laute do: but: doute
be halde: to: ye: hende qo
iohne morvo

which may be modernized as

So goes the compass even about
Truth and loyalty do but doubt
Behold to the end quoth John Morvo.

Curiously enough the old MS. Constitutions have no references to any implements but the "mould square" and rule. The only exceptions so far as I can recall are the Dumfries-Kilwinning MS., No. 4, mentioned below, and the Melrose MS., No. 2, of date 1674, which forbids letting "loses" ("cowans" or "rough layers") know

.... ye privilege of ye compass, Square, levell and ye plum rule.

In that group of documents of uncertain origin and date, which contains catechisms, or lists of questions and answers, there are also some pertinent references. The Mason's Examination, published in the Flying Post, 1723, tells us that a lodge is composed of

A Master, two Wardens, four Fellows, five Apprentices with Square, Compass and Common Gudge.

The Mystery of Freemasons of 1730 repeats the last part of this verbatim. The Chetwode Crawled MS. has the phrase.

..... by the Square Compass and Common Judge.

The Dumfries Kilwinning MS. No. 4, of about 1730 1740, has three references. The first part of the MS. contains a version of the Old Charges and in the legendary history it gives the curious detail that Prince Edwin endowed the Fraternity.

... wt squares of go!d and compasses of silver tipt wt gold & perpedieular plums to be pure gold yr trowals of silver wt all yr other instruments conform

The charges in this MS. are followed by a catechism and in this we are informed of three pillars in the lodge which are

... ye square, the compas & ye bible.

Later on we learn that the master is known by his "habit" of clothing which is

... yellow and blew meaning the compass we is brass & Iron.....

Although perhaps not directly relevant to the question, the curious sheet of memoranda headed Institution of Wrightship which was discovered with the MS. catechism entitled the Institution of Freemasons may be mentioned. The Wrights were a Scottish institution and had a fraternal organization remarkably like that of the Masons. They included all the crafts connected with building other than Masons. This MS. has the following cryptic item:

2. Practical or Government

Rule, Sqre, and compasses or
Sqre, Plumb and Rul etc.
true comradeship.

In the records of old Scottish lodges we find two entries of interest in the present connection. In the minutes of the Lodge of Dunblane of 1720 and later we are told that certain brothers were made fellows of the Craft and

... passed from the squair to the Compass.

The phrase seems to have been used fairly regularly for a few years and then dropped. [1] The other is from an inventory of the property of the Lodge of Peebles in 1727 which included

.... square, tow and compass [2]

We now come to those printed works that purported to give the Masonic ritual of the time. Just what value they have in this connection is doubtful, but for completeness sake some of them may be quoted. The earliest is Prichard's Masonry Dissected, first published in 1730. The following are the references in point:

E. A. Q. 23 ... the compass extended to.

A. 38 Bible, compass and square.

A. 39 Bible to God, Compass to the Master ...

A. 71 In a yellow jacket and blue pair of breeches. N.B. The yellow jacket is the compasses, and the blue breeches the steel points.

M. M. A. 5 From the square to the compass.

In later editions of this work a long list of toasts was added among which appear the two following:

To all that live within Compass and Square.


May every brother learn to live within the Compasses and watch upon the square.

In 1753 the Mason's Confession appeared in the Scots Magazine. This is a confused account of the usages of operative Masons in Scotland in the first part of the 18th century. In describing the form of taking the oath the "confessor" says "he is made to kneel," a posture that he had come to regard as popish, idolatrous and sinful, and that "the open compasses" were pointing to his breast. There is one other reference which occurs in some questions and answers later on.

What's a Mason's livery?

A yellow cap and blue breeches (meaning the compasses).

In 1760 appeared The Three Distinct Knocks, an anonymous work purporting to give the catechisms of the "Ancients." In 1762 another work, called Jachin and Boaz, was published which claimed to give the ritual of both the "Ancients" and "Moderns." Both these works, as Masonry Dissected seem to have been very popular as they were reprinted again and again. Jachin and Boaz was really nothing more than a reproduction of the catechisms in The Three Distinct Knocks, with a description of the ceremonies of the "Moderns" prefixed to it. In this there are ten references to the instrument in question. The first is in a "Description of the Regalia" that follows an "Advertisement." It is really an explanation of the frontispiece, an emblematic Masonic design. We find the following:

The compass and square, to square our actions ...

The plumb level. compass and plumb rule ...

Then comes an account of the arrangement of a lodge and its officers the Master's ribbon hangs a rule and compass...


... the other officers carry the compass alone; also that

... the grand officers' aprons ... carry the rule and compass. the emblems of the order, and finally that the Bible is opened before the Master

... with the compasses laid thereon, and the points of then covered with a ... square.

A diagram is given representing the lodge and in thee explanation appears

B. Past-Master, with the sun and compasses, and a string o cords.

In the account of the ceremony we are told, first that upon a stool

... are placed the rule and compass:

and then that the candidate holds

... a pair of compasses

in regard to which we are told in a note that the "Ancients"

... used a sword or spear, instead of a compass.

After this comes the Catechisms from The Three Distinct Knocks. In these are three references only, as follows:

E.A. Bible, Square and Compass.... the Compass to keep us within bounds with a men

F.C.... supported by the points of the compasses, forming a square ...

M.M.... both points of a pair of compasses ...

And then in an appended account of the installation of officers there is the following description of their jewels:

The Master ... has the rule and compass, and square hanging to a ribbon round his neck ...

The Senior and Junior Deacons have each ... the compass hanging round their necks.

The Past Master has the compasses and sun, with a line of cords about his neck.

These three works were all reprinted dozens of times. There were others of a similar character but as copies have not been at hand they may be allowed to pass, and we can go on to consider some books that have a real claim to authority. The first is William Preston. We find, in his Illustrations of Masonry, the form compasses three times, one in the Installation Ceremony, where we are told that

... the Sacred Law, with the square and compasses, the constitutions, the minute book, the rule and line ...

and the rest of the working tools are "separately presented to him." The other two references are each in an order for processions, one for laying a foundation stone, the other for dedicating a lodge. In almost identical phrase we are told of the

Bible, Square, and Compasses on a crimson velvet cushion.

Preston's great antagonist Laurence Dermott chose the other form of the word. one mention only has been discoverable, and that is in the clever skit on the "Moderns" in Ahiman Rezon that he for some reason or other chose to call a "Philacteria." In this he says:

... some of the young brethren made it appear that a good knife and fork in the hands of a dexterous brother, over proper materials would give greater satisfaction, and add more to the rotundity of the Lodge, than the best scale and compass in Europe.

Coming to America we find that Thomas Smith Webb in his Freemason's Monitor consistently used the same form as Dermott, Compass, while Jeremy Cross, Webb's pupil, in his Masonic Chart as consistently says Compasses.

There is one more work to be examined, and it is rather illuminating. This is Browne's Master Key, a ritual in cipher published in 1802. In it we find the following references. The figures refer to the number of the question and answer.

E. A. 95 ... a pair of compasses extended ...

96 Why were the compasses extended ... As the compasses were then . .

160 The bible compass and square ...

161..... so is the compass and square when united... .

162..... the compasses to the Grand Master in particular

164 Why the compasses to the Grand Master ... The compasses being the chief instrument ...

In the answer to question 183 we find compasses twice, and in that to 217, the singular form, compass, appears, as it also does in the M.M. 26. It is quite possible that there are other references that have been overlooked, for it is exceedingly easy to miss them. But certainly enough have been adduced to show quite conclusively that Browne had not the faintest idea that one form was right and the other wrong. And this is the impression produced by the whole collection of references that have been here given. The shorter or singular form of the word would seem to have been the favorite, but from the time the Masonic Institution emerges into the light of historical record the plural form has also been used apparently quite indifferently and with no sense that it was incorrect.

It would be possible to let the case rest at this point, and claim Masonic freedom to use either form of the word at will by virtue of ancient and well founded tradition. But it may be possible by going a little further to reach a positive conclusion in the matter. Bro. Pfrimmer consulted most of the standard dictionaries, which of course all say, what everyone knows, that it is correct to say "Compasses" in ordinary speech. This does not, however, touch the position of those who claim that "Compass" is the correct Masonic usage. The editors of Webster's Dictionary seem to have a sneaking wish to assert that common usage is wrong in this case. This attitude is more than balanced by that of the New English Dictionary, whose editors consistently use the common plural form in every reference they themselves make to the mathematical instrument. Under the head of "Compass" there are five long columns of close print in small type. The derivation of the word is first discussed. Its origin is not certain, but is supposed to be from the Latin cum, with, and passes, a stride or step. The prefix however may be only an intensive and not the preposition. The root meaning seems to be that of measurement, and if so, the instrument got its name from its use as a measuring appliance. The Latin name for it, however, is not compassus, but circinus.

After this the different meanings of the word are taken in order under numbered sub-heads. Thus I. Measure, proportion, regularity, etc. II. Artifice, skillful device, etc. III. Mathematical Instrument. Under this appear a long list of compounds, bow-, beam-, calliper-, hair-, elliptic-compasses and the like. The instrument is then described, and it is said that with this designation the word is "now general in the plural." No preference is expressed for either form, though as has been noted the editors consistently use the plural themselves.

There then follows a long list of quotations, the use of the singular form, then of the plural and last of the phrase "a pair of compasses." The earliest appearance of the word is in a MS. of date 1340:

A tour faire of yuory ... craftely casten with a compas.

The last quotation given with the singular form is from Emerson's Essays:

Defined by compass and measuring wand.

The first quotation with the plural form is from Eden, 1555;

We took oure compases and began to measure the sea coastes.

The earliest use of the compound phrase is singular in more than one sense, it is of date 1556.

Have a payre of compasse aptelye made for to draw the circles.

Now the brethren who argue this question seem generally to have forgotten that it is not an isolated phenomenon in our language. There is no need to look for such reasons as that suggested in the Montana report that the plural form of compass came into use to distinguish the instrument from the mariner's compass, when that became generally known in Western Europe, for there is a small but well defined group of words which are also generally, or invariably, used in the plural, while the object denoted is singular. These things can all be preceded by the phrase "a pair of," such as pincers, tongs, scissors, trousers, breeches, corsets and the like. Some of these words are very old, others are of more recent origin. The older ones were originally used in the singular form, the modern importations, such as pantaloons and trousers for example, have taken the plural from the first, apparently to conform with the established idiom.

One characteristic is common to the things designated by this group of names, they consist of two parts identical or very similar in shape. An examination of the history of some of these terms may afford some further light on our own problem. It may be noted that this "pair of" business is especially an idiom of the English language, though not entirely unknown in others. As for example in French, Ciseaux, scissors, is a plural form, of which the singular means a chisel. According to the dictionaries, ciseaux may be preceded by Une paire de, a pair of, though it is seldom met with in actual use. But other words, which in English are plural, are always singular in French, as pantalon, calecon, corset. Compas is also always singular. Why the English language should have come to dwell on the duality of such objects is rather mysterious, but the fact is patent, and its final development lay in the transition period between Middle and Tudor English though it began a good deal earlier. We have seen that the first appearance of the plural form "Compasses" was in the sixteenth century. Let us now look at the history of some of the other words of the same kind.

Both alphabetically and in point of time, bellows is one of the first. It goes back to earliest Teutonic times. In Old English it was Blaest-bel, which is to say "blastbag." In the eleventh century it was belg or bylg the last letter not being our present "g" exactly, for it changed into beli and bely. Chaucer about 1390 used it in both singular and plural. After 1400 it became belies and bellis, and in 1500 belwes, belows. Some people still say "a pair of bellows," and according to our usage it is not inappropriate for the fireside appliance.

Among the B's we find also breeches. This is another ancient Teutonic word, bred brace, in Old English, in old Norse brok and braekr. In 1100 it is still brek, Wicklif used breche in 1380, and Caxton as late as 1480 has breche. But breches appeared as early as 1205, and Wicklif also had the plural brechis, while in 1500 it had become breechys.

Corset is a much older word than might have been supposed. It is still singular in 1299, but this perhaps is not so strange as it was equivalent to corslet. In 1387 Trevisa has corsetts, Caxton has corsettys, although the singular form, corset, continued to be used, like compass, right down to the present time. Now, owing to the influence of Paris on the nomenclature of feminine garments, it bids fair to supersede the plural form altogether. Callipers need not be more than touched upon. Originally a distinguishing epithet for a special kind of compass, they have become quite independent in the speech of the men who use them. In 1588 we have calleper compasses, in 1627 we are told that "Compasse callipers" are "like a paire of compasses." The bow-compasses of the draughtsman may be spoken of shortly as "bows." which is a parallel development, though it has not got beyond the drawing office, and is hardly an established usage.

Two more words only will we consider, both interesting as having taken the plural form very early, and that the corresponding words are used in the plural in some other languages. The first is the ill-omened gallows. In Old English it is galga and galgan, singular and plural respectively. In middle English the plural form prevailed and the singular became unusual; in the thirteenth century it was galwes, Caxton has "gallows" and "a pair of gallows," the latter form of course referring to the two upright posts. Coverdale, in 1535, goes back to the singular form, "make a gallow of fiftye cubites." Shakespeare has "gallowes," but Robertson in 1693 again goes back to gallow. The German form of the word, der Galgen, is plural, the French gibet is however singular.

The last word is tongs. This in German is die Zange, a plural form, and in French, les pinces, or tenailles, both also plural. The Old English is tang. We have tong in 725, tang in 1000, tonge in 1250. Wicklif has toenge, but the Venerable Bede, as far back as 800, has tangan, a plural form, and the Durham Roles, contemporary with Wicklif have

j par de Tangs

and later we have 1412, tangos; 1500, taingis; 1660, tongues, and so late as 1816, tangs.

It will be noticed that with the older words of this group the change in usage from singular to plural comes roughly between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries, some earlier and some later. We cannot be certain that the records always give us even the approximate date of the change, but it is probable that they do so closer in respect to the words of every day use as tongs and breeches for example, while on the other hand a specialized instrument like the compasses would be less frequently mentioned. It may be noticed also that "tongs" which appears to be perhaps the earliest to take the plural is also found to take the plural in other languages also, or at least in French and German. Words of this dual nature that were adopted after the period of transition took the plural form from the first, of which pantaloons, and its colloquial abbreviation pants, may be taken as an example.

There is nothing unusual in the use of two words, or two forms of a word, for the same thing. It is a phenomenon of all languages. At the same time there is usually some reason for the use of one form rather than another, though not at all necessarily the same reason in every case. It may be no more than euphony or economy of effort, or it may be to denote a distinction or contrast of meaning or for the sake of variety. English is a strongly accented and highly rhythmical language. Those to whom it is their mother tongue seldom realize the fact unless they have given special attention to the subject, but it is so. We all alter the length of the vowels and slide over unstressed syllables according to the context in which words and phrases are put. We do it instinctively and unconsciously. When a foreigner, or a child learning to read, is told the pronunciation of the common demonstrative "the," with a long vowel, and proceeds to use it thus in a sentence it sounds very funny. All of our common words have many slightly different pronunciations according to their place in the sentence, and this quite aside from the elisions, allowable some, and others merely slovenly, that are in constant use. For example, the comic pages of our newspapers make out that the average American says "lotta" instead of "lot of." There is no doubt "lotta" is easier to say; one has only to try it to see. It is good usage to say I'll for I will; don't for do not, even shan't for shall not. But there are countless other incipient elisions that we all make on occasion that are never represented in spelling. It would be an endless and hopeless task to try to do so. If now we go to the passages quoted earlier in which the compasses are mentioned in one or other form, it will be found at least by those with an ear for rhythm and accent that to use the other form in that place is often not so euphonious, would take a little more effort to say or would not run so smoothly. In some cases this is not apparent possibly the whole context might make a difference in these but there are some definite enough to illustrate the point. "Square and Compass," or "Bible, Compass and Square" are smoother and easier than the plural. But not in "The Holy Bible, Square and Compasses." Here the rhythm demands the last syllable. Browne's "Why were the compasses extended?" is smoother than the singular form would be, though "The Compass extended" is better standing by itself. It all depends on the rest of the context and where the stresses come.

Now the Masonic ritual in America, in spite of the revising, improving and general tinkering it has undergone for a hundred years past at the hands of committees and custodians of the work, Grand Lecturers, and like authorities, is still in great part an oral tradition, or at least took its form as an oral tradition. And it is precisely in oral transmission that this instinct for quantity and accent will have most effect. Much of our ritual is of the nature of free verse, it has an unmistakable swing and rhythm. The newer portions, composed on paper, have not got this rhythm at all, and sound heavy and dull by comparison. The suggestion that finally arises from all this is that when we say "compass" (as most of us do on occasion) we are not using the singular form of the word at all but an elided plural, and that if we spelled it with accuracy we should write compass'.

Whatever may be thought of this suggestion, and it is nothing more, it does seem that we are justified in drawing the conclusion that both forms of the word have been used by Masons for the last two hundred years and more, and that we may all continue to use both according to our own feeling for euphony without shame or fear, as in all probability most of us have been doing without realizing it.


  1. History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, Murray Lyon, page 416.
  2. Op. cit., page 77.

* * *


Bro. John W. Shuman, California

WESTERN Christian Missionary work has been going on out there in the land of the Bible for over a century and although the educative features have been working only for about fifty years, it is only in recent years that big strides have taken place along this line. The pleasant and wholesome memories of service as a physician with the troops in the American Expeditionary Forces were still so fresh in mind that "the call" to Syria was happily and wholeheartedly received. It seemed a grand and glorious opportunity to do more good in medical work, for a greater number of needy people.

The call to serve mankind has always found willing listeners those willing to hear, keen ts act and sticklers for performing the same "for the good of the service." For this reason there are many preachers, teachers, doctors and free-givers of the wherewithal (cash) in the service of Missionarying. It is correctly estimated that "Missionary work is the most worthy of causes here on earth." However, there are several types of Missionaries. Some are quite sincere; some are only superficial; whilst others are "gold diggers." The latter two classes cast discredit upon any service.

There are few venturesome souls who have not at some time been called crazy, foolish, and other harsh words. When folks, friends and relatives (especially the latter) were informed that we were "turning Missionaries" they objected with spoken and written words of advice, scorn, and criticism few praised the decision. Many of those offering discouragement didn't even know where Syria was; some spelled it Assyria, others spoke of cannibals, heathens and pagans as native residents of Asia Minor; some even wrote letters of reference for us to carry to their "powerful and influential" friends at Moscow and Hong Kong, in case we got into serious trouble. All of which goes to show that our education is too often woefully "short" concerning the other fellow's country, also concerning his religion and his customs.

Syrians and Missionaries were seen and studied from the time we stepped on board the S.S. Bragga until we stepped off the Madona a year later; for on the Bragga there were old and new workers en route to their respective stations in Syria, Palestine, Turkey, Persia and Cypress. Missionaries were not exactly strangers to us, but we had never witnessed them in action on their own stamping ground; we had heard their talks and read their letters, concerning "the handicaps, drawbacks, need of clothes, food, money, etc., etc.," to the home-folks. But here began opportunities to see to the bottom of things, to see below the superficial. The reader must already realize that it is impossible for anyone to see Syria without seeing the Missionaries, for they are an important part of the population of that country.


On the same boat there were many Syrians (Moslems, Druz, Jews and Christians) going back for either a visit, a wife, or on other business. One Syrian Durzi, who had been an American property owner for twentyfive years, he owned practically the entire Virginian town in which he lived, had made the trip back to Syria six times, for his wife and five children had never been to America. From the start our little group mingled with all first-class passengers and some of the others playing games, singing and talking as most healthy sea-voyaging people do. The Missionaries stayed on the upper deck aloof, stiff, and reserved. This segregation of themselves was just a repetition of the old mistake of sectarianism and congregationalism.

The first Saturday night on the boat the Bulletin Board carried nothing referable to the morrow; this seemed odd, for there were three full-fledged Christian Protestant Missionary ministers aboard. With the consent of the captain, who was delighted, "Sunday services at 9 a.m. in the dining room collection for the French seamen's widows and orphans" was billed. A quartet was rounded up and one parson was persuaded to "work." The church was crowded and the captain's and purser's caps were filled with shekels. The ice was broken and the services on the next three Sundays were well worth while.


We saw the Orient for the first time when the anchor was dropped, on a Saturday, at Jaffa (Joppa), the old Phoenician city which is now a part of Palestine, ruled by Great Britain. There is no harbor there, so the Oriental boatmen came out to sea to take off the cargo. There was a wind and the sea was choppy. Their style of boat has not changed much since Jonah's accident with the whale in that same end of the Mediterranean Sea. The boats were and oar and sail-propelled and manned for the most part by Mohammedans. The wind blew hard and threatened to blow off their scant clothing, viz., white banded caps (fezes) and knee-length shirts; a few of the boatmen, evidently chiefs, wore the baggy trousers, such as you see on our Shriners during parades, only not nearly so clean; all were barefooted. Some passengers amused themselves by tossing coins into the sea and watching the boy divers recover them. English pennies were in demand but a United States quarter of a dollar was discarded, after it scrutinized and bitten, as being "counterfeit," fort it was explained, "The bank would not pay on it." It was different with a silver dollar, it seems to be well-known in Asia Minor.

In reference to the baggy trousers, they don't quite reach to the ankle; the crotch extends to below the knees; the upper legs and girth have yards of material; a draw-string pulls them together and holds them up when properly tied; a wide and many colored sash, for a belt, hides the knots, loose ends, wrinkles, etc.; then there is an immense pocket at each side of size sufficient to carry a big family wash in. The reason I know so much about these garments is because I borrowed a pair from a servant of the Yankee Consul to wear at a masquerade one night a few months later; during that party someone asked me the question "Doctor, why are the Moslem's trousers so large?" All my guesses did not come close, for the answer was, "There is a belief that when Mohammed comes the second time he is to be born of man, hence man's preparedness!"

While the men were taking off cargo that day a boxed-up touring car slid into the sea and sank; but on Sunday, the day following, naked divers with ropes and an old hand windlass reclaimed it from its watery grave, in plain sight of all. As they yanked in union they shouted in tune, "Y Allah! Y Allah!" ("Oh, God!" so the Missionaries said, but the Syrians "It is the same as 'Heave ho' or 'Come on!'")

Sunday night sailing slowly, because we were not to arrive before daylight, up along the coast the lights from light-houses were plainly visible; especially was this true of that on Carmel; that historic mountain where Elijah, to the disgust of King Ahab, showed up his, and Baal's, false prophets. After Mount Carmel came Tyre and Sidon and after them Beirut, the capital of Syria. The morning was clear, and the lofty Lebanon Mountains, where Solomon got the cedars from King Hiram to build the first Temple, dominated the landscape. To the new-comers it was a never-to-be forgotten sight that beautiful panorama was indescribable no one can blame Missionaries for enjoying life there. There were no docks or big-ship-wharfs there so the anchor was dropped and boatmen came to the ship's "side stair," or ladder, and there took off the passengers and their possessions.


Meeting the newcomers is quite a jolly occasion everywhere; it seemed to be an especially joyous affair in Beirut that morning, judging by the number of representatives from the mission fields, Near East Relief Organization, mercantile game and populace who were on hand to welcome those from "the home land."

We landed bag and baggage, a little wet on account of being splashed by struggling boatmen. The boatmen, like cab drivers, were out for "fares," and like taxi drivers they worked by "fare and foul" means. The boatman sent out for us didn't get us but another one did. The story came out later that he had "listenedin" when the boatman who was to get us received our description. That's an example of how cute and industrious the native is he is not at all dumb. When he had landed us and got our luggage and group into cabs (arabias) and was asked "How much?" his answer, then new to me but later I found quite characteristic, was, "Whatever you think, Effendi." The amount offered was less than half he then demanded, stating that he had broken his back lifting and carrying one of our wardrobe trunks. Finally the matter was left to a third party, the treasurer of the A.U.B., who, by the way, was paying all expenses. He simply told the man, "Here is your fee." He took what he gave him, salaamed, thanked him profusely and departed. It was our first lesson in economics in Syria.

That night we slept under bed-mosquito netting, in one of the A.U.B. college dormitories, for the first time in our lives; but gladly missed the rocking of the boat! Without the netting mosquitoes and sand flies would literally have eaten us up. As it was our hands were badly bitten, because we were careless with them, letting them lie against the net so that all the insects had to do was to stick their suckers through and take their fill they sure did like foreign blood by the way they went to it!


The house assigned us by the University was the twenty-four-room house in which Dr. H. Graham had lived and held his medical office for many years. The "tram" station, just in front of the door, was called "Graham." The house faced the beautiful blue Mediterranean Sea. It was difficult to keep our children seated at the table during meal times for the dining room overlooked the street and the sea and if they weren't stretching their necks to see a camel-train go by on the street it was, O looky, there comes a French battleship!" Syria, since the World War, is mandated by France.

The door-bell, like all the rest of its kind in Syria, was rung by a long wire or rope with handle hanging down alongside the door the bell jingle-jangling away off somewhere in the middle or back part of the house, and the door was opened from upstairs by a rope or wire.

The largest room of the house was sixty by twenty-five feet, which made a nice place for the children to play and their elders to dance in. Am not sure that it was ever used for the latter prior to our occupancy, but all of Madam's parties were well attended by the community. Some came, "only to look on," but they could not keep their feet quiet when the music got under way.

We had arrived in Beirut at the tail end of "the five dry summer months," during which time not a drop of rain falls and at the time when insect life is most abundant, especially fleas, moths and mosquitoes; the latter hatch out in the garden pools (Berikehs) used for irrigation, in the damp soil, and the pools by the sea. They attack night and day and all the year necessitating the mosquito netting for beds:

Madam called our house "the Ark" for, she said, "it contained a pair of nearly every creature that Noah took aboard his ship, viz., fleas, mice, mosquitoes, rats, flies, moths, bugs, cockroaches (some two inches long; we caught them in mouse traps!), cats (not pets), scorpions, lizards, dogs, centipedes, spiders (as big as mice), and other animals too numerous to mention."

The first morning she would not leave her bed until two ten-inch lizards had been chased from under her bed; and just when they had climbed well up on the wall where they would be good insect catchers (no one should kill these friendly reptiles) Grandma screamed for "Help!" and was found standing guard, just in front of her chamber door, over a six inch centipede, which became a total wreck after a number twelve shoe was Stamped on it. We never put on our shoes thereafter without first examining their interiors for spiders or centipedes.

The cleaning, unpacking, buying additional furniture, employing and breaking in servants, etc., were all problems mostly for the wife. And servants should be trained; for example, when she found the "Femme de chambre" using the dishrag to wash the bedroom crockery, she made her stop it. When a U.S. lady first goes out there the native ways are not to her liking, so she goes at things "lickety-split" to make them American-like; which is quite right, for if sanitation was 100 per cent in Syria there would be far less sickness with its complicants and end results.


The servant problem is not any nearer solution in Syria than in any other land; although the wages are not so much, the upkeep bill is; for one thing each servant has many cousins who visit and must be fed. Dicron, an Armenian lad, whose father (a Christian minister) and mother were killed in Turkey, was Madam's house boy; he did all her marketing, interpreting and errands.

As Dicron was Armenian it was quite natural that all the other servants were Armenians. We tried to have a Syrian table-maid, and did have one for two weeks, but the Armenian odds were against her so she resigned. But not until she taught us a few of the Arabic names for the table utensils and most of the foods. We enjoyed many of the native dishes but the cook's attempt at pie brought peals of laughter from the whole family and made for indigestion. The crust was almost an inch thick and mighty tough.

Our house had one of the few "modern" bathrooms; few people had American tubs; almost all baths were wash tubs. Ours consisted of a tub and a large copper kettle, like the ones in which our grandmothers used to make plum jam and apple butter, set so that half was in the bathroom and the other half in the kitchen. One Saturday afternoon the cook made a fire under said kettle, heating the water to desired hotness. Then, through a faucet, it was run into the bath tub. The maid and cook washed our two lads the first Saturday their mother not knowing anything about it until afterwards but never again! Those young men had "Never suffered such indecencies as a stranger giving us baths," and "If we got to stand for such stuff we are going home."

Charcoal was the fuel for cooking and is toted from door to door by the charcoal peddler on his little ass, or wee donkey, some of them not much larger than a St. Bernard dog.

Among the servants was the laundress, the cook's mother, who came on Mondays and got through on Tuesdays maybe. She sat on the floor of the wash house with a high copper tub three feet across by ten inches deep in front of her. The water was heated in another big kettle over a wood fire, the clothes were wrung by hand. The natives did most of their own washings in the sea, also their bathing. After our wash-lady had finished, she heated up the bath tub water and "cleaned up." The native irons for ironing clothes have a lid which can be lifted and the hollow part filled with red hot charcoal, which will retain heat for hours. They preferred these to the electric irons which Madam took to Syria.


To the rear of the house was a big garden in which there were beautiful flowers and delicious fruit. There was also a spacious yard for hanging out the wash, and for the kids' baseball games, also a chicken-run at the back. Chickens recall the fact that Madam and her servants did not do well with them. When visiting the Druz they gave us a dozen hens and roosters Dicron brought her some more, and she went into the business as they do in Southern California and was just as fortunate. She got excitement, but was out money and chickens. Possibly it was the "pip" that carried them off, if that's the disease that "takes them during the night and leaves no dead chickens behind."

As to other live stock, the two rabbits died. They were gifts from the cook's brother, a junior medical student wanting, quite naturally, to get on the good side of the doctor. The mother rabbit died in child-birth, the father presumably from a broken heart. Jeanne's dog "passed on" one night in spasms due to too much strychnine in his meat diet. It came in over the garden wall he was a noisy pup at night. A cat enveloped Grandma's canary, a gift from my Arabic tutor.

The blood-sucking bugs, however, thrived well. They seemed to prefer foreign (Frangi) blood rather than the home brew; and whoever says bugs don't have individuality doesn't know what he is talking about, for in the matter of appetite fleas and bedbugs rush madly from me to my wife and literally chew her up, whilst flies and mosquitoes don't care much for her, but dearly love me; and she can pet spiders, while a poor picture of one looks real enough to me; and if one toddles across the floor I can arise from chair to table without being conscious of how I got there.

There was electricity only part of the time, so candles had to be kept on hand. Street cars (trams) and automobiles were becoming numerous, but the streets were so narrow that one could not break the speed limit without "breaking a leg" or something else.

The ill smells, the dirt and filth in the cities and villages, which shock the newcomer, are not noticed by the one who has become oriented. In America my wife could never eat butter that was not fresh, but eight months after she was in Syria she smacked her lips after taking a bite of butter that was so strong it could have thrown Strangler Lewis. Today, looking back, she says, "I sort of miss the Syrian smells."

A Missionary of North Syria just wrote, "There have been changes here in the past thirty years but the young ones don't see them, and it is impossible to make radical changes, so we must go slow and gradually then we forget to keep going."

Hardships of life are soon forgotten and only the pleasant memories stick; so it was in no time at all that we were relishing goat and garlic scented Armenian-Arabic food, with some of the American kind mixed in; sleeping scratchfully with ideas and other night biters; and talking Arabic with plenty of American accent. As Syria is mandated by France everyone tries to speak French, but Arabic is the language of the country. It should be remembered that the teaching, in all departments, in the American University of Beirut is in English.


A tutor was furnished who taught me Arabic from six to seven p. m. each day, with the result that in four months I could conduct a medical consultation and write prescriptions in Arabic. Necessity forces one to do many things and it is the first requisite in learning a language. Arabic is certainly different from any language I ever attempted. It is full of strange gutturals, has a novel syntax and there is a big difference between the written language and the speech of ordinary conversation, the latter being the "Common," the former the "High Arabic." One should speak the language of the country in which he expects to live or carry on.

Few Americans speak Arabic really well. As stated, it is important to be well acquainted with the native language, for example, the Arabic words for dog and heart sound quite alike to the foreigner. An American Missionary praying in Arabic, before a group made up for the most part of Moslems, prayed that "God would turn the dogs (he meant hearts) of these folk to God." Dog is a favorite term of the Moslems for the "unbeliever."

It is said, "Exactness is not in the Syrian vocabulary." One evening while making hospital ward rounds with Adjunct Professor Yennikomshion he promised to remove the fluid from a man's chest "before the students the next morning." Imagine my chagrin when the next day I found that he had withdrawn the fluid "before the students had arrived." He had been speaking English for twelve years but interpreted the remark to mean "before their arrival," instead of to "demonstrate in front of the students."

The natives are worse than the Irish with the use of blarney. Several tried to "kid me" into believing that I spoke Arabic very well after I had been there but a month; which gives one an idea how easily one may be misled if he is willing! The native is kind and politie some are to be admired; others well, it is the same the world over.

During the first week there were quite a number of social functions for the "new Professor," which taxed one's memory for faces and names, especially the latter. For example, there were Faiz Abd-ul Malak and Yakub Abd-ul Masih, the first two names on the senior class roll in medicine. The fact that the first name meant "Slave of the King" and the other "Slave of Christ" helped to differentiate a little, but it took usage to get correctness.

The social festivities were taken on by Madam, the one naturally best fitted to handle them. She said, "You will need every ounce of steam to put over your work," and I did. During the first week she had over one hundred callers; and they are more jealous about visiting and returning calls over there in that community life than on a United States Army Post. For a long time she was in disgrace because she had failed to make a "call" on a certain lady upon her (the lady's) regular receiving day. Madam had called on another day but that did not count.

During our first week there the Missionaries of Beirut were returning to the city from their summer mountain (Lebanon) homes, fifteen to twenty miles distant. During the summer this is the practice, the college is closed so there are no duties for the teachers. Many enjoy a jaunt to and through Europe. The hospital is closed down, all but one pavilion, which liberates four-fifths of the nurses and doctors to vacations. Sickness, however, takes no vacation.

* * *


The Report Presented to the Grand Lodge of New Mexico

AS President of the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association, I submit herewith an account of our stewardship together with some observations upon the history, development and the present status of Masonic tubercular relief and the efforts to effect a national Masonic organization for the relief of Masonic brethren and members of their families who are afflicted with tuberculosis.

New Mexico is one of the few states of the West and Southwest upon which is imposed a great and increasing burden incident to the relief and care of tuberculars, who come from every part of the United States seeking climatic advantages.

For more than a generation, and in fact for over one hundred years, consumptives have been migrating to the Southwest, seeking alleviation of their suffering and a longer lease on life. Because of this migration there has developed one of the greatest and most tragic problems of relief, calling for united and concerted action, similar to that which was carried out for the relief of war sufferers in Europe when all of America joined in contributing for the relief of the homeless, sick and destitute.

Few realize the magnitude of the problem of relief for tuberculars sojourning in the Southwest. Although the subject has been investigated by the United States Public Health Service and the National Tuberculosis Association, and the results of the surveys published by the Federal Government as "Public Health Reports," nothing has been accomplished, and no concerted plan has been adopted for the relief of these unfortunates.


In 1913 and 1914 the first survey of the Southwest was made by the Public Health Service, as the result of an incomplete survey of the situation by the "Southwestern Conference on Tuberculosis." It was estimated that there were probably 30,000 consumptives in West Texas, 27,000 in New Mexico, and 20,000 in Southern California. No estimate was made for Arizona and Colorado. Shortly before this, the National Tuberculosis Association officially stated:

It is probable that not less than 10 per cent of the people in this territory have tuberculosis themselves, or have come to the West because some member of their family has had it.

The present population of the "Tuberculosis Triangle" is estimated to be three million people, and if the aforesaid percentage applies today it enables us to realize that the Southwest is called upon to solve a tremendous problem in the care of those who are indigent.

The Public Health Service Survey also revealed that migration was apparently increasing at the time of the survey.

In 1920 the National Tuberculosis Association sent investigator to six cities of the Southwest-Denver, Colorado Springs, Phoenix, Los Angeles, El Paso and San Antonio. In these six cities it was found that within a period of one year some assistance had been given, through some charitable agency, to 7,319 tubercular indigents. With those sick there were 9,315 others, members of their families, who were also objects of charity, making a total of indigent, or partial indigents, of 16,734, supported wholly or in part by public charity. Included in the group there were 5,347, under sixteen years of age, living under conditions most conductive to infection because of their tender years, when danger of infection is greatest. That this danger is real is shown by the fact that one-tenth of the sick were children under four years of age.

In 1920 there were 1,635 tubercular recipients of aid in the city of Denver, one to every 156 inhabitants. A total of $129,000.00 was expended for relief, equivalent to a per capita tax of over fifty cents on each inhabitant of the city.

In that year, in Colorado Springs, there was one indigent tubercular to every 78 of the population, and the cost for their care represented a per capita tax of $1.00.

Conditions were similar in the other cities mentioned, with Phoenix bearing the heaviest burden, having one indigent to every 58 of the population, and spending $1.75 per capita for their care.

Surely no other part of the country bears a similar burden for the care of sick who are non-residents, non-taxpayers and who have not previously contributed to the upbuilding of the community which now cares for them.

Is it fair or just to the communities of the Southwest to impose this burden upon them without aid from other states, or the Federal Government?

In 1925 the same investigator was again sent by the National Tuberculosis Association to several of the cities mentioned, to check up the findings of the 1920 survey. The result of the second study revealed that migration had increased during the four or five intervening years. In the 1920 report, the following statement appears:

None of these cities has anything like adequate provision — medical, relief or institutional — for caring for the tuberculous persons, whether resident or non-resident. From what can be learned from the records it would seem that there is no attempt at a coordinated policy or program of rehabilitation of the tuberculous anywhere.

In 1925 the investigator said, "After four years, that statement is still true."


At the 1926 Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge of New Mexico there was adopted an amendment to the by-laws providing for the creation of a standing "Committee on Masonic Boards of Relief" charged with the duty, among other things, of corresponding with the Masonic Relief Association, and with other similar associations, with a view to evolving the best methods for dispensing Masonic relief.

The subject of Masonic Tubercular Relief, upon a broad national scale, has been given intensive study by the New Mexico Grand Lodge for a number of years.

It was first considered by the Grand Lodge of Texas, at the December, 1921, Annual Communication, when a committee of three was appointed to study the subject, in cooperation with suggested, similar committees to be appointed by the Grand Lodges of New Mexico and Arizona, with a view to evolving a comprehensive program, upon a national scale, for the relief and hospitalization of Masons and members of their families, afflicted with tuberculosis.

At the February, 1922, Communications of the Grand Lodges of Arizona and New Mexico such committees were appointed, and the three committees thus named organized as the "Tuberculosis Sanatoria Commission" of the three Grand Lodges.

A report, with recommendations, was submitted to the three Grand Lodges involved at their next Annual Communications in 1922 and 1923. The basis of the report was an estimate made by the National Tuberculosis Association, that at that time, with an estimated Masonic population of 2,500,000, there were probably 4,700 deaths from tuberculosis annually, and approximately 42,300 living cases.

In 1926 it was estimated by the same Association that any group of 3,250,000 American males, over twenty years of age, will sustain an approximate annual loss of 4,309 lives from tuberculosis, and the approved ratio of nine living cases, for each death, shows approximately 38,681 living cases among adult males alone. There are approximately 3,250,000 Masons in the United States. Applying the multiple of 5 indicates a total Masonic population, or family, of over 16,000,000 persons.

The Texas Grand Lodge Committee was discontinued after the 1924 meeting. Another committee appointed at the 1926 Annual Communication submitted a report in December, 1927, recommending that Texas take care of its own in existing hospitals, and in their homes. Twenty-five cents per capita was levied, to provide a fund for relief. Although San Antonio, El Paso and some of the other communities of the state have many sojourning sick Masons from other states, Texas has no plan for aiding them.

Arizona has a Convalescent Camp at Oracle, about forty miles from the railroad, where it has cared for a very limited number of ambulatory cases, but does not always have a resident physician or nurse. The Grand Lodge of Arizona deserves great credit for doing its utmost to care for both its own afflicted members and for sojourners.


Profoundly impressed with the solemn obligation devolving upon American Freemasons to provide organized relief for its tuberculars, and realizing the imperative necessity for action, in 1925 the New Mexico Grand Lodge took the initiative, and through a duly authorized committee chartered the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association and inaugurated an intensive publicity campaign to acquaint American Grand Lodges and American Freemasonry with the purposes of the organization and the needs, with a view to securing cooperation and financial assistance from all Masonic organizations and Masons, regardless of jurisdictional lines.

In addition to the publicity campaign a survey was instituted to ascertain, if possible, the number of Freemasons and members of Masons' families afflicted with tuberculosis who were sojourning in the Southwest.

The report submitted at the Chicago meeting of the Sanatoria Association, in November, 1926, disclosed a record of 1,693 Freemasons and 321 members of their families in the Southwest; and, in addition, there were found 532 Masons and 493 relatives of Masons sick in hospitals in other states, a total of 2,225 Masons and 814 relatives of Masons, or a grand total of 3,039.

It is certain that those figures would not begin to represent the real total number of cases, either in the Southwest or in the remainder of the country. What percentage of those cases were indigent is unknown.

The Association has received many letters from all parts of the country seeking admission to our "Masonic Sanatorium," which is still non-existent. Assistance has been extended to a limited number. The primary object, believed to have been based on sound business principles, was first to acquaint the Fraternity with the facts and convince them of the necessity for cooperative organized effort, in order most effectually to deal with the great problem and thereby secure the measure of financial assistance requisite for consummation of a comprehensive program for home relief and education and hospitalization in existing local sanatoria and the ultimate building of Masonic Sanatoria.


The Grand Lodge of New Mexico is proud of the fact that with the total of its annual $1.00 per capita assessment for tuberculosis relief paid in, in 1928, the financial report submitted at this Annual Communication shows that the Masons of New Mexico have paid practically all of the overhead expense of the Association and of the effort to induce American Freemasons to join in this movement. Surely no one can justly criticize New Mexico Masons for spending their own money in the effort to perfect the organization of the Sanatoria Association by inducing other Masonic bodies to cooperate in the accomplishment of the great humanitarian objects contemplated by the Grand Lodge.

New Mexico thus took the leadership and the initiative in Masonic tubercular work, actuated by a sincere belief in the ideals and teachings of the Order, confident that the Craft would rise to the great opportunity for real service and a practical application of Masonic principles. The writer of the Missouri Review of the "Proceedings of Grand Lodges" appropriately summarized the situation in the following words appearing upon page 149 of the Appendix of the 1926 Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, to-wit:

The Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association of New Mexico is, perhaps, the most significant movement before the Masonic public, and unless we are very much mistaken this enterprise will soon capture the imagination of the entire Fraternity. If it succeeds in doing this we may look for the largest outburst of philanthropy the world has ever known in this or any other country.

Thus we initiated the movement, which has been largely financed by the New Mexico Grand Lodge.

In the first year of operation twenty-six Grand Masters were persuaded that the obligation existed and that the efficient handling of the problem demanded comprehensive organization of effort, and they evinced their interest and approval by accepting service on the Board of Governors, or by appointing some interested brother for such service. At the Annual Meeting in Chicago, November, 1926, the Association had reached the high-tide or peak of the organization work designed to create an Association, to be governed by leading Masons from each and every Grand Jurisdiction, the scope of the activities of which would be national in fact as well as in name.


Some Masonic leaders have criticized the plan for the government of the Association, claiming that its affairs would not be under direct Masonic control. It is difficult to understand how the enterprise could be more directly or effectually under Masonic control than through the medium of a Board of Governors consisting of one duly appointed and authorized representative from each and every Grand Jurisdiction. Others have decried the magnitude of the enterprise and expressed the fear that it could not be successfully handled.

The problem, the solution of which is involved, is of such vast magnitude, both from the humanitarian and economic standpoints, as to call for and demand an organization of the magnitude and scope provided for by the plans of the Association. If the leaders of Masonic thought and action in the various Grand Jurisdictions would forget jurisdictional lines, if the scales would fall from before their eyes and enable them to envision the project, and if they would permit the rank and file of Masonry to be circularized in their respective jurisdictions, the financial aspects of the problem would speedily be solved.

In my Annual Address, as Grand Master, to the Grand Lodge of New Mexico in February, 1927, in discussing this movement I made the following observations:

My faith in our Fraternity is strong enough to cause me to believe that if given the opportunity, through the sanction and cooperation of the Masonic leaders of the several Grand Jurisdictions and the officers of all other Masonic bodies, every American Freemason will gladly contribute at least $1.00 per year for the relief and hospitalization of our brethren and the members of their families who are afflicted with tuberculosis.

The responsibility for the financing of this work and for salvaging Masonic lives and homes in such manner rests primarily upon the Grand officers and leaders of American Grand Jurisdictions, and upon the officers of all Masonic bodies.

In the name of our sacred and binding obligations and in the name of our afflicted brethren from whom is emanating the Grand Hailing Sign of Distress, I implore the Masonic leaders of thought and action to extend to our brethren this opportunity to practice the, great teachings of our Fraternity and to aid in financing this humanitarian movement.

Millions of dollars are garnered in the treasuries of Grand Lodges and constituent lodges, and more millions in the treasuries of other Masonic bodies, and in those of organizations affiliated with or claiming some connection with Freemasonry. These millions are growing into more millions. Why this great accumulation of wealth? For what useful purpose is it designed? Is it for the construction of costly temples or to enable the Craft adequately to finance some great work for the relief of, and genuine material service to, the Fraternity and humanity?

Shall we continue to levy assessments for the erection of great Masonic edifices and memorials, while closing our purses and shutting our eyes to the distress of our sorely afflicted brethren and turning a deaf ear to appeals for funds in aid of a relief program designed upon a national scale, the financing of which would require the contribution of but the insignificant sum of $1.00 per annum by each American Freemason? Shall not a comparatively small portion of the accumulated and hoarded wealth of the Fraternity be annually contributed to a general fund to be administered as a sacred trust by the Sanatoria Association, organized by the Masons and controlled and directed by representatives of each Masonic Grand Jurisdiction, for the benefit and relief of our afflicted brethren, and their families? Are not the lives of Freemasons, and those of their wives and children, more valuable to the Fraternity and to America, than mere wealth alone? Aye, are they not wealth itself?

I quote the words of the poet, Goldsmith, in his beautiful "Deserted Village":

"Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay."

Following the 1926 Chicago Meeting, acting under authority there conferred, an appeal was made for contributions, upon the basis of fifteen cents per capita of Masonic membership. Before Masonic bodies had time to act upon the appeal, we had an opportunity to purchase a Sanatorium in El Paso, Texas, in first-class condition, for about fifty cents on the dollar of its real value.

The cost, including furniture and equipment, would have been $75,000.00. Our first appeal was shortly supplemented with a full statement concerning the opportunity to acquire a "going hospital," wherein immediately to commence our work of relief.


These appeals were made to every Masonic Grand body, including the York Rite bodies, the Scottish Rite, the Shrine, the Grotto, and the General Grand Chapter of the Order of Eastern Star. The response was negligible, because shortly thereafter the great Mississippi flood became a menace, and the brethren of the states directly affected were compelled to make plans for the relief of those who were, or would be, in distress. More than $500,000.00 was contributed to flood relief, and the cause of Masonic tubercular relief was lost sight of in this dramatic disaster. Freemasons contributed liberally to aid flood sufferers and to replace property losses, but would not, or could not, visualize the necessity and duty and obligation to respond to an appeal for aid in the effort to save Masonic lives, Masonic families and Masonic homes.

In my address as Grand Master in 1927 to the Grand Lodge of New Mexico, the following observations were made, in discussing our first appeal:

The economic phase of our problem affords an interesting study, and provides convincing and conclusive evidence of the importance and value of salvaging the health, the lives and homes of our tubercular brethren; but the controlling and actuating motive is and should be our obligation.

Our appeal for funds with which to finance the. work will demonstrate, during the present year, whether or not American Freemasonry has a soul. It will demonstrate whether or not we observe the letter or the spirit of the law; for "Faith without works is dead."

Our first appeal for funds, upon the basis of fifteen cents per capita, calls upon each American Freemason to contribute at least the price of one good cigar for the assistance and relief of his sick brethren. The cost of attempting to collect this sum from each individual would be prohibitive. Hence, we ask that each Masonic body contribute that amount from its treasury, in which event there will be no expense of collection. If there are no available funds in the treasury, we ask that each Masonic body circularize its membership, either constituent lodges or individual members, asking for voluntary contributions. We believe that such action will produce average contributions far in excess of fifteen cents per capita.

If, during the ensuing year, contributions from all Grand Lodges average fifteen cents per capita, the total sum contributed will equal $487,500. With this amount it is proposed to construct an initial or first hospital unit of one hundred bed capacity, at an estimated cost of $250,000; to set aside $100,000 for the first year's operating expense, and an equal amount for home relief work and hospitalization in existing sanatoria, pending completion of the Masonic Sanatorium; to continue the educational and publicity campaign and to carry on the administrative work.

My remarks upon this subject concluded as follows:

Some Grand Jurisdictions are wealthier than others and are financially able to care for their own members, whether they do or not. According to our conception of Masonic obligations, they are binding upon us, no matter where a needy brother may be found; our obligations are not limited by state lines or by any other boundaries. We are, or we should be, one common brotherhood. Shall we continue as forty-nine separate organizations, not interested in each other's problems, and not interested in our own brethren if they wander from their homes? Or shall we unite as one family to care for those who have fallen by the wayside, who are down and out through no fault of their own?

A national organization has been perfected and a plan outlined, a design has been placed upon the trestleboard, whereby succor and relief may be afforded to our tuberculous brethren. If they are longer neglected their blood will be upon our hands.

It has fallen to our lot to speak for these brethren of our "Grand Lodge of Sorrow." They are a great inarticulate mass, scattered in thousands of homes throughout this great, free and wealthy land of ours. They cannot personally make their plea to the Fraternity. Therefore, in their name we have made a plea to the Masons of America, to stretch forth their hands to aid our fallen brethren and to assist in raising them again, to stand among us as men and Masons.

In the great true heart of American Freemasonry is to be found the answer to our appeal.

Many and varied have been the reasons assigned by the various Grand Jurisdictions which have declined or failed to join the organization or to respond to the appeals for cooperation and financial assistance.


It has been demonstrated that numerous Masonic leaders are fundamentally opposed to a national organization of this or any other character, and believe in zealously safeguarding the sovereignty of each Grand Jurisdiction, and limiting Masonic relief work of every and any character strictly within the confines of their several jurisdictions, coupled with the assertion that they will take care of their own tuberculars within their own borders, if they will stay at home, and that they will even take care of their own, thus afflicted, who may migrate to more favorable climates in the hope of obtaining relief; but as to the latter assertion, our experience has demonstrated that its complete fulfillment is the exception rather than the rule, and I am confident that this statement can be corroborated by the experience of other Grand Jurisdictions within the confines of the great "Tuberculosis Triangle." It is contended by some opponents of the Sanatoria Association that the admittedly superior climatic advantages of the arid and semi-arid Southwest are not essential to the treatment and cure of tuberculosis, but it is a noteworthy fact that statistics have revealed that more than half of the tuberculars who have migrated to those regions were advised so to do by their local physicians.

It is not my purpose to discuss or argue with reference to the two schools of thought upon this subject. Suffice it to say that the basic and primary purpose and object of the Association was not the establishment of sanatoria in any particular section of the country, but to arouse the Fraternity to a realization of the impelling obligation and imperative necessity to organize upon a broad national scale to deal with the great problem. It should be remembered that tuberculosis is an infectious and communicable disease wherein it differs from certain other diseases to which the human flesh is heir and the death toll from which is great; and it should also be remembered that tuberculosis is a great menace to the children of the brethren or parents who may be afflicted with the disease and that it is highly important to educate the public as to the best means not only of prevention but for cure.

Other opponents of the project urge that the movement is a departure from the fundamental teachings of the Order, chief among which is training the individual Mason to practice individual charity, apparently outside of the Fraternity.

It seems to me that one of the fundamental teachings is Service; and that the character of the service demanded by the magnitude of the tuberculosis problem is such as to render it imperatively necessary to organize upon a basis and scale commensurate with the magnitude of the situation now confronting the Masonic Fraternity.

One of the greatest difficulties encountered has been that incident to the succession in the leadership of the various Grand Jurisdictions. Grand Master Charles F. Roberts of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia, aptly said:

Times change and men change with them. Grand Masters come and go, with varying ideas, of the relative values of matters in which our Fraternity is concerned. What seems important to me may not be so regarded by my successors, but we have the comforting assurance that the policies, and ultimate purposes of Freemasonry are fixed, and that necessarily the efforts of all are directed towards the same worthy end.

It is not my purpose here to challenge the sincerity of any brethren whose opinions differ from mine or from those entertained by my intimate associates in the conduct of the affairs of the Association. For them as men and Masons I entertain the highest respect and fraternal regard, but from my viewpoint it seems deplorable that American Freemasonry cannot unite in this great cause; and contemplation of the apparent apathy and indifference, and inability or unwillingness to envision the cause from a broad national standpoint, "maketh the heart sick."


The Sanatorium which we had an opportunity to purchase in El Paso and which should now be in operation as the "First National Masonic Sanatorium," was purchased by a Catholic Sisterhood, and is now rendering service as a Catholic Sanatorium.

It has been said that the establishment of a Masonic Sanatorium in the Southwest would constitute a standing invitation for migratory consumptives. The answer is: Suppose this were true; are we not organized for the great fundamental purpose of contributing as largely and expeditiously as Possible to the relief of our tubercular brethren and members of their families afflicted with the dread disease, in the effort to salvage and restore them to health, activity and economic production at the earliest possible date? Time will not permit an elaboration of the economic features of the problem. Suffice it to say that upon the basis of statistics of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of New York the total economic loss from the death of 4,309 American Freemasons who die each year is over $93,000,000.00.

The foregoing observations indicate the impossibility of an immediate successful consummation of our work of organization along the lines originally planned and as embodied in our charter; but "Rome was not built in a day," and it may well be that several years must elapse before our hopes are fully realized.

However, as a result of the campaign of education there has been stimulated in many jurisdictions a marked degree of activity in the line of tubercular relief work.

Defeat is not recognized or admitted. The facts are thus laid before the Grand Lodge and your advice and counsel are solicited as to the best method for attaining the great objective.


The complete abandonment of the movement would be tantamount to admitting that Freemasonry cannot function outside of jurisdictional lines, or upon a national scale; that its protestations are as "sounding brass and tinkling cymbal"; that it does not practice what it preaches; that it has been "weighed in the balances" and found wanting, and that it is incapable of that degree of cohesion and co-ordination essential efficiently and effectively to deal with the existing situation. American Freemasonry is on trial, and will stand or fall according to the final answer to our sick brethren, standing in the "Northeast Corner," pleading for help, which has been so long withheld and failure to render which has resulted in the death of so large a number while we have debated among ourselves.

How many more Masonic lives will be sacrificed, how many more Masonic homes will be destroyed before the sleeping giant of American Freemasonry arouses to meet the need and to fulfill our sacred obligations?

What is your answer, what do you advise and what will you do?

Before calling upon you to answer this question, I should like to state that there is a real and insistent demand, on the part of Masons and Masonic magazines and newspapers, that New Mexico should continue the effort to secure action for relief of our suffering brethren. Foremost in the ranks of our supporters, who counsel us not to abandon the fight, stands THE BUILDER of St. Louis. For several years these friends of our cause have devoted two or more pages each month to articles telling the story of our efforts and the need, and in addition they have always given us powerful editorial support. The nation-wide interest in the movement is due, in no small measure, to their splendid efforts, which it is our pleasure and duty to here acknowledge, with heartfelt appreciation.

Bro. F. H. Littlefield, Executive Secretary of the National Masonic Research Society, publishers of THE BUILDER, and the editor of THE BUILDER, Bro. R. J. Meekren, urge us to "Hold the Fort," and continue this work, adapting our plans, as far as possible, without the sacrifice of principles, to meet the objections made to methods.

Bro. Walter L. Stockwell, former President of the Masonic Relief Association of the United States and Canada, and Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of North Dakota, and incumbent of many other Masonic positions of trust and influence, writes as follows:

While I do not want to urge the, New Mexico brethren to take on any proposition which they cannot handle, I do hope that you will not give up without making one last earnest effort to get the attention of the Craft in this country.

The Masonic Chronicler, a Masonic newspaper of Chicago, recently published a long editorial, in which it mistakenly announced that the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association would be dissolved. It reviewed the situation in the Southwest, the need for cooperative action to meet the situation and our efforts to meet that need, and concluded with the following statement:

It is a sorry task to have to record so ignomious a failure for Masonic charity. It is humiliating to have to contemplate a situation in which cooperation in so worthy a work as that of saving to Masonry a large number of afflicted brethren apparently is so completely lacking. It grieves one to know that the Fraternity the country over is content to see the brethren of these three states struggling with their excessive burden and not off er a helping band; all the more so as part of the burden justly belongs to almost everyone of the Grand Jurisdictions of the United States. It is no wonder that the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association throws up its hands in defeat and intends next February to ask the Grand Lodge of New Mexico for its dissolution. Would that some miracle might happen between now and then to save the project and insure support for its grand and glorious work.


In the last number of THE BUILDER we gave the recommendations presented to the Grand Lodge of New Mexico by Bro. H. B. Holt on behalf of the N.M.T.S.A. which embodied certain amendments to the charter of the Association. These recommendations were referred in the regular course to the Committee on Jurisprudence, which made certain changes and additions. The recommendations as adopted by the Grand Lodge of New Mexico are as follows:


WHEREAS, The President of the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association has reported to this Grand Lodge inability to complete organization of the Association along the lines prescribed in the original Charter, and has suggested that the Charter 'be so amended as to change the name, method of government, and plan of organization;

Therefore, Be It Resolved, That this Grand Lodge recommends that steps be taken to amend the Charter of said Association, as follows, to-wit:

FIRST. That the name of the Association, wherever same appears in the original Articles of Incorporation, or Charter, shall be changed so as to read "Masonic Tuberculosis Association."

SECOND. That sub-paragraph (1) of Article IV be amended so as to read as follows:

(1) To act as an agent or trustee for and in behalf of the Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of New Mexico, to receive and administer funds contributed, or acquired, for the relief of Freemasons, and members of their families, or others, suffering from tuberculosis, or who may be in distress from other causes; and, generally, for any and all of the objects and purposes herein enumerated.

THIRD. That Article VI be amended so as to read as follows:

All the affairs and business of this corporation shall be under the control and management of a Board of Governors chosen by the Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of New Mexico, at its next Annual Communication, and annually thereafter; and in the interim between Annual Communications the Grand Master shall have authority to fill vacancies in such board, and to appoint additional members thereof.

Provided, until the first meeting of the Board of Governors, for the creation of which provision is herein and hereby made, and thereafter, if so authorized by such board, the Executive Committee hereinafter named, or the duly appointed and designated successors of the members of such committee, shall have and exercise all of the powers conferred upon the Board of Governors by this Certificate of Incorporation, the Laws of New Mexico and/or the By-Laws of this corporation when said Board of Governors is not in session, subject to such restrictions, limits and regulations as may be imposed by such Board.

And Be It Further Resolved, That this Grand Lodge reaffirms its recognition of the obligation devolving upon the Masonic Fraternity to make adequate provision for the relief of worthy brethren and members of their families who are victims of tuberculosis; and its firm conviction that adequate relief can be afforded only through the medium of an efficient organization; and that the burdens incident to providing adequate relief for indigent brethren and members of their families, victims of tuberculosis, who migrate to the Southwest in search of climatic advantages in the hope of regaining their health-should be assumed and borne by the Fraternity at large, through the medium of an agency such as that which is here involved, through which only can the problem be efficiently and economically handled.

And this Grand Lodge therefore suggests the foregoing proposed amendments to the Articles of Incorporation, or Charter. of the existing corporation, and when such amendments shall have been adopted-favors a continuance of the effort heretofore so earnestly made to arrest the attention and arouse the interest of American Freemasonry and to enlist the financial aid and assistance of individual Masons and of Masonic bodies throughout the United States; and pledges a continuance of its financial support to the further efforts and work of the Association, and its active cooperation in the renewed and continued effort to secure requisite financial assistance from other Grand Jurisdictions and Masonic bodies.

And Be It Further Resolved, That the Most Worshipful Grand Master of this Grand Lodge shall be, and he hereby is, authorized and directed, in the name of this Grand Lodge to make such appeals for contributions as from time to time may be required or deemed necessary for the accomplishment of the objects and purposes of the aforesaid Association, receive such contributions, and disburse the same through the aforesaid Association for the furtherance of its objects and purposes, and shall report his acts and doings relative thereto to this Grand Lodge at each Annual Communication.

And Be It Further Resolved, That when the aforesaid proposed amendments shall become effective, any and all funds which have heretofore accrued, or which may hereafter accrue to this Grand Lodge, to and for the use and benefit of the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association, shall be paid over to, or covered into, the treasury of said Association under its new name, as designated in the amendments to such Articles of Incorporation, and thereafter, until otherwise ordered, the annual assessment now levied for said National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association shall be levied for said Association under such new name.

Your Committee unanimously recommends the adoption of said report and all the aforesaid Resolutions as hereinabove amended and set forth.

* * *



R. J. Meekren, Editor-in-Chief
E. E. Thiemeyer, Research Editor

Associate Editors

Louis Block, Iowa
Robert L. Clegg, Ohio
Gilbert W. Daynes, England
Ray V. Denslow, Missouri
George H. Dern, Utah
N. W. J. Haydon, Canada
R. V. Harris, Canada
C. C. Hunt, Iowa
Charles F. Irwin, Ohio
A. L. Kress, Pennsylvania
F. H. Littlefield, Missouri
Joseph E. Morcombe, California
Arthur C. Parker, New York
J. Hugo Tatsch, Iowa
Jesse M. Whited, California
David E. W. Williamson, Nevada

* * *


ON another page will be found the report of the President of the National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association to the Grand Lodge of New Mexico. We received this before the March number of THE BUILDER went to press but too late to do more than insert the recommendations made. This report in a sense must be regarded as the swan song of the N.M.T.S.A., in the passing away of which the Masonic Tuberculosis Association is to be born. Let us hope, to change the metaphor to another fabled bird, to enter like the Phoenix upon a renewed life in which more definite results will be achieved.

The N.M.T.S.A. however has not been without achievement. There can be no doubt that the local interest in the tuberculosis problem that is showing itself in various jurisdictions throughout the country owes a great deal to the campaign of the organization founded by New Mexico, and for which the Masons of that Grand Lodge have paid out of their own contributions to the cause. For it may as well be repeated again, in case anyone has failed to note the fact, that New Mexico contributed to the, funds of the N.M.T.S.A. practically the whole amount that was expended for organization and educational purposes, leaving the funds contributed from elsewhere to be devoted to the purpose of temporary relief.

There seems to be at the present moment, however, a distinct reaction everywhere against the idea of combined action. This is, we believe, unfortunate. The Grand Lodges of the United States, sovereign and independent as they are, have necessarily many problems in common, problems that could be most efficiently solved by combined action. But such things observe the law of the pendulum. At the close of the war, the impotence of the Craft in its divided state was so impressed on the leaders of the Craft that everywhere there was a desire to find some way to coordinate the work of Grand Lodges and to concentrate the latent power of the Fraternity. But now the ideals of independence are having their turn, and there is some danger of their being allowed to run to seed.

We suggested last month in our summing up of the situation that in view of the fact that it seemed at present out of the question to secure official cooperation in the tuberculosis cause that it might be well to try to secure individual support, by making the new organization a body of Master Masons, and not a group of Grand Lodges. We were greatly gratified, when we received the advance copy of the recommendations made by Bro. Holt, that this plan had occurred to others, and that the executive of the N.M.T.S.A. proposed that the amended constitution should provide for this. We want to make it quite clear that we in no way wish to blame the brethren of New Mexico, but a comparison of the amended recommendations as passed by the Grand Lodge with those presented by Bro. Holt will show that the reaction has set in with them also. No one familiar with all the circumstances can possibly blame them for deciding to withdraw within their own boundaries; but we cannot help feeling it is unfortunate and much to be regretted. Bro. Holt's proposals made it clear that any Mason could contribute to the fund of the new M.T.A. and thereby become a member of it. It is true that the amendments proposed and adopted do not bar this, but they do seem to stress the fact that the M.T.A. is to be an organization especially of the Masons of New Mexico; that its control will be entirely in the hands of the Grand Lodge of New Mexico, in that its executive will not be elected by its members, but appointed by the Grand Lodge.

Practically this may make little difference at the moment, but it does seem to bar out a line of possible advance, one that at least has not yet been tried. We believe, from such information that has come to us, that there are many Masons who would be glad to support the movement. As long as it has moved in the superior cycles of Grand Lodge orbits, the individual has felt that it was not his place to intrude. The stress in the past has all been laid upon the membership of Grand Bodies as such, although the Constitution of the Association distinctly, though not prominently, provides for individual memberships. Article VIII provides for the membership of all Master Masons of New Mexico, in virtue of their contributions to the Association's funds, paid through the Grand Lodge, but the final clause adds with those specifically mentioned are also included.

... such persons as may contribute money, services or anything of value to further the work of the Association.

It does not say so, but we presume that such persons are eligible for membership, not that it is automatically conferred upon them. Article VII also provides for the establishment of branches, local societies or committees, which the Association has power to recognize or regularize by charters or warrants. These two articles remain unchanged, so in spite of the control of the Association now being vested solely in the Grand Lodge through its appointive power; there is nothing to prevent the admission to membership of Masons generally, nor the establishment of committees, branches and chapters in other states. We trust, therefore, that the natural discouragement of the brethren in New Mexico will not lead them to neglect the possibilities that here exist, possibilities that as yet there has been no very definite attempt to realize.

That the original difficulty still stands in the way must be admitted — the refusal of many Grand Masters to permit the lodges in their jurisdictions to be circularized; which would be the obvious and easiest way to bring the matter to the attention of the whole Craft in the U.S.A. But there are other ways of obtaining the result, which though less direct and slower in operation might in the long run prove as successful, and that is to work through those individuals who have expressed their interest and made contributions.

For the benefit of those who would like to compare the original and amended recommendations with the Charter of the N.M.T.S.A., we remind our readers that the latter was published in full in THE BUILDER for September, 1926. The original recommendations appeared last month, and the amended ones will be found on another page in the present issue.

In view of the changes thus made the Northeast Corner department is to be discontinued. Bro. R. J. Newton, who has done so much for the cause, and who was editor of and entirely responsible for what appeared in the pages devoted to the work of the N.M.T.S.A., has ceased to be actively engaged therein. In plain language his task has come to an end with the change of plan. He was engaged largely as publicity manager, and as the reorganized Association does not intend to continue the "propaganda," there is nothing further for him to do. But his interest in the cause remains, and though no longer an official of the organization we know that he does not intend to cease his efforts to further this great work.

As for THE BUILDER, while the regular appearance of the Northeast Corner thus comes to an end, our pages will always be available for any articles or communications upon the general subject. We know that a great many of our members are keenly interested in the problem, and feel as we do that it is nothing to be proud of that the Craft as a whole has proved so im potent in meeting this need, and for this reason, if for no other, we shall keep them informed of all developments in the situation as they occur.

* * *


RECENTLY the daily press of Philadelphia has published accounts of the making of Governor John S. Fisher a Mason "at sight" by the Grand Master, assisted by most of the Grand officers of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania. The natural result has been to raise once more the questions, what, how, why and by what right is this done? A number of our correspondents have written about it, and one or two have asked us to say something more on the subject. It was discussed from all points of view in THE BUILDER for February, 1925, and at page 204 of the same volume was a communication from Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins, Chairman of the Board of General Purposes of the United Grand Lodge of England, in which it was shown that English Masonry is even more democratic than our own, in that not one letter of the law is ever relaxed even for the most exalted persons. There was a later communication in the following volume (page 177) from. Bro. Haydon, which affords a ray of light in the obscurity, in that it gives some tangible evidence as to the time and place of the first appearance of the doctrine that this power pertained of right to the office of Grand Master of Masons.

That there is much misunderstanding as to what is implied by making Masons "at sight" is only to be expected. Naturally the newspapers get it all wrong. One report says about it:

The ritual procedure is impressive and the act is to permit the candidate, to be received into the Order without passing through the usual form of passing from one degree to another.

This is excusable enough in a non-Mason, but what shall we say of the good brethren who seem to think that the Grand Master takes a profane into a retired corner and says, "by the power invested in me I make you a Mason" and proceeds to administer an oath and communicate secrets? This is really not at all exaggerated, absurd as it sounds. In actual fact the making a Mason at sight, as it is carried out today, is precisely the same ritually as the normal procedure, the difference lying in the quite external features that all the usual time intervals are dispensed with, the one between petition and ballot, and those between the degrees. Perhaps too the ballot is also omitted — as to this we have no information. Even so, we presume, though it would be very embarrassing, that any brother present could object if he thought fit. The only other difference is that the lodge in which the work is done is formed occasionally, or temporarily, for the purpose, and ceases to exist as soon as its special task is done. The candidate thus being left in the position of an unaffiliated Mason, or rather of a Mason whose lodge has returned its charter.

Bro. Robbins has shown that this is now impossible under the Grand Lodge of England, because there the Grand Master is shorn of the powers of dispensation that certainly appear to have been generally allowed to inhere in his office at the first in England, and still do in most American jurisdictions, even where the making at sight privilege is expressly denied. Bro. Haydon pointed out that the first appearance of the power in formal terms was in Dermott's Ahiman Rezon, in which he probably made explicit what was implicit in Irish usage. American Masonry undoubtedly received the idea from this source.

This privilege of the Grand Master, where it still survives, is a complex one. It is made up of a number of different powers, most of which are normally exercised separately by American Grand Masters. The first is the power to grant a dispensation for the formation of a lodge, and to recall it when granted. If he can grant such a dispensation to others, he can grant it to a group associated with himself. So in respect to the dispensing with the constitutional intervals of time. A hundred years ago, and less, such dispensations were very frequently granted, sometimes for very slight reasons. Applications were acted upon, the candidate ballotted for and initiated all at the same meeting. Earlier still, in the eighteenth century, lodges constantly dispensed with these intervals at their own discretion. At first without any objection at all. It was only when the risk of such proceedings became evident that it was forbidden. Thus the Grand Master is only doing on very special occasions what every lodge did once whenever it so pleased.

But the history of the privilege seems to reach back further still, to the days when it was the inherent right of any Master to gather a group of brethren and form a lodge for the purpose of making someone a Mason. So it would seem that this much discussed privilege is a case of survival and gradual restriction, till one Master Mason only, in any given jurisdiction, is allowed to exercise the right once possessed by all. However, one change has been made, doubtless through lask of clear understanding of the antecedents of the privilege. The "making a Mason" properly means no more than initiation, while now passing and raising seem always to be included. These additions really make the old phrase distinctly a misnomer. In the old lodges of Scotland it was very usual for five or seven members to make a Mason by themselves, but he had later to be received and passed a fellow at a regular meeting of the lodge. In fact, in one or two lodges this procedure would seem almost to have been the normal one.

Thus it appears that this right is a picturesque survival of the long distant past, and it would seem to be a great pity to demolish it where it still exists. It can do no harm. But naturally great care should be exercised in choosing the candidate where it is exercised, and to us it appears that no one actively engaged in political life should be chosen; at least not until he has entered the elder statesman class and has won the respect and admiration of his opponents as well as of his friends.

* * *


A pamphlet on "How to Organize and Maintain a Study Club" will be sent free on request, in quantities to fifty.


MUCH has been said from time to time about various methods of forming Study Clubs. One of the difficulties which arises early in the career of any Club is the matter of internal organization. What officers should we have, what committees, and dozens of questions of similar character find their way into the office of the National Masonic Research Society.

If we think for a few moments, it will be easy to see that a Study Club should be burdened with as little machinery as is possible. The machinery should be simple and at the same time elastic. There are two reasons for expressing such a view. In the first place, the risk of meetings running to interminable length due to a great amount of time being occupied with routine affairs is lessened materially. The second reason is much more important, however. Study Club meetings are intended primarily for the study of Masonry. If too many formalities are injected into the meetings, there will not be that feeling of freedom to speak which it is essential should exist in all such gatherings. The new members will feel backward about expressing their views on the subject under discussion. There are others who do not feel at ease when on their feet before any sizable gathering. Such men will sit by and say nothing unless some effort is made to draw them out. It should be an ambition with every Study Club to encourage these members to speak, to make them feel at ease, and thus to place them in a position to assume their rightful station in the lodge. Informality will do a great deal to help this situation.

There should be as little routine business brought before the meetings as is possible. Just as soon as Study Club meetings begin to last until the late hours of the night you will notice a considerable falling off in members. If the meetings are held not too frequently and are so managed that only interesting programs are prepared there will always be a good attendance and a thoroughly interested membership.

Usually there is recommended a corps of officers composed of a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary-Treasurer, a Study Director, a Librarian when necessary. The officers might well form an Executive Committee, with enough lay members, to avoid the danger of a deadlock in Committees. Other than this no officers should be necessary.

The duties of the President and Study Director might be combined, but that plan has some objections. If the President has no more to do than preside at the meetings of the Club as a whole and the Executive Committee when in session, there is the advantage that be has his mind free to watch the progress of the meetings and to observe the members who have or have not spoken. He can judiciously encourage those who lag behind to say a few words, and gradually bring them into the regular discussions. This should be his sole duty aside from the formal ones which are naturally associated with the office.

The Vice-President really needs no special mention. He should assume the duties of the President in the absence of the latter, and should cooperate by being of any assistance which seems necessary. It would be well if he could assume all duties which might be delegated to him by the President. In other words he should be thoroughly cooperative and the right-hand assistant to the presiding officer.

The formal duties of the Secretary-Treasurer are too well known to make an elaborate discussion necessary. It would be as well for us to consider the advantages of combining the two offices in Study Club work. The funds handled are usually so small that there is no need to burden a separate individual with their care. It often happens that the Treasurer is not needed at all since the lodge from which the Study Club draws its members pays all expenses. In such cases there is absolutely no need for a Treasurer. In any group, however, which is self supporting there must be dues, no matter how nominal. There should be some officer to care for the funds, and since they are usually very small the Secretary can conveniently fill both offices. He has the greatest need for funds, for his notices, stationery and other incidentals. Practice has shown that it is best to combine these two offices.

The Study Director will probably be the hardest worked member of the organization. Upon him devolves the duty of planning the programs, of seeing that interest is maintained, and of securing or assigning the topics for discussion. The members of the Club should be willing to cooperate with him in every possible way. He, on the other hand, should see that he does not usurp too much of the time of any one member.

The Club as a whole, when first organized, should arrange to adopt a definite program for study. They should consult with some competent authority and ascertain the best procedure to follow. Clubs generally are most interested in symbolism, and this is usually the starting point. The National Masonic Research Society has prepared a course of study covering this phase of Masonic research. It is arranged in convenient outline form with topical references. Each group of references should furnish enough material for one evening's discussion. We are always glad to furnish full details. Whatever subject is adopted the Society stands ready to prepare outline courses for Study Club work.

Knowing, then, that there is one source from which such information can be obtained, there is nothing to do but decide the course to be pursued. With this information available the job of the Study Director is very much simplified. All that is necessary is for him to assign the topics in rotation, seeing that every member has his turn. That is the routine work.

There is more to the office than just that, however. There will be questions raised which need investigation. The Study Director should assign these questions to various members to report at the next meeting. Some of them may be sufficiently ,important to warrant a whole meeting being given to their consideration. Decision in such matters should be left with the Director. Where special investigation is required and the references are not readily obtainable the National Masonic Research Society may be consulted.

It is very important that the Study Director be left a wide latitude in all matters as soon as the Club has adopted a definite program. Unless he is given a free hand his work is likely to be hampered and the results less noticeable. It is usually important for the members of the Club to offer all cooperation possible and to accept cheerfully all tasks that may be assigned to them. Even more important is the necessity for each member doing his particular task promptly and to the best of his ability.

The Executive Committee should be permitted to handle all business affairs of the Club. They should endeavor to work out all details and to make the necessary recommendations to the Club in such a way that a minimum of time will be occupied in the regular meetings.

If these suggestions are followed out the Club will function efficiently and effectively. There will be no occasion for friction and the maximum of results should be accomplished with a minimum expenditure of effort.

* * *


Bro. Charles H. Merz, Ohio

THE ark of the covenant is a legitimate appendage to the Third Degree, although it is also mentioned in many of the higher Orders. The Helvetian Ceremonies provide that "In the middle of the procession is carried the ark of the covenant, covered over with a veil of blue, purple and crimson silk. It is carried by four of the oldest Masons that can be found in the whole company. The age of the Masons and not of the lodge is here to be observed. The furniture of the ark is the Old Testament, salt, clay, a pair of compasses, etc."

The ark was a kind of chest or coffer, placed in the Sanctum Sanctorum, with the two tables of stone containing the decalogue, written with the finger of God, and containing the most sacred monument of the Jewish, or any other religion. Along with the ark were deposited the rod of Aaron, and the pot of manna. At the east end of every synagogue the modern Jews have a chest which they call "aron," or ark, in which is locked up the Pentateuch, written on vellum in square characters.

The descriptions of the ark are somewhat meager. We learn that it was made of shittim wood. It is supposed to have been the wood of the burning bush, which was once held in veneration in Royal Arch Chapters. The shittim wood had a very close grain and was capable of receiving a very high polish. From its aromatic qualities it was exempt from the attacks of worms and decay. We are told that it was made by Aholiab abd Bezaleel, under the direction of Moses. It was appropriated to such a sublime office, that all persons were forbidden to look upon it or touch it under penalty of death a penalty which fifty thousand men of Bethshemesh suffered for this offense only.

The ark was overlaid within and without with pure gold. In size it is described as being about three feet nine inches long, two feet three inches wide and of the same extent in depth. On the side it had two rings of gold, through which were placed staves of shittim wood, by which, when necessary, it was borne by the Levites. The entire covering was of pure gold. The covering was called "kaphiret," from "kaphar," "to forgive sin," hence the English name of "mercy seat," as being the place where the intercession for sin was made.

Sacred chests, bearing much resemblance in principle to this ark, have been found in different ancient and modern nations.

The ark is described as being surrounded with a golden rim or cornice, which was denominated a crown, is reference to the ornament that was worn by monarchs as a symbol of their dignity. This fillet of gold served also to support the mercy seat, which constituted the lid or cover of the ark. The propitiatory was not made of shittim wood overlaid with gold, like the ark, but consisted of one plate of pure beaten gold, surmounted by two cherubim, formed out of the same mass, and was so constructed as to fit exactly the inside of the crown, that no interstice might be perceived.

In view of this rather indefinite description of the ark, it is interesting to learn that two London artists, George Dennison and Frank Ingerson, have designed a reproduction of the "Ark of the Covenant" for Temple Emanuel in San Francisco. The design which appeared in the New York World some months ago is here reproduced. Bronze, gold, old cedar and exquisite jewel colored enameling makes up this remarkable piece of craftsmanship. Recent research has thrown much light upon Solomon's Temple and its furnishings, and our cherished ideas on many subject are undergoing radical changes. Correspondence with the Rabbi of Temple Emanuel discloses the fact that this ark has been reconstructed according to accurate descriptions, and it is therefore of particular interest to the Masonic student. The ensigns of the twelve tribes of Israel are found on front and two sides of the ark, and the double triangle or Seal of Solomon is depicted on the front. The design is so different from all ordinary ideas of the ark that it is singularly striking and beautiful.

* * *


For some years past a number of the lodges in Los Angeles have been building a Masonic Library in that city. Bro. Thomas S. Southwick, a member of Pentalpha Lodge, No. 212, is librarian and has long been actively associated with the work. The following description of what has been accomplished during the past calendar year has been condensed from the report of the librarian which has just come to our notice, and which was previously published in The Masonic Digest.

The report goes to show what a very important function a library has in raising the general level of Masonic knowledge. In fact no sustained effort along these lines can be carried on without one. Lodges elsewhere might profit by the example.

The Grand Lodge Committee on Education, under the direction of Bro. Reynold Blight, has greatly stimulated the interest in study clubs and individual reading. As a result, there has been such a demand for books on special subjects that it has been necessary to purchase many extra copies of the same title. During the past year, we have purchased 160 books in this way. Many volumes have been donated to us.

The brethren have shown an interest in the Library as never before, and every day there are requests from bibliographers on Masonic topics, not only from our local students, but from those of other counties. Special clubs have come to us from San Francisco, Tulare, Santa Barbara and Riverside. Many brethren have expressed their appreciation of the assistance the Library has given them, and several letters from other states have been received commending the work we are trying to accomplish. One of our students stated that he had received more benefit from the Library in three months than he had in twenty years of lodge attendance.

But, unfortunately, the lodges do not appreciate the Library sufficiently to give the necessary financial and moral support as they should, but as time passes and the brethren become better acquainted with Masonic books, we believe the value of our collection and its influence for good will be adequately recognized by all.

The quantity of literature on hand requires more space. Our present shelf room is limited. We should have larger quarters or possibly a building of our own. We hope in time to add more books on travel, general history, poetry, the arts and sciences, which make for civilization, and miscellaneous matters to our collection.

Symbolism seems to be the most popular study. Esoteric Masonry has an attraction for many and it is always interesting to the earnest student. Frequently all of our titles on symbolism are in use outside the Library. We recommend on this subject the works of Mackey, Finlayson, Lawrence, Buck, Haywood, Stewart and Ward.

The Builders and The Religion of Freemasonry, both by the Rev. Joseph Fort Newton, are read and re-read by very many of our borrowers. There are few, even among the students of Masonry that have caught more than a glimpse of the real meanings of our philosophy, and these two books, the most popular of all Masonic titles, present Masonry as a dynamic, vital spiritual force, uplifting humanity throughout the world, and suggesting to our inner consciousness the desirability of building up a temple that is eternal in the heavens.

This Masonic library was organized in June, 1926, by Los Angeles Lodge, No. 42, Pentalpha Lodge, No. 212, and Southern California Lodge, No. 278, which lodges have since contributed to its financial support to the present date.

It has an equipment of tables, chairs, book-cases, pictures, etc., and has over one thousand feet of filled book shelves. The books are classified as follows: Masonic History, 200 volumes; Masonic Research, 125 volumes; Masonic Magazines, bound, 150 volumes; Masonic Miscellanea, 650 volumes; Foreign, mostly Masonic, 120 volumes; Old books (100 years or more), 50 volumes; Religious and Philosophical, 280 volumes; Sacred Books of the East, 14 volumes; Education, 44 volumes; California, old, 59 volumes; all others, mixed, 1280 volumes. Also 11,385 reports of Proceedings of Masonic Grand bodies, bound into 2088 volumes.

This collection of Proceedings, one of the largest and most valuable in the country, has been made possible by the kindly cooperation of many of the Grand Secretaries, is short only about 2600 annuals of all those issued in the U. S. A. since 1733. Some of these 2600 annuals were never printed, owing to the Civil War and anti-Masonic agitation. The value of this collection cannot be estimated; one hundred thousand dollars could not duplicate them.

Also, proceedings of foreign jurisdictions, 144 bound volumes and many unbound.

To make them durable and more useful to students, we bind them as soon as we have sufficient to make up a volume.

For the convenience of many brethren we have several hundred books in our branch libraries in some of the lodges.

Members of every lodge in the city and vicinity borrow our books, and occasionally by those of outside counties.

We loan daily 25 or more for students' use, and many others for general reading.

The privileges of the Library, at present, are offered without cost to any Master Mason.

The directors are planning to incorporate under the name of "The Masonic Library of Southern California," and a proposition is being thought out for an endowment.

The Library is now supported by forty-four Masonic bodies, who extend an invitation to the other forty-four lodges to join them in the support of this educational boon to the brethren.

We have suggested the affiliation fee of one cent per member per month as a minimum, until it reaches the maximum of five dollars per month.

We should be recognized as the Masonic educational center of the Southwest. Most of us are only in the kindergarten class of Masonic philosophy and need more knowledge. We have before us in our Library the source whereby we may graduate into a satisfying perfection of our Masonic life, if we will only take the trouble to seek for it.

This Library is used chiefly by the younger members of the Fraternity and this interest on the part of young Masons will produce intelligent and better Masons. If all the study clubs, which have been the means of bringing so many to the Library, were to cease, there would still be a large number of interested patrons, desiring to make themselves better acquainted with our principles, to warrant its fullest development. It is to be hoped that everyone will use their influence to this end.

* * *


The books reviewed in these pages can be procured through the Book Department of the N.M.R.S. at the prices given, which always include postage. These prices are subject (as a matter of precaution) to change without notice; though occasion for this will very seldom arise. Occasionally 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.

* * *

A PILGRIMAGE TO PALESTINE. By Harry Emerson Fosdick. Published by the Macmillan Company, New York. Cloth, table of contents, bibliography, indices, colored frontispiece, 294 pages. Price $2.15.

IF you purchase Dr. Fosdick's book in the hope that you will find another book of travel of the usual type you are doomed to disappointment. The book is a travelogue, but of a very different sort from those usually met. The author has departed from the general run of such works in that his book is not the log of a trip, but rather a historical sketch of Jerusalem with comments on the present condition of the locations upon which history was made. It is arranged chronologically, from a historical rather than a travel viewpoint. The plan adopted is something of a relief from the routine, and contributes largely in making this work one of the most interesting books on Palestine it has been my pleasure to read.

There is certainly an advantage in this systematic treatment. It gives an opportunity to present a picture of Palestine from the dawn of civilization to the present time in concise, form and in a manner which makes one believe he is reading of events which might happen today instead of centuries ago. The descriptions of the land in its present state, with Dr. Fosdick's gift for picturing Biblical history, has a strong tendency to unconsciously roll back the curtain of time and help one to live in the days of Nebuchadnezzar, the Philistines and even of Christ.

To say that all of the vividness of this book is due solely to the plan is to be mistaken. Dr. Fosdick is an entertaining writer, though he occasionally shows the influence of his profession and is inclined to become oratorical in spots. The lapses are not numerous enough to be bothersome to the reader, in fact, to some extent, they add to the charm of the book. This is particularly true when he enters into a glowing description of some locality, impressive of itself and teeming with history. He reflects the enthusiasm of a talented speaker living again in a spot which has endeared itself to him. It makes one feel almost as though he were listening to the learned Doctor expound the history with which he is so familiar upon the very spot. From the technical side the book is a scholarly and thoroughly masterful presentation of the subject.

So many people have a smattering of Palestinian history that to discuss any of the places mentioned by Dr. Fosdick would be useless repetition. Even so the present work will give these readers an opportunity to piece their knowledge into a systematic pattern and give the proper prospective to the whole.

When it comes to the Palestine of today there are few equipped to discuss the subject authoritatively. We hear much of Zionism and of what the Jews are doing in Palestine today, but we know little of the situation as it relates to the Arabs and Moslems in the Holy Land. Dr. Fosdick devotes a chapter of perhaps a little more than average length to this question. It is one on which he has, first-hand information and he speaks as one who has seen the situation. The dangers which lie ahead of this movement are discussed in cold impartiality as well as the benefits to be derived from its success. The book would be valuable if all other material were omitted. Certainly all Jews should read it, all Christians should be acquainted with the facts, as for the Moslems who may read this, they too should be acquainted with the truth. The question of the future of the Holy Land is interesting to all adherents to these three faiths. Britain has avowed its support to the Zionites, it has also guaranteed the security of existing religions in the Holy Land. There is a problem entailed that should be interesting in its solution. It is a question of methods to be followed — certain practices will doubtless lead to the downfall of Zionism unless they are stopped. This is true in spite of the well known vim, vigor and vitality of the Hebrew race.


* * *

DIE GRUNDGEDANKEN DER FREIMAUREREI IM LICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE. By Otto Heinichen. Published by Alfred Unger, Berlin. Third enlarged edition. Paper, 138 pages. Price, paper, $1.00; cloth, $2.35.

THE Basic Principles of Freemasonry in the Light of Philosophy is the title of this meritorious little volume. And that means, gentlemen, that we are going to have metaphysics for luncheon. We trust that your stomach is sound and logical. The menu is written not in French, but in German. For the convenience of those who are not familiar with the "Schoenste Lengwidsh" we shall translate it:


Appetizer: Faust Cocktail (Cauda Gallorum Mephistophelis is the botanical name).

Soup: Creme of Transcendentalism a la Fichte.

Fish: Soul realism boiled in parapsychic research. Driesch sauce. Goethe chips, German fried. Puree of mental values.

Roast: Criticism of Pure Reason en casserole. Nietzsche kohl in Zarathustra sauce. Chopped nature realism. Badische tripes a la Windelband.

Pudding: Categorical Imperative mit whipped Indeterminism cream.

Beverages: Primitive Phenomena. Nontotalism. Permissorial Liberty.

Sollgesetzlichkeit on draft.

Music by the Schopenhaner Glee Club

There is plenty of good substantial food at this luncheon. It is well cooked and nicely served. But the drinks are, despite their suggestive alluring names, soft. No kick in them. The banquet is dry, bone-dry.

It is a good many years since metaphysics, transcendentalism and similar delicacies were fed to us on the school benches. We have not tasted them since. It is therefore with a decided awkwardness that we follow the author of the Grundgedanken into the realm of the abstract. In the darkness of our mental obtuseness we walk slowly; inch by inch we grope our way down into the caverns of subconsciousness and up to the dizzy heights of Nietzsche's Superman, of whom, incidentally, only a mouldy skeleton remains. Often we pause to wipe the beads of perspiration from our brow as one weighty deduction after another is stuffed into our bag of fresh philosophical knowledge "All Gaul is divided into three parts," said Julius of old. So are the Grundgedanken. And as in the case of ancient Gaul these three parts differ very much in size.

In the first, and very short chapter, we learn that Freemasonry stands on two legs: the one is the liberty of conscience, the other is symbolism. Liberty of conscience is not to be understood here in the common acceptance; civic freedom to choose your own religion. It means here the absence of dogmatism or, to be more exact, the reduction of dogmatism to a minimum; for it cannot be avoided altogether, neither in religion, nor in science nor in philosophy, not even in agnosticism.

On these two very short but powerful legs rests the body or trunk, the second chapter; this comprises three-fourths of the book. It consists of three sections with numerous subdivisions.

A. Masonry and Science.

B. Masonry and Ethics.

C. Masonry and Religion.

This last section ends in a disagreement with the Apostle St. Paul who in his Letter to the Hebrews speaks of Faith as an unwavering expectation of what we hope, an expectation that does not doubt what it does not see. Heinichen frankly declares that he sees therein a double error. To quote: "To suppress doubt and to dictate to faith: these are the two greatest sins against the holy Spirit of Reason."

The author thereby enters the field of theological controversies. Anglo-Saxon Masonry is not interested in them. It neither endorses the Letter to the Hebrews nor does it reject it, or any part of it. It is neutral about it.

Having viewed the legs and the trunk of the Grundgedanken, we come now to the brief third chapter, which represents the head that sits on the torso: it is a resume of the whole.

Heinichen cites Goethe and Kant extensively. With them he asserts the existence of God and the immortality of the soul. He also believes in the supernatural. He is on the whole a clear, cautious reasoner who skillfully substantiates his contentions. The book contains multum in parvo. It is intended chiefly for non-Masons. If they are not afraid of making an excursion into the field of metaphysical speculation, they will find themselves rewarded by an excellent exposition of the aims of Freemasonry — of continental Freemasonry.

C. L.

* * *

THE MORAL STANDARDS OF DEMOCRACY. By Henry Wilkes Wright. Published by Appleton & Co. Cloth. Table of Contents, 300 pages. Price, $2.15.

THE book before us is written by a professor of philosophy and social ethics in the University of Manitoba. It is probably intended rather for students than for the lay reader, requiring close attention to get the author's meaning. His English is a model for a work of this class; he is quite accurate and discriminating in setting forth his views; and his vocabulary is amply adequate. At times he rises almost to poetic flights of imagination which are very fine indeed.

In his preface he admits a threefold complexity in man that renders generalization difficult in all efforts to discover the natural laws by which his social relations are governed. The human organism is a three-in-one complex — a system of physical energy, an individual life, and a self-conscious person. To unfold and determine accurately the extent to which these three phases interact upon each other and upon the external world, and their reactions from reciprocal forces and external stimuli is necessarily a stupendous undertaking. But despite the magnitude of the task, he ventures into the field with confidence by positing two axioms: First, that rational human intelligence and will inherently possess a general uniformity of perceptions and logical processes which enables every normal person of mature years to apprehend and arrive at similar conclusions respecting the main fundamentals of life; or, in simpler but less scientific language, "to see things alike." Second, that this normal intelligence and will always expresses itself in bodily movement in a manner somewhat similar to the motor responses of distinct to external stimuli. By this he explains, is not meant that the conceptions and judgments of intelligence in the finality leads to conscious action, which is admitted as a matter of course, but that, after intelligence has freed itself by the processes of experience and thought from direct dependence upon external stimuli, it still expresses itself in incipient movements of the larger muscles, or still other slighter movements more or less imperceptible of special mechanisms like that of the speech organs.

In the first chapter he treats of the meaning of democracy and defines it, preliminarily to further discussion, as "the fullest and freest and most comprehensive type of human association made possible by the intelligence and will which is common to all men." Again, it means the opportunity for all persons to participate in a common good. It means equality, not in a mathematical distribution of physical comforts and pleasures, but in the enjoyment of those goods which are common and indivisible. He admits that the proposed conception of democracy is rather normative than realistic. But as the motor responses of human individuals are originally determined by instinct and reflex, while intelligence acts independently of external stimuli, and yet is closely related in its operations to unconscious instincts, he devotes the second chapter to instinct and intelligence.

Here, although the author does not say so, he evidently regards intelligence and instinct as intimately related, notwithstanding that at first blush they seem to belong to different worlds. Advancing psychological science however has brought them into the same category through the study of mind in response to stimulus, the method of study called behaviorism. While denying its conclusion that it can dispense with consciousness in the psychological sense, and vigorously opposing this conclusion with more or less extended argument, he credits behavioristic psychology with the discovery of the fact that intelligence expresses itself through mute and mostly invisible movements of the organs of oral and written speech, gestures, changes of facial expression and slight movements of the larger muscles, all of which movements have come to symbolize the meanings previously expressed and understood through verbal language. Instinct, therefore, being after a brief existence accompanied by consciousness, is guided by perception of the stimulating cause, and as experience gathers around the motor response, intelligence reorganizes the scheme of reaction to the stimulus in accord with the probable conditions of the future as well as the present, instead of meeting it impulsively for the moment only. Hence the author's first conclusion is, that the functions of instinct and intelligence are reciprocal. Instincts are inborn patterns of action common to men and many animal species for making adjustments to environment necessary for the continuance or promotion of life. Intelligence directs instinctive responses so that they may subserve and promote the welfare of the individual during the whole of his life including the future as well as the present.

But intelligence is not confined in its operations to the simple direction of instinctive responses. It correlates and classifies instincts, bunching them together in logical order with the power of enlisting them in the accomplishment of its own purposes through the instrumentality of a sentiment called the selfregarding sentiment — as we understand it, a sentiment which shapes our movements not only and alone with reference to our own choice or convenience, but also with reference to our being a unit in a larger class, i.e., the association in which we live. Intelligence thus rises from the position of servant in the beginning to that of master and controller of instinctive action. As a second step in the discussion the author therefore concludes that intelligence, by virtue of its capacity to generalize and classify instincts and responses, is able to evoke, organize and direct a number of instincts.

But the function of intelligence is expanded still farther. It engages effectively and continuously in the reorganization of the activities, whether instinctive or habitual, by which the ultimate ends are realized; in common parlance, in pursuit as well as in the final possession of the ends sought. In doing this it endows the stimulating object with certain qualities which give it a distinct character and location in the world of objects. These qualities reflect the permanent interests of the individual as a unitary center of activity which seeks to maintain its own existence and to obtain its own satisfaction.

The third chapter considers the possibility of realizing the social ideal in the attainment of the highest communal satisfaction, and asks: Does humanity constitute a community organized upon a different and higher plane than that of natural existence? The author believes that his basic axioms of community of human intelligence and will, and intelligent motor responses and reactions, open up possibilities of enlarged social life and an enriched social intercourse. But he admits that these desiderata are for the most part academic and unrealized; that in the present condition of society they have not even developed into a generally recognized ideal, but remain only a more or less casual idea which, as Mark Twain said of the weather, is much talked of but nothing done about it. And he "reaches the heart" of the inquiry to which he has devoted himself in the present volume in propounding this question: Are there any motor activities arising out of these two basic premises that, either single-handed or in any measure of combination, are capable of bringing home to the individual the infinitely varied content of unrivaled experience? Translating this technical statement into every-day vernacular, is it possible by human effort directed by human intelligence to establish the kingdom of heaven here on earth? And he thinks it is possible.

The different forms of human association through which the perfect society is ultimately to develop are then considered, of which there are three — exchange of ideas (discussion), laboring together for a common purpose (cooperation), and the mutual and reciprocal enjoyment of the esthetic (imaginative sympathy) in contemplating the true, the beautiful and the powerful, thus covering the fields of science, art and industry. From these premises and all that has preceded in the general discussion, the objective of human association being the greatest good to the race as a whole — or, better, the objective being to enable every member of the community to participate equally in those community benefits which are not susceptible of division and distribution separately to individuals, but whose enjoyment is enhanced by the fact that they are the subject of common enjoyment to all, the moral character of the definition itself extends the province of human association entirely beyond the doctrine of laissez faire, and the purely material or utilitarian view. The ideal of the "perfect society" is therefore the ideal of democracy, for no less comprehensive union and cooperation than that of all persons on terms of strict equality will afford to all its members that full and free participation in a common good which democracy demands; and the author therefore believes that there is no reason for deriding the efforts to realize it as Utopian and hopeless.

In laying the foundations for moral standards in democracy the author naturally and appropriately emphasizes education as the principal factor, and this must take place in three different directions; toward intellectual alertness and intellectual honesty, practical competence and loyalty, and imaginative sympathy. These three are considered in separate chapters in detail, and interestingly treated; but after all, they mean simply that we have heard long ago about the threefold education of the head, the heart and the hand. No doubt the author's analysis and definitions are more accurately and psychologically scientific than the familiar slogan and therefore more acceptable to specialists in sociological studies, but the lay mind apprehends the simple statement much more easily. The book concludes with a chapter on Democracy and Social Life, in which he arrives at a conclusion that will meet with universal approval from humanity at large, and that is, that the family circle and the domestic hearthstone are, after all, the foundation upon which the realization of the democratic social ideal depends, for the simple and obvious reason that the individual gets his initial outlook upon the social world and his primary experience of personal association from the family life into which he is born, and therefore that the family must remain the foundation of civilized society and the cornerstone of democracy.

The present reviewer finds much to commend and agree with in the book. Granted the unexpressed premises upon which all such works are founded — namely, that the principles of sociology can be reduced to an accurate science through a biological process of reasoning — it seems to us that the author has made out a strong case in proving his thesis. Every reader will, of course, determine this for himself. Moreover, whatever may be the solidity of his logical foundations or the lack of it, his exposition of individual morality and standards of conduct is in line with the foremost idealism of modern thought. It would be impossible if attempted, to give an adequate idea of his discussions in detail, or to note many minor points upon which we would differ, and we have no hesitancy in pronouncing it a masterly exposition of the principles of social morality from the psycho-biological viewpoint.

However, we have arrived at conclusions generally similar regarding the supremacy of society over the individual through a cosmological, rather than a biological premise. There is an infinite and eternal energy operating throughout all time and space, so far as we can see or judge, which manifests itself to our senses in cosmotic processes that appeal to that common intelligence of humanity which the author takes for one of his premises. This energy displays a supreme perfection of intelligence such as man can never hope to attain. This supreme intelligence must be purposive, because the human mind cannot conceive of intelligence without purposiveness; the concept is apriori in the human babe as soon as it begins to ask questions. To ask what a thing is, is to ask an explanation of what it is for. Keeping this in mind, and beholding life everywhere in countless forms, we find always the will to live and to reach out for more life, for enhanced satisfaction, and observing the life processes, we see that this will to live not only aspires to higher life for the individual, but for the offspring, and in most forms of animated life and even in many forms of vegetation — the individual will freely sacrifice its own life for that of future generations. There is a purpose of some kind underlying every life; and in all the gregarious types of animals, the flocking together even though it be instinctive and social, serves the purpose and is so used, of protecting the life of the herd, and especially that of the young. Man, with his superior intelligence, never could have perpetuated his species except through some form of association, beginning, of course, with the family, but families must have been associated very early after man's appearance upon earth for mutual protection as well as from the social instinct. The distinguishing feature, biologically considered, which sets man apart from the lower animals is his ability to recall past events and organize his experiences for the guidance of his future actions. But he made very slow progress until he had devised some means of perpetuating the memory of his experiences and handing it down to future generations; and this was finally accomplished through the visible signs which we call writing.

As to whether the perfect society will ever at any time be realized is with this reviewer a matter of serious doubt. But he believes that wonderful progress has been made during the millenniums of man's existence, and will continue to be made in the future; not so much through the development of sociological science by the learned, but by and through a kind of intuitive intelligence — broader in its nature than mere instinct, and yet largely lacking in that self-conscious thought which lies at the basis of scientific inquiry. Each generation has made, and each generation of the future will, in a general way, make more or less progress in solving the problems of life for the future. Much more could be said along this line, but the limits have been already reached, merely stating our basis for standards of morality is, that whatever promotes more life, higher life, more exquisite life in the race is right; and whatever hinders, retards or operates unfavorably to such enlargement of life for the race is wrong; and that the trend of society is more and more in the direction of recognizing its truth with each succeeding generation.

L. B. R.

* * *


BOLSHEVISM, FASCISM AND DEMOCRACY. By Francesco Nitti, Translated by Margaret M. Green. Published by The Macmillan Company, New York. Cloth, Table of Contents, Frontispiece, Index, 224 pages. Price $2.90.

The title conveys something of the intent and content of the book. It is a scholarly discussion of the comparative merits of the various forms of government predominant in world affairs at the present time.

MEN OF DESTINY. By Walter Lippman. Published by the Macmillan Company, New York. Cloth, Table of Contents, Illustrated, 244 pages. Price $2.65.

Brief accounts of the men of destiny who are taking part in the affairs of modern government. It is limited to Americans of the present day and does not include any who are not now living.

* * *



Have you any definite information in regard to the Masonic affiliations of Generals Joseph Warren and Joseph Reed?

Frederick Hooker, N.Y.

Unfortunately we are unable to find any reference to General Joseph Reed as a Mason. This is not, of course, conclusive evidence that he was not a member of the Fraternity, but this field has been so thoroughly covered that it is hardly likely that a man of General Reed's prominence has escaped investigation.

General Warren was a Mason, a member of the Lodge of St. Andrew in Boston. The records show him to have been received as an Entered Apprentice on Sept. 10, 1761, passed to the degree of Fellowcraft on Nov. 2, and admitted to membership on Nov. 26. On Nov. 30, 1768, Joseph Warren was chosen Master. The records on May 30, 1769, say that Joseph Warren, Master of St. Andrew's, was made Grand Master of Masonry in Boston. See also the article by Bro. Baird in THE BUILDER, Vol. VIII, page 372; also Vol. X, pages 78 and 110.

* * *


The following letter was received from Bro. Hunt, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, and deals with the attitude taken by that jurisdiction in this important matter:

Replying to your letter I take leave to quote from our Grand Lodge Proceedings. In the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Iowa for 1911, page 381, I find that the following report was adopted by Grand Lodge. I quote from the report only that portion which relates to the question you raise: "As your Committee is informed, this Grand Jurisdiction is in fraternal accord with all legitimately organized Masonic Grand Bodies of the world, with, perhaps, two or three exceptions, as to which there may be room for doubt as to legitimacy, and as to one or more of which there may be other objections. In making this statement, as to so general a recognition of Grand Bodies, we must not he understood as saying that this Grand Lodge has taken affirmative action as to such recognition, but it is in active fraternal accord with such bodies, and to as great an extent as if there had been in each case an express recognition. Your Committee, in this connection, chance the statement that as to all legitimately constituted Grand Lodges recognition is presumed until in some manner brought in question, when the facts essential to legitimacy must be made to appear.

"Having said that recognition is presumed in particular cases it seems important to place some defined meaning on the word 'recognition,' so as to know how much is comprehended in its presumption. So far as we know no specific meaning has been applied to the term as employed in Masonic parlance, and we are left to state our own conclusion, which is that a simple recognition is an acknowledgment, and, as applied to Grand Lodge recognition, it is an acknowledgment of the conditions or facts essential to a legal recognition, as, that it is a properly constituted Grand Lodge. If not properly constituted, it cannot legally be recognized. If properly constituted, it may or it may not be recognized, depending upon the will and wishes of the lodge taking the action, for recognition of a legally constituted lodge is not obligatory, and other facts than those pertaining to its legitimacy may be considered."

The last paragraph quoted indicates that in the case of undoubtedly clandestine bodies, such as the Thomson Organization, such recognition is not presumed.

I take the following from a report adopted by Grand Lodge in 1922. See Proceedings of that year, page 154: "Your Committee on Recognition of Masonic Bodies recognizes the fact that Masonry is or should be universal. While we do not deem it best to endeavor to name every Grand Lodge that we would consider as regular and legitimate, we believe that when there is only one Masonic governing body in a country or territory that such Masonic body should be recognized and its members permitted to visit in Iowa lodges, unless for good and sufficient reason we refuse recognition, or unless the legitimacy is questioned or denied. When there is more than one Masonic body claiming jurisdiction we would suggest that recognition be withheld until such time as the Masonic standing shall become unquestionable."

I take the following from a report adopted by the Grand Lodge of Iowa in 1925. See Proceedings of that year, page 163: "Our Grand Lodge is in fraternal accord with all legitimately organized Masonic Grand Bodies of the world with but few exceptions. In the report on Fraternal Correspondence you will find the Grand Lodges in the United States and other English speaking Grand Bodies which we feel we are recognizing as legitimate Grand Bodies through the active fraternal accord with such Grand Bodies. It has been our theory and doctrine that to all legitimately constituted Grand Lodges, recognition is presumed until challenged in some way."

In two of these reports, there is an indication, or rather, statement, that a legitimate Grand Lodge should be able to trace its descent from the Grand Lodges of Great Britain. However, we have never gone to the extent of saying that we, would not recognize a Grand Lodge whose lodges could not so trace their descent. We have in the past recognized Grand Lodges whose lodges were organized by Scottish Rite bodies. We do claim, however, that a Grand Lodge to be entitled to recognition must have supreme authority over the Masonic degrees in their own jurisdiction.

You may be interested to know that the M.S.A. has a committee working on this subject. The Conference of Grand Masters recently held in Washington, recognizing the importance of this subject, also ordered a committee to make investigation and report at a subsequent conference.

C. C. Hunt, Iowa.

* * *


I am enclosing a clipping from a Pittsburgh paper, which states that Governor Fisher of this state was made a Mason at sight, March 7, 1928. Would like to have you publish same in THE BUILDER as well as anything you wish to add on the subject. For instance, it has not been long since I read several articles in THE BUILDER on the subject of Making Masons at Sight.

One writer spoke about William Howard Taft having been made a Mason at sight; he said that it was like coming down through the roof when the Tyler was asleep. As most of us think that everyone should pass the ballot as well as travel the road, whether he be Governor or a common workman, would like to see you give a good article on the subject.

R. P. M., Pennsylvania.

The clipping says in a sub-head that this was a "rare honor" conferred on the Governor. It states that:

By special dispensation of the Grand Master of the lodge of Pennsylvania, the chief executive was made a "Mason at sight," an honor said to be but rarely conferred. This ceremony waives formalities in the awarding of the first three degrees.

The account is vague and it is evidently written by a non-Mason. "Making a Mason" does not by itself imply more than Initiation, so it is not clear if Bro. Fisher is an E.A. or a M.M. "Waiving formalities" may be properly understood as those of petition and investigation, but the phrase seems in the mind of the writer to imply omission of part of the ceremonies.

The articles Bro. R.P.M. refers to were a series of briefly expressed opinions on the subject by brethren of more or less prominence in the Craft. They appeared in the February number of THE BUILDER for 1925. A wide difference appeared in these opinions, which are probably irreconcilable as they depend more on feeling and point of view than on pure reasoning.

We might add that wherever a Grand Master has the power to grant a dispensation for the formation of a lodge, to dispense with the statutory interval between petition and ballot, and between ballot and initiation, he obviously has the power, by exercising all three rights at one time in his own presence, to congregate a number of Masons and form them into a lodge and proceed to initiate the candidate selected for this honor. It seems that it can be properly called an honor, and for that reason should never he exercised except where no question as to the fitness of the recipient could possibly arise.

* * *


If a Master or Past Master of a lodge will wear his ring with the square open towards his body and others wear theirs with the compasses open towards theirs, then their hands will be in the same relative position as they were in giving and taking the obligation. At least it is so in this jurisdiction.

We suppose the brother — who neglected to give either his name or address — has reference to what was said on this subject in the February number on page 64. So far as we know what our unknown correspondent says is true for most jurisdictions, but we must confess that we fail to see the point exactly.

The three following queries were on the same sheet, but we have answered them separately for convenience of indexing:

* * *


In what jurisdiction (if any) are the lesser lights displayed in all three degrees?

Under the Grand Lodges of the British Empire the custom is, we believe, invariable, not only to display them in the Second and Third Degrees, but to light them before the opening of the lodge, and to keep them burning till it is closed. The lesser lights are always candles, electric and other imitations being severely frowned upon. In the United States, on the other hand, it is quite general to light them only during the work of the First Degree, and often only for the few moments while they are being explained to the candidate. But we have very little definite information at hand upon this particular point and would be glad to have any readers send us the usage in their own lodges, and also any variations with which they may be acquainted.

* * *


What other Grand Jurisdictions, if any, besides Missouri, have refused to recognize French Masonry because they have removed the Holy Bible from their altar?

L. D., Missouri.

Your question can be more easily answered by saying that practically all the English speaking Grand Lodges, both of America and the British Empire, refuse recognition to French Freemasonry. There are a few exceptions. It must be remembered that there are three "obediences" in France besides the Co-Masonic Droite Humaine, these are the Grand Orient, the Grand Loge and the Grand Loge National. The latter is recognized by the Grand Lodge of England. The Grand Loge is recognized by Alabama, California and in Canada by Manitoba. There are, we believe, one or two others besides these.

There is much ignorance regarding French Freemasonry, the Grand Loge and the Grand Orient are not to be judged together. The former has made no essential changes in its rituals. So far as the Bible is concerned it is not correct to say it was removed from the altar as from the first it never formed part of the furniture of French Lodges. It must be remembered that the Bible is not regarded in the same way in France as in Protestant countries, and its presence or absence would never have meant the same thing to French Masons as it does to us.

* * *


I understand that in the various jurisdictions there are different ways of wearing the apron, especially in the Second and Third Degrees. Why is this so, and what do these different methods signify?

This is one of those minor points upon which there is no general agreement. In other countries the rank to which a brother has attained is designated by the apron itself — in the First Degree it is plain, while in the Second there are two rosettes placed in the lower corners. The Master Mason has a third rosette on the flap or bib, and the Past Master replaces the rosettes by three "levels" or inverted T's. This is hardly symbolism, though perhaps there might have been some significance in the last mentioned device. But there is a real difference between a designation or mark of distinction and a symbol — or if the former be called a symbol it is one of the very lowest denomination, and would be in the same category as letters and numbers when used as distinguishing marks.

However the earliest method of distinguishing the rank of Masons was in a different mode of wearing the apron. This first appears definitely about 1760, when in one work (of rather doubtful authority it must be confessed) we are told that the Apprentice had to wear his apron wrong side out so that the bib was concealed. The Fellowcraft wore his with the bib turned up and fastened to a button on the vest. The earliest aprons were provided with a buttonhole for this purpose.

There are reasons for thinking that in France members of those higher degrees that claimed special privileges in Craft lodges (which, it would seem, were often allowed) also turned up a corner of their aprons if they did not happen to have with them the jewels and other insignia of their exalted rank. It is barely possible that this was the origin of the triangular aprons used in so many of the so-called "Scottish" or Ecossais degrees.

The original form of apron used by operative Masons, whether of linen or leather, was large enough to really cover all the parts of the clothing likely to come in contact with the work. Such aprons are still worn by both masons and carpenters in Europe. It is quite common when a man is moving about for a corner of the apron to be tucked up into the string in order to get it out of the way and leave more freedom to the legs. It does not of course signify anything as to status, it is simply a matter of individual convenience. Thus on an early occasion of the laying of a foundation stone by the Grand Lodge of Scotland it was recorded that the procession returned "in due form, with the right corner of their aprons tucked up." As the procession was composed of all grades of Masons there was no question of distinction in this. It may have been done as following operative custom, but this would merely lead us to the same conclusion.

In the earliest American usage there is no doubt that rosettes and other adornments were employed. Later the custom seems to have been that the Master Mason turned up one corner of his apron, and the apprentice the flap. Some jurisdictions still retain this in their instructions but qualify it by saying the Master does not actually do so, as a general practice, either for convenience or uniformity or some like reason. This leaves in practice no distinction between the Fellowcraft and Master. Other jurisdictions have therefore modified their ritual by transposing the method of the Second or Third Degrees, or else by making the Fellowcraft turn up both corner and flap.

Though a good deal has been written on this subject at one time and another, it does not seem that all the information bearing on the subject has yet been collected. It would be well if brethren in a position to do so, looked for any evidence of a variation or change in their own jurisdictions. If we knew what actually has been the history of the usage in different States we would be in a better position to determine why changes were made.

* * *


The Book Department has had an inquiry for Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid, by Piazzi Smith. If any of our reader have a copy they wish to dispose of, we would like to hear from them.

* * *


I am trying to complete a set of the American Freemason founded and edited by Bro. Morcombe. If any readers of THE BUILDER have in their possession copies of this periodical that they would be willing to dispose of, I should be very glad to hear from them.

M. A. Barr, Muscatine, Iowa.