CHAPTER II

AUTHORITIES
The principal sources of information are:
1. The official engraved lists published by authority of the Grand Lodge of England.
2. The various editions of the Constitutions.
3. Original record and account books.
4. Manuscripts of the period.
5. Newspapers of the period.
6. The various editions of The Free Mason’s Pocket Companion, containing a history of the Fraternity (and in some editions a list of the Lodges) written by J. Scott and first published in 1754.
7. Preston’s “Illustrations of Masonry,” the first edi- tion of which was issued in 1772.
8. Other manuscripts and publications by those who lived during the period in question, whether written then or shortly thereafter.
1. OFFICIAL LISTS OF LODGES
Valuable sources of information concerning the early Lodges are the official engraved lists which since 1723 were published at least annually by authority of the Grand Lodge of England. Just before 1730 the Lodges were given numbers in these lists, usually in accordance with seniority. When a Provincial Lodge was not re-
ported promptly, as often happened, it was given a posi- 28
AUTHORITIES 29
tion later than that to which it was entitled but corre- sponding with the date of the receipt of its report; and then when a vacancy occurred by the erasure of a Lodge somewhere near the position in which it belonged, the transfer would be made (e.g., the First Lodge at Sa- vannah, Georgia. See 1735, after October 30, énfra). The early official lists were engraved with artistic repre- sentations of the signs of the taverns, etc., in which the Lodges met.
With all of their errors—and they had many—these lists are invaluable to the Masonic student, and in many cases are the sole source of information.
Printed lists were now and then issued, but they were not official and have less probative value. Brothers Hughan and Lane have made exhaustive studies of these lists, the ultimate being reached in Lane’s Masonic Rec- ords, 1717-1894 (2d Edition, 1895) to which frequent reference is hereafter made.
Of the printed lists the Grand Lodges of Iowa and Massachusetts own a large number, some of which were apparently unknown to Lane.
2. THE CONSTITUTIONS
The first printed edition of the Constitutions and Regu- lations of the Grand Lodge of England was compiled by Anderson and published at London in 1723." An im-
1 As to its authority and accuracy see “Introduction” by Lionel Vibert to his 1923 facsimile reprint published by Quaritch, London. Bro. Vibert’s “Introduction” is a volume in itself. He says, in part, “An- derson’s Constitutions of the Freemasons was originally a private venture which gained Grand Lodge sanction by a kind of accident, and it came into general use by a slow evolution. In its own time it almost escaped notice, at least by the general Masonic public. Yet, after a time it came to be to the Craft in general what the Old Charges were to lodges in the Operative period, and continues so to be in spite of
30 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
proved edition was issued in 1738. Many editions have since appeared. The first American printing was by Benjamin Franklin, in Philadelphia, in 1734. All con- tain a history of the Craft. But little weight can be given to the history, as there recorded, prior to the eight- eenth century, it being largely an adaptation of the old manuscript Constitutions. A considerable number of these manuscripts still exist written during the years as far back as the fourteenth century, but they are a curious blending of fact and fiction such as usually results when facts are handed down through hundreds of years by tradition.
Even the record of the events from and after 1717 in the printed Constitutions must be scrutinized though they were recorded by participants in the events them- selves or by their associates who had first-hand sources of information.
3. RECORDS AND ACCOUNT BOOKS
Few of the Masonic bodies of the early eighteenth century began to keep records in a minute book contem-
the fact that since R. F. Gould, Anderson’s work and Masonic record have been scrutinized with merciless severity, one of the results being that his attempt at writing a Masonic history has been discounted almost to the vanishing point.
“Vet it would be difficult to estimate its influence on the history of the Craft. Notwithstanding the way in which Grand Lodge received the work after its publication, it took its place as the official manual, so that the fact that it was not official but essentially a private affair was entirely lost sight of. It was taken by the Grand Lodge of Ireland as the model for their Book of Constitutions in 1730. It was re- printed verbatim for use in America by Franklin in 1734. It was pirated in London and later in Dublin by Smith in 1735. And its author’s reputation was great enough to carry off the History he wrote for his second edition of 1738, and led the Craft for a century and a half to accept it and reprint it as a serious contribution to the sub- ject. To-day we value the Doctor’s labours less highly, but the Con- stitutions of 1723 is nevertheless one of the most important records of the Craft.”
AUTHORITIES 31
poraneously with the events recorded until several years after organization.
a. The Grand Lodge at London, for instance, was organized in 1717, but its first contemporaneous record book begins June 24, 1723.
b. The Brethren who met in Philadelphia had an account book now known as “Libre B” beginning with June 24, 1731, g.v., which came to light in 1884, and is now in the library of the Historical Society of Pennsyl- vania. This book is in several handwritings. Much of it has been ascribed to Franklin, but in my opinion little, if any, of it is in his handwriting.
In many respects the book is a mystery. On the out- side it is inscribed (in very black ink):
“Philadelphia City.” Under this, in brown ink and a different penmanship: “St. Johns Lodge Libr B.”
It is plainly evident that the cover was first marked “Libr A.” The “A” was heavily printed. The left side and the cross-line of the “A” remain. The right side of the “‘A” has been erased and the bulging bells of a cap- ital ““B” (as in script) substituted. The marks of erasure were clearly visible when examined by the assistant li- brarian and the writer on April 12, 1923, yet the over- written ink seems ancient rather than modern. Brother Sachse neither explains nor mentions this alteration.
The first twenty-three pages are an index to the Ma- sonic accounts which appear in the last third of the book. This index was written in some time after November 5,
32 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
1733, for it is evidently written by some one other than the person who made the entries dated on and before that day.
Next are a number of pages which concern the print- ing in 1791, and later, of Prayer Books, Testaments, and Laws. These pages contain no Masonic references.
From there, the book is blank about two-thirds of the way through. At this place the Masonic entries com- mence, the first being an account with
“Messrs Shippen & Pratt, Wardens for the year 1736.”
The next two pages have the account with “Pratt & Syng,’ Wardens for 1737. Following this, is the gen- eral account of Lodge expenses for 1736 and 1737; two blank pages; and then what is apparently a Lodge ac- count beginning June 24, 1731. (See facsimile, page 64 énfra.) The purchase of the book itself is charged under date of August 2, 1731.
It is evident, from the accounts with the members which follow, that on the date with which the accounts begin (June 24, 1731) there were fourteen members of the Lodge. The entrance or admission fees of all the others were charged at later dates. Entrance was then £3-0-0. Admission was £2-0-0. In June, 1734, the entrance fee was raised to £5-0-0.
The latest entry in the Masonic part of the book is dated June 24, 1738.
This curious book is not a fraud. It is evidently gen- uine. Why, when and by whom the change from “A” to “B” was made is, to me, a mystery. Signs of the erasure are still plainly visible and yet the ink is appar- ently as old as some of the internal entries. Neither can I offer any satisfactory explanation for the other pe- culiarities of the volume.
AUTHORITIES 33
The earliest published comment concerning this vol- ume, containing a hint of ‘‘Franklin’s Journal,” is to be found in the ‘Early History” published by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1877 (page 4, following page CXIx).
1 O.M.L.P., Chapter II. 1899 Mass. 51.
c. The First Lodge in Boston constituted July 30, 1733, began its records at some unknown period. Its earliest record book now known begins with copies of Price’s Commission, of the By-Laws of the Lodge, and of Tomlinson’s Commission, followed by the record of De- cember 27, 1738, “being the VI meeting of the Quarter.” Ebenezer Swan was the Secretary. It closes with the record of July 24, 1754.
Reversed, the volume contains the account book of the Lodge beginning December 27, 1738, the first entry being “To a Ball® brought from a former Book 34:8: 5.”
Thomas Oxnard was then Treasurer. This account runs to February 26, 1755.
1 N.E.F. 57 and 279. 1900 Mass. 125.
This volume is in the archives of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
d. The existing records of the Masters Lodge in Boston begin with its constitution, December 22, 1738, Francis Beteilhe, Secretary. This book closes with the meeting of November 6, 1761. Reversed, the volume discloses the account book down to December 21, 1753. A loose sheet is inserted with a rough account from De- cember 1, 1758, to December, 1760. This volume is in the archives of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
e. The known records of Saint John’s Lodge of Ports-
34 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
mouth, N. H., begin October 31, 1739, Jonathan Log- gin, Secretary.
The volume beginning on this date is now in possession of the Lodge.
f. The minute book of Tun Tavern Lodge of Phila- delphia is now in the archives of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. The entries commence June 28, 1749, and end July 2, 1755.
g. There is in the archives of the American Philo- sophical Society at Philadelphia a volume entitled “Benj” Franklin® Journal, began July 4, 1730,” and its first entries begin with that day. It is a printer’s ac- count book. On the cover are some indistinct letters fol- lowed by the inscription
“Leidgers A & B”
Beginning in the summer of 1734, there are scattered entries relating to Franklin’s reprint of Anderson’s Con- stitutions, and other entries against the ‘““Lodge of Masons held at B. Hubard’s.” (Bro. John Hubbard kept the Sun Tavern.) The first entry of Masonic significance follows September 9, 1731. The next entry is after June 13 and before July 7, 1734, and reads:
“Mr. Newinham D* for a Bind® of a Mason Book gilt -4~”
The account against the Lodge begins with an undated item; the next item is dated Sept. 1734; then two items are inserted as August items omitted.
Accounts to be continued beyond this book are marked “Transfer’d to Leidger [or Leger] E.”
There is:no reterénceito Cas otma oe
Many, but by no means all, of the entries in this book are in Franklin’s handwriting.
See 1898 Penn. 85-102; 1899 Mass. 51.
AUTHORITIES 35
h. The contemporaneous records of the Provincial Grand Lodge at Boston begin April 13, 1750, Peter Pelham, Grand Secretary, exactly seventeen years after the date of Price’s Deputation. ‘These records are in the first volume of the official records of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and are reprinted in a volume to which I herein refer as | Mass. That printed volume covers the Proceedings down to the union of said Provincial Grand Lodge and “The Massachusetts Grand Lodge,” (organized December 27, 1769, in pursuance of a com- mission issued by the Grand Master Mason of Scotland to Most Worshipful Joseph Warren, Esq., to be Grand Master of Masons in Boston, New England, and within one hundred miles of the same, the commission being dated May 30, 1769). Pelham, following the custom of the period, opened his record book with such detail as was then in his possession of previous happenings during those seventeen years.
See | Mass. 1-10.
He had his own part in a few of these events but, what is more to the point, he had available information thereof from Henry Price and from the other Brethren who were participants therein and who were his intimate friends and constant associates, as well as from manu- scripts now lost.
When Francis Beteilhe was elected Clerk of the Vestry of Christ Church, Boston, he had done exactly the same thing; viz., begun his record book with a brief statee ment of the preceding history of the Church.
O.R.
36 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
4. MANUSCRIPTS OF THE PERIOD
a. The original petition for the constitution of the First Lodge in Boston is still preserved in the archives of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
See 1733, July 30, znfra. Facsimile, pg. 81, znfra.
Investigations have failed to disclose any older similar document in the world.
b. The original petition for the constitution of the First Lodge in New Hampshire is upon the same files:
See 1735/6, February 5, znfra. Facsimile, pg. 149, znfra.
c. The Beteilhe Manuscript.
The Beteilhe Manuscript, so called, of twenty-six pages, is entitled almost to the dignity of a contem- poraneous official record. It is in the handwriting of Francis Beteilhe, bound with an original of the Constitu- tions printed by Franklin in 1734, was purchased some years ago for $375 (1899 Mass. 72, et seq., 1906 Mass. 93, et seq.) and is now in the archives of. the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts (1916 Mass. 76). The hand- writing is abundantly attested by comparison with known specimens of his handwriting in the possession of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and referred to in later citations, and also with the record of the Vestry of Christ Church, Boston, of which he was elected Clerk on Janu- ary 15, 1732/3, serving to and including its meeting for July 30, 1739. There is no clue in the Church records as to why he ceased to serve in the middle of this year except as we may judge from the handwriting itself. His last two entries seem to be written in a larger and feebler hand, certainlv in a more straggling style than
AUTHORITIES 37
was his custom. It looks almost as if his style of writing or his control of his muscles was affected by an illness of some sort which might account for his giving up the office. His successor, however, does not seem to have been elected until April 10, 1740. When Beteilhe be- came Secretary of the First Lodge in Boston and of the Grand Lodge we do not know. He was made in the First Lodge on July 24, 1734, ¢.v. infra. He signs as its Secretary as early as June 23, 1736, g.v. infra. He was appointed or reappointed Grand Secretary by Pro: vincial Grand Master Tomlinson on June 24, 1737 (1 Mass. 470). Although not a member of the First Lodge at its constitution he had abundant opportunity to learn the facts which he records not only by his intimate asso- ciation with the other Brethren in the town of Boston, but also especially because he was the partner of Pro- vincial Grand Master Henry Price from 1736 to 1741.
The records of the Masters Lodge from January 2, 1738/9, to and including August 7, 1739, are in his hand- writing. That he gave up this Secretaryship in the same year that he ceased to be Clerk of the Vestry of Christ Church, and that the records of the Masters Lodge for some time after August 7, 1739, g.v., are not in the book give confirmatory evidence of his being afflicted by some indisposition during this year.
The Manuscript starts with a copy of the petition of July 30, 1733, of the Brethren in Boston to be regularly constituted as a Lodge. This covers three pages. Pages four to six inclusive contain an account of the formation of the Grand Lodge by Henry Price, the presentation of the petition of the Boston Brethren, and the constitution of the First Lodge on July 30, 1733, q.v. infra. Pages seven to twelve inclusive contain the By-Laws or Regu-
38 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
lations of the First Lodge in Boston as adopted October 24, 1733. Pages thirteen and fourteen contain a list of the officers of the Grand Lodge and of the Lodge and also of the Brethren, this list having been written be- tween July 27 and August 23, 1737. Pages fifteen to seventeen inclusive contain votes relative to By-Laws, the first being passed by the Lodge on March 12, 1734/5, and the last on February 9, 1736/7. The eighteenth page is blank. Pages nineteen to twenty-one inclusive contain a copy of the Deputation issued by the Earl of Loudoun, Grand Master of England, to Robert Thom- linson as Provincial Grand Master. Pages twenty-two and twenty-three contain a copy of the letter of Glasgow Kilwinning Lodge, dated February 22, 1736/7, q.v. Pages twenty-four to twenty-six inclusive contain a copy of the letter from Edinburgh, dated January 28, 1736/7, g.U.
There are twelve names on the Pelham List which do not appear in the Beteilhe Manuscript. These Brethren had probably ceased to be members of the Lodge by July 27, 1737. There is but one name, Captain Roger Willington, on the Beteilhe Manuscript which is not found on the Pelham List and that name is found in the Barons Letter of June 23, 1736, g.v. There are but two names on the Beteilhe list prior to the date of the Barons Letter list which are not found on the latter. These slight differences, to my mind, confirm the general ac- curacy of all of the lists and prove that no one of them is copied from any other but that all were drawn off from some original records which are now lost.
See also 1747, May 27, énfra.
A facsimile of pages 13 and 14 of the Beteilhe Manu-
script is herewith presented.
AUTHORITIES 39
O74. oe KS a
Krone Cas lps Ge Ye x 6 9) S ie a " WER ae 2 YOO Holey beer bai Grrercia Socleils itp?
/ Mah Se JIN: eccle aa
2Gi hia ‘Eig
3 Mie. Motony
WATE «Seyler
F! Doo Ses Jiallomey 6THo FL
hoot WlekLeor
6Wiltne. VeLorr’
9 ko bart? Sion lnSofigr. Ons efi | nnthon ed
BALL Coy
PAGE 13 OF BETEILHE MANUSCRIPT
40 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
Uns Fraps’ . I :
Soin borer Uv bunioe Slob Bdye Gf \\ The Mknight of Benj Hallow lle Wibber Ge For—Caf> Soran Shor Reebert-Jinlte tlh
BO eens | an 4G y Vion ey) ;
Ok, Gp letiooll Es Caf Sp? Puget
L! Soop tan- \\ Gules Varelelllare\ of, ho Me Co lus? larheoy ili Qeort Sdopie— ”
DS chibel Gamay |\Olyg! French. VB,
Sean’ Lore of} Vales,
PAGE 14 OF BETEILHE MANUSCRIPT
AUTHORITIES 41 For facsimile of pages 4, 5, and 6, see 1733, July 30,
infra.
d. The Barons Letter.
See 1736, June 23, infra.
e. The Pelham List.
See abbreviations, supra.
I have compared the Pelham List and the original records of the First Lodge in Boston for the period when they overlap. There are two hundred and twenty-four names on the Pelham List for that period. Eight are given on the List whose names do not appear on the original records as made or accepted on the dates stated. Three names are given on the original records which do not appear on the Pelham List. Of the eight, in at least three instances the List must be correct and the Secretary in these cases omitted from the records of the Lodge some things which actually transpired.
See 1747, May 27, and 1739, July 25, infra.
5. NEWSPAPERS OF THE PERIOD
Every newspaper published in Boston prior to March 25, 1750, so far as they are known to exist, has been read. See IX publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, containing check list of Bos- ton Newspapers, 1740-1780. Appendix to 1915 Proceedings of American Antiquarian Society.
Extensive but not exhaustive search has been made of the papers published during the period in Charleston, S. C., Philadelphia, New York, and elsewhere. No com- plete check lists of the existing copies of these papers have been found.
42 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
6. THE POCKET COMPANION
7. PRESTON’S ILLUSTRATIONS
Both of these were written by men who copied or paraphrased Anderson. Both were supplemented in suc- ceeding editions. Both occasionally contain lists of the lodges. So far, at least, as they recite facts not recorded by Anderson their statements concerning the events of the eighteenth century have great evidential value.
8. OTHER MANUSCRIPTS AND PUBLICATIONS WILL BE REFERRED TO FROM TIME TO TIME
CALENDAR
Much confusion has arisen over dates from January I to March 24 inclusive prior to 1753, because to and in- cluding the year 1752 the first day of the new year was March 25 instead of January 1. Consequently old style March 24, 1750, for instance, was the day before March 25, 1751; and January 1, 1750, was the day after De- cember 31, 1750, and not the day after December 31, 1749. In many commentaries on early Masonic matters as well as upon matters of general history this distinction has been overlooked, with resultant confusion. Accuracy of dates has been attempted herein, and for clearness both old and new style have been indicated. For in- stance, March 24, 1750/1, means the day before March 25,1751. At the time, that day was officially known as March 24, 1750.
CuaPprTer III
EARLIEST TRACES IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE
1606, Nova Scotia.
Dr. Charles T. Jackson, of Boston, while making 4 survey of Nova Scotia in 1827, discovered upon the shore of Goat Island in Annapolis Basin a flat slab of trap rock with the date 1606 and what some have thought to be the Square and Compass deeply cut though much worn by time and weather. It was at first thought that upon this stone the French had engraved the date of their first cultivation of the soil in memory of their formal possession of the country.
Historical and Statistical Account of Nova Scotia by Judge Haliburton, published in 1829, Vol. II, p. 155.
Dr. Jackson gave this stone to Judge T. C. Halibur- ton, and about 1887 his son passed it along to the Canadian Institute of Toronto to be inserted in the wall of its new building. It was duly received and instruc- tions were given to build it in with the inscription ex- posed but very stupidly the workmen covered it over with plaster and the stone cannot now be traced, although the plaster has been removed at several places to look for it and a reward of one thousand dollars offered for its dis- covery.
Early History of Freemasonry in Nova Scotia and Published Lecture by M. W. Bro. Hon. Wm. Ross, delivered in Virgin Lodge June, 1910, pages 3-6.
48
44 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
Brother R. V. Harris’s theory concerning this stone seems the most reasonable one presented, namely, that “the stone marked the grave of either a mason or stone- cutter or possibly a carpenter who died November 14, 1606, and not that of a speculative Freemason.”
Transactions of Nova Scotia Lodge of Re- search for Jan. 31, 1916, pages 29 e¢ seq.
In 1785, there was a tradition in Nova Scotia that Freemasonry had been known there while the country was in the hands of the French.
See “Charges and Regulations,” etc., published by John Howe, Halifax, 1786. The only known copy is in the archives of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
1654, New England.
Plymouth County Records, Volume X, page 137, con- tain a reference to a parcel sent from Cooper’s Hall, London, March, 1654, to the Apostle John Eliot ‘‘for the use of the Indian worke.”’ On the outside are some hieroglyphics which, in part at least, are unintelligible. The first may be intended for “‘N.E.” At its base are some lines which might possibly have been intended for the square and compasses. This, in my judgment, is purely fortuitous. It is a strain on the imagination to find any real Masonic significance in this incident.
1656 or 1658, Rhode Island.
Brother J. L. Gould of Connecticut published in 1868 at New York a manual entitled “Guide to the Chapter,”’ in which this statement is contained:
“The earliest account of the introduction of Masonry into the United States is the history of a Lodge organs
THE MASONIC (?) STONE OF 1606
From photograph in possession of the New England Histcric Genealcgical Society.
_o—
EARLIEST TRACES 45
ized in Rhode Island, A.D. 1658, or fifty-nine years before the revival in England, and seventy-five years before the establishment of the first Lodge in Massachu- setts.” The author states that ““The Reverend Edward Peterson, in his ‘History of Rhode Island and Newport in the Past,’ gives the following account of this early Lodge,” etc.
On page 101 of the 1853 edition of Peterson’s History the above statement is made in substance and immedi- ately following it in italics are the words: “Taken from documents now in possession of N. H. Gould, Esq.”
In 1870 M. W. Bro. William S. Gardner, then Grand Master of Massachusetts, wrote to Bro. N. H. Gould requesting a detailed account of the documents referred to. On December 12, 1870, Bro. N. H. Gould replied by a letter quoted in full in 1870 Mass. 358, in which letter he says:
“The document was dual in its nature and as follows:
“ certain which, as the place was stained and broken: the first three figures were plain] W mett att y House off Mordecai Campunnall and affter Synagog W® gave Ab™ Moses the degrees of Maconrie.’ ”
He explains further that the document spoken of was in a very tender state and that after a time it became so broken that he could not have it even daguerreotyped and adds: ‘“‘But what there is of it was nicely enveloped and tucked away with some of my papers in my house securely but not where I can at present put my hand upon it.”
46 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
Judge Gardner comments:
“It is almost impossible to treat this story with the attention which the subject demands. It bears upon its face the utter refutation of the assertion made by the Rev. Edward Peterson, and of the claim made by Br. J. L. Gould, of Connecticut. It is unnecessary to argue that, admitting everything in the letter to be true, it affords no proof, not even the probability, of the exist- ence of Masonry in Rhode Island previous to its intro- duction there by the Provincial Grand Lodge of Massa- chusetts about 1749. Fragmentary pieces of paper, con- taining partly illegible writing in the handwriting of no person known, ‘nw/lius filius,’ are not sufficient to con- trovert well-established historical facts. If the Rev. Ed- ward Peterson carefully examined this weatherworn fragment of paper, and made his statement upon the faith and credit of this token, then we need not be sur- prised to learn that in Rhode Island his History is not recognized as an authority.”
The letter of December 12, 1870, was sent to M. W. Bro. Thomas A. Doyle, then Grand Master of Masons in Rhode Island, who replied, among other things:
“T can only say that, from the best information I can obtain in regard to that history, the statement is not to be taken as a fact, unless supported by other reliable testimony. What he has said about Masonry is, I under- stand, asserted upon the authority of documents in the possession of W. Bro. N. H. Gould. I have made many enquiries about these documents of brethren in Newport, members of the Grand Lodge and others, and do not find that any one has ever seen them; neither do the brethren believe that any proof exists of the truth of Peterson’s Statementiar ei
“My own opinion is, that the first lawful Lodge of.
EARLIEST TRACES 47
Masons ever convened in this jurisdiction, was the one which met in Newport, in 1749, under the authority of R. W. Thomas Oxnard, Provincial Grand Master of Massachusetts, which Lodge has existed since that time, and is now known as Saint John’s Lodge.”
In 1891 M. W. Bro. Sereno D. Nickerson commented:
“Tt must be confessed that both Grand Masters had good reason for dismissing with contempt the extrava- gant claim of the historian. The manufacture of docu- mentary evidence to supply missing links in Masonic his- tory is a department of belles lettres in which it seems especially dangerous to venture.”
Notwithstanding repeated requests and demands, neither the document nor any fragment of it has ever been produced for examination and we are safe in con- cluding that unless and until the document is produced or accounted for, no credit can be given to it or to any conclusions based upon it.
1697. Henry Price, founder of duly constituted Masonry in America, was born this year in London. See page 93.
1700, American Colonies.
It is generally believed, as a warranted deduction from known facts, that Freemasonry was brought into the colonies of North America at a very early period in the eighteenth century and that the immigrating Freemasons soon established Lodges at various places, which they worked without the sanction of warrants.
Mackey 1517.
48 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
These occasional Lodges, meeting ‘‘according to the Old Customs,” were never “‘duly constituted” but they were, nevertheless, “regular” prior to 1721. They were neither “recular” nor ‘“‘duly constituted” after June 24, 1721, unless and until lawfully warranted or chartered. On Saint John the Baptist’s Day, in 1721, the Grand Lodge at London adopted and promulgated the following regu- lation:
“VIII. No set or number of Brethren shall withdraw or separate themselves from the Lodge in which they were made Brethren, or were afterwards admitted mem- bers, unless the Lodge becomes too numerous; nor even then without a Dispensation from the Grand Master or his Deputy: and when they are thus separated, they must either immediately join themselves to such other Lodge as they shall like best, with the unanimous consent of that other Lodge to which they go (as above regulated ) or else they must obtain the Grand Master’s Warrant to join in forming a new Lodge.
“If any set or number of Masons shall take upon themselves to form a Lodge without the Grand Master’s Warrant, the regular Lodges are not to countenance them, nor own them as fair Brethren and duly formed, nor approve of their acts and deeds; but must treat them as rebels, until they humble themselves, as the Grand Master shall in his prudence direct, and until he approve of them by his Warrant, which must be signified to the other Lodges, as the custom is when a new Lodge is to be registered in the list of Lodges.”
As will be seen hereafter the Brethren in Boston were the first in America to be constituted in accordance with this regulation (July 30, 1733). They thus became the first “regular and duly constituted Lodge’’ in the Western Hemisphere. The Lodge at Montserrat was the second
EARLIEST TRACES 42
in 1734; the Lodge in Pennsylvania came next in 1734/5; the Brethren in Savannah, Georgia, and Charleston, South Carolina, came next in 1735; and the Lodge in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, followed in 1736.
1705, Boston.
Jonathan Belcher, who was born in Boston in 1681 and was graduated from Harvard in 1699, had all the advantages of education and travel which the opu- lence of a fond father could give. Among other things he had the opportunity of travel in Europe where he was made a Mason in 1704, according to a letter which he wrote to the first Lodge in Boston on September 25, 1741. His standing was so considerable that on this trip to Europe he was presented to the Princess Sophia and her son, afterwards George II.
His education being finished, he returned to Boston and engaged in business as a merchant. Almost immedi- ately he was chosen a member of the Council and in 1729 again visited England, this time as the agent of the Colony. While he was thus engaged, Governor Burnet of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay died, and Mr. Belcher obtained the appointment of Governor of Massa- chusetts and New Hampshire, which he held from 1730 to 1741, under which latter date further reference will be made to him.
The point to be noted here is that as in 1705, after being made a Mason in England, he returned to Boston, he may properly be called the Senior Freemason of America.
1914 Mass. 249. 1 N.E.F. 67.
50 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA stay.
It has been related within recent years that one Horace W. Smith possessed a letter purporting to have been written in 1715 by one John Moore, Collector of the Port of Philadelphia, in which he spoke of having “spent a few evenings in festivity with my Masonic Brethren.”
This letter was for a time exploited as evidence of meetings of the Fraternity in Philadelphia during this year. This letter, however, never existed. Careful in- quiry discloses repeated but unsuccessful attempts by the acquaintances of Mr. Smith to see the letter. If he ever had such a letter he could have produced it or accounted for its absence, but he never did so. No one among his contemporaries or among those having had the best op- portunity to talk with him and to see the document if it existed can be found who believes there ever was such a letter. No notice would be taken of it here were it not for the fact that such Brothers as Hughan, Stillson and Newton, learned in historical matters, accepted the false statements with regard to this letter at their face value but without making a personal investigation to check up the fact.
Mackey, 1518.
1718/9, January 5, Boston. The Boston News Letter for this date, page 2, under its news for the Port of Boston chronicles:
“Outward Bound, Jacob William Ship Charles and Free Mafon for Jamaica.”
We shall hear of this ship again. Pt.
EARLIEST TRACES 51
1720, Boston.
Reverend Brother Montague, formerly settled at Ded- ham, Mass., in the early part of the nineteenth century, was on a committee to investigate the title of King’s Chapel in Boston to certain property rights then in ec- clesiastical and civil legal controversy.
Brother Montague was a member of some Army Lodge, the identity of which however is unknown. While abroad on the duties of this committee, Brother Montague discovered evidence that a Lodge of Free Ma- sons had met in King’s Chapel in Boston in 1720, al- though the meetings were shortly discontinued.
In 1826 Brother Montague exhibited the evidence to R. W. Charles W. Moore, then editor of the Masonic Mirror (Grand Pursuivant 1833; Recording Grand Sec- retary from 1834 to 1867; Deputy Grand Master, 1868; Corresponding Grand Secretary, 1869 to 1873; Hon- orary Past Grand Master, December 10, 1873, Grand Lodge of Massachusetts; Active 33° N.M.J. and Grand Secretary General; Editor of Masonic Magazines, 1825 to 1873).
Brother Moore published a statement of the fact on January 27, 1827, in the Masonic Mirror and Mechanics Intelligencer. Unfortunately, critical study of Masonic history was not then in vogue and though Brother Moore subsequently referred to the matter in the third volume of Moore’s Freemasons’ Magazine (1844), page 163, he did not state the nature of the evidence upon which he and Brother Montague relied nor where the original evi- dence is to be found.
In the concealed pages of some forgotten tome or in some hidden and ancient manuscript, this evidence will probably again be discovered by some delver into the
52 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
secrets of the past. Until then we shall have to rest con- tent with the knowledge that Brothers Montague and Moore were highly respected by their compeers and were men of unquestioned veracity. ‘The evidence, therefore, of these meetings in King’s Chapel as now known neither rises to the grade of unquestioned proof nor falls to the level of tradition. We have the definite knowl- edge that men of the highest standing in the community actually knew of evidence which satisfied them. Certain known facts lend argumentative support.
Governor Belcher of Massachusetts, to whom we have referred, was a Mason. His son, Andrew, was at some time prior to July 30, 1733, made a Mason upon this side of the Atlantic, as were others referred to hereafter under date of 1733, July 30. Extensive study demon- strates that at least ten of those who on July 30, 1733, applied to Henry Price for the Constitution of the First Lodge were “‘made here.” In their petition they stated in so many words that some of them were “made here,” though they omitted to tell who or how many.
See Facsimile, page 81.
Other confirmatory facts will later appear sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the first “‘regular’ Lodge ° in the Western Hemisphere met probably in King’s Chapel, Boston, in 1720.
1914 Mass. 249, et cét. 1888 Mass. 164.
1891 Mass. 35.
S. and H. 447.
1720, August 29, Boston. In these days it was customary for members of the Fraternity to speak of Masonic matters by indirection.
EARLIEST TRACES 53
For instance, if a cowan or eavesdropper approached while Brethren were talking Masonry one would say, “It rains.” ‘This was the cue to turn the conversation. Bear- ing in mind this habit, it is interesting to read in the Boston Gazette for August 29, 1720, the following ac- count:
Charleftown, Aug. 27. On Wednefday laft Four Men belonging to this Town went down in a Boat to the Iilands to kill wild Fowl. On their return home toward Sun-fet, they efpied an Heron at fome {mall diftance, which they attempted to fhoot. And as one of the Com- pany was difcharging his Piece, Another of the Company, (Seil. Mr. Benjamin Dowfe,) unexpectedly ftarted up before the mouth of the Gun and received the Shot into his own Body, under his right Shoulder, upon which He expired in a minute or two with thofe words in Acts VII. 59. Lord Jefus receive my Spirit. When the Body was brought on fhore, it would have melted the moft Ada- mantine heart into relentines, to have heard the Weeping and feen the Tears, which the whole Town fhed at the Affecting fight. He was very much beloved and is uni- verfally lamented, being a Perfon of Exemplary Piety, and Induftry, and Good Temper, and a Widows Only Son. He was alfo the Town-Clerk and Treafurer, and One that was very ufeful in teaching the Youth, Writing, Arithmetick, and Singing of Pfalm Tunes. He was de- cently Buried yefter day (there being a vaft concourfe of People at his Funeral) tatis Sua XXV.
hate
Whoever wrote the above article probably was a Mason and intended thereby to inform all Brethren who should read the Gazette that Benjamin Dowse was a member of the Craft.
The facts are as he gives them but his choice of italics
54 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
does not accord with the custom of the day. Benj. Dowse’s father and brother predeceased him. He left a mother and three sisters.
Our learned Brother M. Huxtall thinks that this looks like “the writing of a man who ‘took his Masonry seri- ously,’ and (perhaps half unconsciously) introduced the language of the Craft more or less habitually.”
1721, June 24.
On this day the Mother Grand Lodge of the Masonic world, that at London, adopted a regulation quoted on page 48, supra. This has ever since been the law for- bidding the formation of a Lodge without a Grand Mas- ter’s Warrant.
This Mother Grand Lodge acquired jurisdiction over the new world and every Regular and Duly Constituted Lodge which existed in America during the period with which we are dealing derived its authority directly ‘or mediately therefrom. At least from and after the public promulgation of this rule (1723) every Lodge which met in England or her Colonies without the required author- ity (and there were doubtless a number of them) was irregular. All such came under the second paragraph of said General Regulation VIII. Clandestine and irregu- larly made Masons were no more entitled to Masonic recognition in the eighteenth century than they are now in the twentieth century. The so-called Lodges in the Colonies, therefore, meeting without Warrant after 1723 are no part of legitimate Masonic history until they “humbled themselves” as did the Masons of Pennsyl- vania when they applied for and received recognition from Provincial Grand Master Henry Price, in 1734/5.
Until then, under the law quoted they were “rebels.”
EARLIEST TRACES 55
And never in any phase of the life of the world have rebels obtained the rights of legitimacy unless the re- bellion was successful. In dealing with questions of precedence, primacy is to be accorded to regularity, and obedience to law is to be preferred to violation thereof. The channels of regularity since 1721 are recorded and certain, susceptible of definite historic proof. The story of the irregular Craft is vague, uncertain, and almost wholly traditional. No real historian to-day claims the exercise of warranted Masonic authority in America until the formation of the Provincial Grand Lodge in Boston,
July 30, 1733, ¢.v. infra. Peat auly, 3S), Boston.
The Boston Gazette under “‘Entred Inwards,” gives “John Peddie Ship Free-Mafon from New-Caitle.” Lt.
Pal wept. 15, Boston.
Under this date we find in the official records of the Port of Boston and in the Boston Weekly News Letter “Outward Bound. ... John Peddie, Charles & Free- mafon for West Indies.”
P-t.
1722/3, January 17, London. The Constitutions and Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England were approved for publication, con-
taining General Regulation VIII above quoted, page 48. Anderson, (1723).
1723, Boston. Henry Price removed to Boston. See Chapter V.
56 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
N27, Philadelphia.
At one time it was attempted to claim for this year proof of Masonry in Philadelphia because of the finding in 1756 of a manuscript copy of the “Old Charges” dated 1727. ‘The contention is unworthy of serious dis- cussion. The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts owns a similar manuscript dated 1677 but makes no claim by virtue thereof.
1909 Mass. 105-109.
L727 Mayas: Boston.
The Boston Weekly News Letter contains an account of a meeting of the Grand Lodge in London on Monday, February 27, 1726/7. This is the earliest known account in any American newspaper of a Masonic meeting. Would the publisher of a Boston newspaper have in- serted an account of the Masonic meeting in London if there were not known by him to be a sufficient number of members of the Craft in Boston to whom the item would be interesting reading? Does this not lend force to the argument that there were Lodge meetings in Boston and perhaps elsewhere in the Colonies and that the public generally knew of them? Else why would the readers of the News Letter be expected to care for such an item of news as this? The Governor-General was a Mason (page 49). And his son and others were ‘“‘made here”’ before 1733 (page 81).
1730, June 5, London.
The Duke of Norfolk, Grand Master of England, ap- pointed Daniel Coxe, Provincial Grand Master of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania for a period of two years. ‘There has appeared no evidence, however, that
EARLIEST TRACES 57
he exercised this deputation. He was on this side of the ocean about four months of the year 1730,* but the bal- ance of his two-year term he was in England endeavoring to perfect his title to nearly half of the Continent of North America, which he claimed to own by virtue of a erant to his father, who was physician to Charles I and IJ. On January 29, 1731, he was present at a meeting of the Grand Lodge of England (X Q.C.A. 139). Dur- ing that year he registered as a member of Lodge No. 8, meeting at the Devil Tavern within Temple Bar. He does appear in America in 1734 but then his commission had long since expired by limitation. The issuance of the deputation, however, establishes three facts, viz. :
1. That the Grand Lodge of England in 1730 claimed jurisdiction over these Colonies.
2. That the Mother Grand Lodge and its Grand Master held to the doctrine that Regular and Duly Con- stituted Lodges could exist in British possessions, or at least in the Colonies, only through the authority of the Grand Master of England.
3. That the Mother Grand Ledge and its Grand Master in 1730 having assumed jurisdiction over New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which were then dependents of the British Crown, no one else had author- ity to establish Lodges in Pennsylvania, New York or New Jersey until at least after June 24, 1732, the end of the term of the deputation, unless it was revoked or superseded.
The establishment of Lodges in Pennsylvania during the term of Coxe’s deputation and without his sanction
* See article by David McGregor in The Builder for November, 1924, and the author’s reply in the December issue.
58 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
was, theretore, irregular and in direct contravention of his authority. IV Gould 362.
1730, July 9, Philadelphia.
There is an account in the Pennsylvania Gazette of the meeting of the Grand Lodge in London, April 21, 1730. From later instances which will be referred to it is suspected that this was clipped from some Boston newspaper now lost.
1730, July 27, Boston.
The New England Weekly Journal gives an account of a Lodge held at the Horn Tavern in London on May L2e FOU
P-t.
1730, August 13, Philadelphia.
Benjamin Franklin was born in Boston, January 17, 1706. He left Boston in October, 1723, although he was again in Boston the following year. On October 11, 1726, he arrived in Philadelphia after a trip to London.
In 1730 Franklin was not a Mason. He was then twenty-four years old and was publishing the Pennsyl- vania Gazette. In the issue of the Gazette August 13, 1730, he reprinted from the New England Weekly Journal of July 27, 1730, the account of the Lodge meeting in London, last above referred to. Is it not an irresistible conclusion that there were Masonic Lodge meetings attended by sufficient numbers to make them known to the community at least in Philadelphia and Boston? If in Philadelphia and Boston, why not else- where in the Colonies?
EARLIEST TRACES 59
The regulations of the Grand Lodge of England, June 24, 1721, adopted in the first instance to apply only within the City of London but almost immediately ex- tended to the British Empire, were not thoroughly known and enforced throughout the Empire. It was as late as 1738 before it can be said that they were firmly estab- lished everywhere, though prior to 1738, as we shall see later, they had become known to and enforced in those centres of population upon this side of the ocean where Masonry was practised and which were in touch through merchants and mariners with the Mother Country.
1730, August 20, Philadelphia.
Account in Philadelphia Gazette of a Lodge meeting in London in June at which “the celebrated Mr. Orator —Henley—was admitted,” etc.
1730, Fall of Year. Philadelphia.
The claim once emanated from Philadelphia that a letter was written in 1754 by one Henry Bell to Dr. Thomas Cadwallader in which the writer is alleged to state that at a meeting in Philadelphia in the fall of 1730 application was made to Daniel Coxe for a Charter which was granted by him. It is now admitted by every Masonic student, both within and without Pennsylvania, that there never was such a letter. The story is like that about the Rhode Island document of 1656 or 1658 and the John Moore letter of 1715. No one of them de- serves more dignified reference than to call it a “fake” pure and simple.
1888 Mass. 131-137. 1899 Mass. 56. 1909 Mass. 108.
1 O.M.L.P. 10.
60 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
1730, December 8. Philadelphia.
Franklin (not then a Mason) republished in his Phzla- delphia Gazette an alleged exposé of Freemasonry which had been circulated for some time in England. It begins as follows:
“As there are several Lodges of Free Masons erected in this Province, and People have lately been much amus’d with Conjectures concerning them; we think the following Account of Free-Masonry from London, will not be unacceptable to our Readers.”
The statement that there were “several”? Lodges must be taken cum grano salts. While there is evidence herein referred to that Brethren did about this time assemble as a Lodge, there is little reason to believe that there was more than one such Lodge.
X O.C.A. 140, 152. IV Gould 361. 1883 Mass. 184. 1903 Mass. 52.
1730/1, January 29, London.
Daniel Coxe was still in England and in attendance upon the Grand Lodge in London. During the year he was registered as a member of Lodge No. 8, at the Devil Tavern within Temple Bar.
X Q.C.A. 140, 152.
1730/1, February, Philadelphia.
Benjamin Franklin was made a Mason during this month in an assemblage of Brethren in Philadelphia which met ‘‘according to the Old Customs” although that method had for ten years been forbidden. Although
EARLIEST TRACES 61
irregular, they undoubtedly met and worked in Philadel- phia as well as in Boston and perhaps elsewhere. IV Gould, 362.
They became regular in Pennsylvania after February 21, 1734/5, g.v., through the granting by Henry Price of Franklin’s petition of November 28, 1734, g.v.
1914 Mass. 252, ef cit.
1730, London.
Lord Baltimore was made a Mason in England during this year. He was Proprietor of Maryland from 1715 to 1751, and Royal Governor in 1732 and 1733. There is no evidence that he practised or promoted Masonry on these shores, but it is not impossible.
IV Gould 262. Mackey 1517.
It is recorded in the records of the Grand Lodge of England that Henry Price had returned to London. This year he was a member of Lodge No. 75, meeting at the Rainbow Coffee House in York Buildings (now The Brittanic No. 33).
X O.C.A. xviii and 183. 1 Mass. 432.
1730, Georgia.
The third edition (1805) of Webb’s Monitor (page 299) stated that Masonry in Georgia dated from 1730. This was an error which Webb corrected in subsequent editions. The statement, however, has been copied with- out correction in several works and has given rise to a curious situation as to which see “1735 after October 30,” infra.
It is too early to look for Freemasons here. The first
62 FREEMASONRY IN AMERICA
emigrants to Georgia landed on the bluff now occupied by the City of Savannah, on January 31, 1732/3. On this spot there was at the time an Indian village called Yamacraw.