Part IV of this Chapter.

Let us for a brief moment sketch the historical background of the Martinist Order. Cagliostro, called ‘““The Divine” by his fol- lowers, was the founder of certain Freemasonic Rites known as Egyptian Masonry. The origin and the real name of Cagliostro are shrouded in mystery. All accurate information concerning him dates from the time of his appearance in London, with his wife, Lerenza Felicianni, about the year 1770. It was in London, in
6 This quotation is made from a letter written to the author on the stationery of the Supreme Council of the Martinist Order by J. Bricaud, Grand Master, at 8 Rue Bu- geaud, Lyon, France, under date of April 20, 1928. The remainder of this letter wiil be quoted in Chapter Five in connection with the subject matter therein treated. Grand Master J. Bricaud made the transition on February 21, 1934.
260
eves sO NLC ROS TCRUCILAN FRAUD
April, 1771, that he was initiated in ‘Esperance’? Lodge. About that time he founded his rites which, in all probability, afterward became the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim, with European Ma- sonry grafted upon them. As the founder of the rite, he conferred upon himself the title of Thrice Illustrious Grand Master, and was also known as the ‘Grand Kopht.” He founded several Lodges throughout Europe. In 1775, he founded a Lodge in Lyon, France, under the name of “Sagesse Triomphante,”’ 1. e., Triumphant Wisdom. John Yarker, in his Arcane Schools, claims that the Rites of Cagliostro were those of Martinez de Pasqually, who founded: his rites in 1754 and introduced them into Masonic Lodges in France. Saint Martin was one of his disciples, helped him to formulate some of his degrees, and greatly assisted in carrying the teaching into many Lodges. It was upon the com- bined Masonic rituals and teachings of Cagliostro, Martinez de Pasqually and St. Martin, that Papus (Dr. M. Gerard Encausse), the French Magus, founded the Martinist Order. The order of succession of its Grand Masters is as follows: Papus, founder and First Grand Master to date of his death, 1916; Teder from 1916 to 1918; Jean Bricaud from 1918 to February 21, 1934, and C. Chevillon from February 21, 1934,to date.’
Victor Blanchard was Secretary of the Martinist Order under Grand Masters Papus and Teder. In 1920 he withdrew from the order and created the Martiniste and Synarchique Ordre, ordain- ing himself Grand Master, after the fashion of our great Ameri- can Imperator. Claiming authority under Victor Blanchard, as he does, it is obvious that Lewis possesses no authority from the authentic Martinist Order of true Masonic nature, and that he is simply using his alleged and spurious claims to such authority as. a subterfuge and fraudulent device in connection with and as a part of his Masonic-R. C. swindle.
Rose Croix
Croix, the French word for cross, has been adopted and long used by Masons of the Scottish Rite as a part of the distinctive name or title of their Eighteenth Degree, which is known to the
7 The facts stated are verified by numerous Fraternal Communications from the Martinist Order, in our archives.
261
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS’ *WHIIE) (7) 3BOOke be
public generally, as well as to Masons, as the ‘Rose Croix’; there- fore, this term or title, by virtue of its general and continuous usage by Scottish Rite Masonry, especially in the United States, has become intimately and most exclusively associated with Masonry —indeed, so much so, that the use of the term Rose Croix by any non-Masonic organization in the United States may well be cal- culated to, and actually does, deceive and mislead the public gen- erally, and Masons, especially those who are not as well advised upon the subject as they should be, into the belief that the organi- zation so using such term or distinctive Masonic appellation is a Masonic Order, or afhliated therewith.
Mr. Lewis, being fully aware of all of this, has made general use of the distinctive Masonic term Rose Croix as a Masonic device to promote his spurious Rose Cross* enterprise and frater- nal swindle. For the past few years, Mr. Lewis has been sending to his members who reach his fourth degree a booklet entitled, The Treasure Chest Message, containing a certificate, prepared and printed in San Jose, California, but mailed and postmarked in Egypt,® offering them special lessons, for which he solicited donations; the certificate purporting to have been issued by the “Rose Croix of Egypt, Sovereign Sanctuary of the Grand Orient,” but in reality issued by himself, and also purporting to have been signed by Sar Tschetta, F. R. C., 33°, 95°, Grand Master ad vitam, and sealed with a Masonic seal,' thus making the certificate dis- tinctively Masonic.
On November 16, 1934, he incorporated in the State of Cali- fornia, as a part of his fraternal enterprise, an institution known as the ROSE CROIX UNIVERSITY OF NORTH AMERICA, the certificate of incorporation providing, among other things, that it “is formed for religious, social, educational and recreational purposes, and especially: to found, establish and conduct a university, college or other institution of learning; to provide for instructions in such
8In the United States the Rosicrucians do not use the French, but the English spelling of the word Cross. Therefore the Fraternity is known only as the Rose Cross or Rosy Cross, which avoids all misunderstanding and deception, which arose, as pointed out in the text, from the use of the French spelling for Cross.
® All of which was admitted by Lewis in his testimony in the Federal Court at San Francisco, in the case of Roy W. and E. H. Smith vs. AMORC and the Lewis family. See Official Transcript of the Testimony, pp. 153 to 160.
1 See fac-simile of this certificate, our Reproduction No. 26, Volume I, p. 387.
202
Peeve OINTC-ROSTORUCTAN FRAUD
branches of learning as are taught in universities, colleges and other educational institutions.”* This so-called Rose Croix Uni- versity he is now using as a part and parcel of his fraternal scheme or spurious Rose Cross Order.
The gross misuse and abuse of the Masonic term Rose Croix, as above pointed out, and also in other ways, is a rank imposition on American Masonry; it is well calculated to deceive—does de- ceive—and is a fraudulent device used by Mr. Lewis to promote his fraternal racket and Masonic-ized Rose Cross swindle.
Masonic Seals
In certain Masonic Rites the official signatures of the high off- cials of those rites are always accompanied by seals in the nature of multiple crosses of different designs and in accordance with the rank of the official. These multiple cross seals are distinctively Masonic and the use of them in connection with their signatures clearly indicates that they are the signatures of Masons of certain indicated rank or of certain official standing. Mr. Lewis illustrated the use of these Masonic seals in his ‘Exhibit No. 9,” upon which we have heretofore commented.®
At the time Lewis fabricated his spurious fraternal enterprise or so-called R. C. Order he also fabricated and adopted for it certain symbols. These symbols were first published in 1915, on page 5 of his first propaganda booklet, entitled: The Ancient and Mystical Order Rosae Crucis in the United States of America, Its History, Purposes and Symbolism. We reproduce herein said page 5 of symbolism, showing said symbols.* At that time he called himself the “Grand Master General’’ of his newly fabricated fraternal enterprise, adopted for himself the ‘‘Great Seal of the Grand Master General,” containing the compass, distinctively Masonic, and the “Sacred Insignia of the Grand Master Gen-
2 Quoted from a certified copy of Articles of Incorporation of Rose Croix University of North America, under the certificate of the Secretary of State and the Great Seal of the State of California.
3 See White Book D, p. 25, and our comment thereon and his wrongful use of such. Masonic seals and signatures on p. 142, Chapter Three, of this volume.
4See our Reproduction No. 68 at the end of Chapter Five and note the Great Seal and the Sacred Insignia of the Grand Master General, lower right corner.
5 Grand Master General is a title of the Masonic Rites of Memphis-Mizraim.
263
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS’ WHITE (7) ‘BOOK: “De
eral,’ consisting of a multiple cross, strikingly similar to said Masonic signature seals, which Masonic-like signature seal he has since used in connection with his official signature as Imperator
of his spurious R. C. Order.
Mr. Crowley, the present secret chief, of the O. T. O., an organi- zation operating under a Masonic Charter of the Rites of Mem- phis and Mizraim,® always accompanies his signature of ‘“Bapho- met’’ by a Masonic multiple cross seal, and Lewis uses a multiple cross seal strikingly similar to that used with and as a part of Crowley’s signature of Baphomet, as we have heretofore shown and fully demonstrated.’
Thus, by the use of a Masonic signature seal, another of his fraudulent Masonic devices, together with the habitual employment of many other fraudulent Masonic and Rosicrucian devices, he has created and operates his gigantic Masonic-Rosicrucian swindle.
Space does not permit us to bring into review, at this time, all of the many cunning Masonic devices he has used, or to show in detail the many different strategic methods employed by him to successfully utilize them in his grand scheme of racketeering in clandestine fraternalism. Sufficient of his Masonic devices and ample facts have been shown to enable us to demonstrate and establish beyond all question that the Ancient and Mystical Order Rosae Crucis—AMORC, as fabricated and compounded by H. Spencer Lewis, and as operated by himself and his son, Ralph, is a Masonic and Rosicrucian fraud and a wicked fraternal swindle.
Lewts Is Not a Master Mason
Although he used and abused Masonry; has laid many claims to Masonic affiliations; has taken complete charge of Masonry; has placed it under the benevolent protection and excellent man- agement of his spurious non-existent “Great White Lodge of Tibet,” and has issued Masonic Charters to spurious and clan- destine Masonic Sovereign Sanctuaries; although he held and manipulated a faked Masonic Congress that created for him an “International Rosicrucian Council” (!) which recognized his fabricated fraternal racket as the only genuine Rose Cross Order
®See Part V of this chapter. 7 See our Reproductions Nos. 30 and 31, Volume I, pp. 362 and 363.
264
overs OoNTOCOROSTCRUCTAN’ FRAUD
in America, and although he has written voluminously and boasted exceedingly of the great, grand, heretofore unknown ‘Masonic Honors” that have been conferred upon—literally ‘smeared on” —the ultra-great, Thrice Illustrious Imperator—the Most Perfect Master Profundis of the Lewis Hierarchy of Fraud and Deceit; yet, all of his Noble Masonic acts were null and void, his great Masonic honors for naught esteemed, and instead, his Masonic acts in truth and fact were and are only fraudulent devices and his great Masonic honors badges of fraud, all because—simply because at this writing HE Is NOT AN ACCREDITED MASTER MASON IN THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
His Masonic record in this country and the Masonic jurisdiction wherein he resides and is operating his aforesaid swindle may be briefly stated as follows: In 1917, a short time after he launched his spurious Rosicrucian Order in New York City, he made appli- cation for membership in Normal Lodge No. 523, at Sixth Ave- nue and Twenty-third Street, New York City, under the juris- duction of the Grand Lodge of the State of New York. He was accepted as an Entered Apprentice, passed to the degree of Fel- lowcraft; so far, so good; however, at this stage, his Masonic troubles—which have since become chronic—began to multiply and to become serious.
The brethren began to investigate and concluded that he was seeking the Masonic Secret work and rituals to use, together with the good name of the fraternity, in connection with his spurious Masonic and Rosicrucian-like fabrication which he was then organ- izing. Accordingly, upon his petition for the Master Degree he was stopped by a very “‘black’’ and most adverse ballot, and all the rights and privileges of a Mason were thereafter denied to him.® He has asked for reinstatement, but without success. Later, he again made application in Master Mason Lodges in Tampa, Florida, and San Jose, California, but was denied admission. It has been said of him by his former Grand Treasurer and close associate that he is ‘‘one of the few persons in the United States
8Time has proven the judgment of the members of Normal Lodge to have been correct and their action fully justified. Lewis’ recent anti-Masonic conduct in Europe, as shown by the foregoing report of French Masons, and the constant misuse of Masonry in the promotion of his fraternal racket have proved the wisdom of the denial of his Master’s degree.
265
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS’ WHITE (7) BOOK De
of America against whom there is a warning on file in every [ Masonic] Grand Lodge Jurisdiction.’ It is, therefore, obvious that Lewis has been fully discredited and has no Masonic standing.
Rites of Memphis and Mizraim
Mr. Lewis cannot controvert the above stated facts, but he may, with his ever-resourceful plausibility, claim that his Masonic standing is well founded under the Rites of Memphis and Miz- raim, notwithstanding that he resides in the United States and Masonically is subject to the jurisdiction of American Masonry, wherein those rites are generally regarded and in some jurisdic- tions have been declared to be clandestine Masonry.’ However, for our present purpose we may disregard the Masonic standing of those Rites in the United States. That question becomes and is immaterial for one peremptory reason and a secondary reason that is almost as conclusive, namely: First, the peremptory reason: Lewis is not a Master Mason, which, as heretofore stated, is the Foundation of all Masonry. The three Craft or symbolic degrees are fundamental and must be conferred in the due order of suc- cession in regular lodges duly constituted—they cannot be commu- nicated as honorary degrees or as ‘“‘Masonic Honors.’ These de- grees are found in substantially the same form wherever Masonry exists, and nowhere in the wide world can a man be a Mason without them.’ This is so universally accepted as true that it needs no citation of Masonic authority to confirm it.
Therefore, the honorary 33rd, 90th and 95th degrees of the Rite of Memphis and Mizraim and the honorary membership in the Sovereign Sanctuary of those rites for Germany, Switzerland and Austria, granted to Lewis by Reuss-Peregrinus under certifi- cate* of the Order of the Oriental Templars, under date of July 30, 1921, were null and void, without effect from the beginning, and conferred upon him no Masonic rights or standing even under
° Letter of Mr. A. Leon Batchelor, April 5, 1935.
1See Article on The Spurious Rites of Memphis and Mizraim issued 1935 by the Grand College of Rites. of the United States, Square and Compass, Vol. 44, No. 10,
pp. 68 et seq.; No. 11, pp. 46 et seq., and No. 12, pp. 40 et seq. Issues of December, 1935, January and February, 1936.
? See The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 15, 249 and 258. 3 See our Reproduction No. 40.
266
overs ON he aROSTORUCEAN FRAUD
the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim.
Second, the conclusive secondary reason: If, at any time, he was for any reason, however meager, entitled to any Masonic con- sideration, however slight, from the Memphis-Mizraim. Masons, he has forfeited it by his anti-Masonic conduct and the abuse of their rites for which they have justly condemned him; therefore, he has no Masonic standing under those rites and deserves the universal Masonic condemnation which he has received.
The Thomson Masonic Fraud
Matthew McBlain Thomson, fabricator of the American Ma- sonic Federation, a fraudulent device, which he operated success- fully and unmolested for several years in the perpetuation of a fraternal swindle, was convicted, with two of his associates, Thomas Perrot and Dominic Bergera, at Salt Lake City, Utah, May 15, 1922, of using the mails to defraud. The indictment and conviction of Thomson and his associates was the culmina- tion of efforts of the United States Government, begun in 1915 and diligently pursued for seven years, to have a just reckoning with the perpetrators of one of the most ingenious mail frauds, and one of the most daring and spectacular Masonic impostors and fraternal racketeers in American history.* This case should be carefully studied by all investigators of fraternal frauds.
That we may better understand and see the full significance of the Lewis fraternal swindle, which he continues to operate, unmolested by governmental authorities, it will be instructive and illuminating to compare it with Thomson’s fraud, whom the gov- ernment prosecuted, convicted and sent to prison. In some re- -spects they are alike, while in others they bear striking similari- ties—except that the Lewis scheme is more confusing, complicated, daring, far-reaching and ingenious. It is regrettable that we shall have space only for a comparison of a few of the major points of exact likenesses and general similarities.
4A full report of this case and a splendid account of this fraud are given in a well- edited volume of 268 pages by Isaaq Blair Evans, under the title of The Thomson Masonic Fraud, to be found in all Masonic libraries and may be purchased through all book dealers or direct from the author at Salt Lake City, Utah.
267
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS’ WHITE (?) BOOK “D”
Expelled and Discredited Masons
Thomson was an expelled and discredited Mason.’ Lewis is a
stopped—denied—ousted and discredited Mason—both have made many varied, fantastic claims to Masonic authority, high standing and great honors,® which they alike have wrongfully used to pro- mote their respective fraudulent schemes and fraternal rackets. Both, probably coincidental, originally claimed authority for their respective enterprises by, through and from institutions in the quaint and mystical French cities of Toulouse and Montpelier,’ which each of them afterward abandoned for a more substantial authority issuing out of a Supreme Council from a foreign land. Both made trips to Europe, at the expense of their followers, to attend Council meetings and International Congresses,* and came back with glowing fictitious accounts of their marvelous accom- plishments for the benefit (!) and fascination of their followers. Both, being egotists of the first water, neither tolerating opposi- tion to the slightest degree, but promptly and unscrupulously ex- pelling and excommunicating those of their victims who question their authority or their methods.° Thomson was charged by Mr. Jas. F. Robinson, the Grand Secretary of the authentic Grand Lodge of regular Masonry of Oregon, with running a spurious and fraudulent Masonic Order. He published many articles expos- ing his fallacious claims. Thomson sued him for libel, boasting to his followers that he would once and for all time settle the matter of his superior Masonic authority. The case came to trial before a jury, and two days were occupied in presenting the evi-
5 See Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 117, 122, 193 and 208.
6 Thomson made exorbitant claims to his unexcelled Masonic standing, the high affces he had held, and the glorious titles and great Masonic honors that had been ‘showered upon him, which he published from time to time in his official organ— The Universal Mason. See The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 43, 44 and 45. We are familiar with Lewis’ claims in this respect.
7 For Thomson’s claims see The Thomson Masonic Fraud, p. 52. For the Lewis claims see Chapter Five, this volume. Both were weird and fantastic claims.
8 As to Thomson’s European trips and accounts thereof, see The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 108, 145 and 240. As to Lewis’ many trips and glowing accounts thereof, his literature is replete, much of which is discussed elsewhere herein. See also Volume I, p. 403.
2 As to Thomson’s actions in this respect see The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 67, 113 and 161; as to Lewis touching on the same point see Volume I, p. 402 and Chapter Six of this volume.
268
A MASONIC-ROSICRUCIAN EKA WD
dence. The jury was out but twenty minutes and returned a verdict against Thomson.* He said nothing of his defeat in his magazine and went on with his game. Lewis had the same experience, but he took no chances on a jury verdict—with unscrupulous cunning far excelling his predecessor, in fraternal fraud, Lewis paid his way out and by a fraud on the court secured a false finding as to his authority.2, Both made fallacious claims of authority from the Martinist Order* and each relied, in the final analysis, upon the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim,* as we shall later see, as the ulti- mate and final source of their spurious and non-existent authority. There are many other points of striking similarity between their various claims of authority and their methods of making those claims that we must here pass unnoticed as to their infinite variety of details, since space will only permit a meager general review of the salient points of their much-alike schemes.
Conceit and Self-Glorification
Mr. Blair, author of The Thomson Masonic Fraud, at page 259, painted a word picture of the self-conceit of pretenders and char- latans that is alike applicable to them all, as follows:
‘Thomson lacked nothing in self-esteem. He gloried in the hollow pomp and mock glory that went with his multitude of large titles. Some of his former disciples say that he fed upon flattery like a mediaeval king, and that the fawning sycophant was the only person who stood any chance of winning his favor. All the high posi- tions were reserved for Thomson. It is arguable that one of the principal motives back of all his activities was a consuming desire to satisfy this colossal vanity.”
1See Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 124-126.
2 See Chapter One of this volume for Lewis’ adventure in establishing his authority in the Court of Record.
3 As to Thomson’s claims, see The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 143 and 125. We have just discussed a similar claim made by Lewis.
4 As to Thomson’s use and reliance upon the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim, see The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 43, 67, 84, 134, 142, 159, 168, 176 to 178, 222, 225 and 245. Lewis’ reliance upon the same Masonic rites is dealt with and fully shown in this chapter.
269
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS’ WHITE (?) BOOK “D”
A more accurate or better word picture of Lewis, his successor in fraternal fraud, upon the same points, cannot be painted. All pretenders are vain, selfish and jealous of their position which they unscrupulously maintain—it is an ever-present badge of their fraud. No man with independent ideas or of questioning mind could long associate with them on amicable terms; they are always the arch-charlatans of the groups, and they brook no rivals. Vain, egotistical and loquacious, they are the guiding spirits of the whole shady business, and by their fruits we know them. A close exami- nation of the literature disseminated by them will at once place them, not in the company of modest men and celebrated scholars, but with notorious impostors.
Confusion—Expert Deception
Much confusion exists as to the origin of Masonry and the Fra- ternity of the Rosy Cross, as well as to their relation to each other.’ Both being secret societies, the true history of neither has been written and published to the world. Much loose, wholly unreliable and spurious literature concerning these two great and truly mys- terious, secret fraternities has been written and widely circulated by charlatans and pretenders such as Thomson and Lewis. The writings and histories of the most careful and sincere investigators abound with errors, and even the writings and works of members thereof do not give true, but all too often, conflicting accounts. Thus, much conflict and confusion exists.
Thomson and Lewis, being expert deceptionists—shrewd and cun- ning, and without conscientious scruples or mental reservation, be- ing fully aware of the conflict and confusion that exists, set up their spurious orders in its midst and took full advantage of it. To successfully promote their fraudulent schemes, it was necessary for them to closely imitate the genuine orders and to challenge the authenticity of the established authentic organizations of the Masons and Rosicrucians; this they both did without hesitation and with brazen effrontery—defending themselves with intricate misrepresentations, cunning deception, citation of conflicting and spurious authorities, and escaped from immediate detection in the confusion that existed which they complicated and made more confusing to serve their purposes.
270
Poe venr sO NT CIROSTCRUCTITAN FRAUD
Both being clever writers, fascinating and convincing speakers, each used his extraordinary faculties and talents with all the prac- ticed art of the unscrupulous promoter. Each boldly and emphati- cally claimed to be an expert authority upon Masonry and kin- dred subjects. In 1914, Thomson had Robert S. Spence, his sec- retary and co-editor of his magazine, issue his challenge to the world, in these words:
“Matthew McBlain Thomson is, without fear of con- tradiction, the brightest Mason in the United States; I put this forth as a challenge to any Masonic wiseacre who desires to take issue with the statement.’”®
Even so, Lewis also claims to be an expert and to know all about Masonry and Rosicrucianism, and when questioned or ex- posed, he writes voluminously and confusingly, making all manner of plausible misrepresentations and using all his subtle arts of cunning deceit—finally winding up by challenging anybody and everybody to debate.®
International Masonic Congress
To strengthen his spurious claims of authority which were grad- ually failing him and to construct a new fraudulent device to take the place of those that were surely collapsing, Thomson made a trip to Europe in July, 1920, to attend a meeting of what he called the “International Masonic Federation,” held at Zurich. He had, for a long time, led his followers to believe that even- tually a world-wide federation would be created which would con- trol Masonry and of which he and his associates would be the leaders. The Congress of Zurich, as explained by ‘Thomson, was for the purpose of taking up the work of the First Congress of Inter- national Freemasons, under the leadership of Papus (Dr. M. Gerard Encausse), held in Paris, in June, 1908, for the purpose of starting a Universal Federation of Freemasonry."
5 See Thomson Masonic Fraud, p. 71. 6 See Volume I, pp. 133 et seq. and Chapter Seven of this volume.
7 Mr. Lewis claimed that this was a Congress or International Council of Rosi- crucians. See his Exhibit No. 6, White Book D, our Reproduction No. 43 and the proceedings of that Congress, our Reproduction Nos. 45 to 45E and the text in Part II of this chapter.
271
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS WHITE (?) BOOK De
A full account of his travels and universal recognition accorded to him, telling of the great work of the International Masonic Congress, as well as what purported to be minutes thereof, was published by Thomson in The Universal Mason for December, 1920. He made much ado about this Congress. Theodor Reuss was present as the representative of the O. T. O. and the Sover- eign Sanctuaries of the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim for Ger- many, Switzerland, Great Britain and Ireland, but the Congress was a farce and not representative, so Reuss withdrew at the begin- ning and did not participate.
At his trial, Thomson was forced to admit, on cross-examina- tion, that the Congress of Zurich was a farce, a snare and a delu- sion, and that only six or seven men were present.°
This is a typical and fine example of how pretenders and fraud- ulent promoters, racketeering in fraternalism, support, lift and sustain themselves by their own: boot-straps.
The times that Lewis has done this same thing and resorted to the same tactics are too numerous to relate here. His literature abounds with accounts of his attendance at R. C. International Councils and Congresses, all faked and fictitious. Some of these we have discussed and others we shall discuss in this Volume.
Universal Unimpeachable Authority
Both claimed unlimited and universal authority with the result- ing right to work every rite, to teach every doctrine and to dis- close every secret teaching to their followers—real or fictitious, known and unknown, existent and non-existent, and all those sub- lime secrets and holy rites lost for generations but recovered by them, which they alone possessed and could give to the gullible victims of their all-inclusive occult, mystic, Masonic and fraternal swindles. Both issued long, imposing and mystifying announce- ments, proclamations and pronunciamentos concerning their ex- traordinary and unimpeachable authority. They were—and Lewis still is—the Lord High Moguls and Popes—unlimited of univer- sal initiation, and wisdom will die with him. Let us hope that all occult frauds, mystic swindles and racketeering in brotherly
8 See The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 145-146. "See The Thomson Masonic Fraud, p. 240.
212
eves ON TC2ROSTCRUCILAN FRAUD
love and fraternalism will also depart with them.
Thomson made fabulous and impossible claims to everything and to all manner of impossible, conflicting and irreconcilable authority under a charter dated April 20, 1898, from the Scottish Grand Council of Rites, which was proven in his trial to have been spurious and a fraudulent device which he used to promote and perpetuate his fraudulent scheme.*
Lewis claims his fabulous, stupendous, universal and unimpeach- able authority under and by virtue of a charter, dated October 20, 1920, from the Great White Lodge of Tibet,’ a fictitious, nonentity and fraudulent device, under which he fabricated FuposI, his pres- ent source of authority—his latest and last model of fraudulent devices. In the September issue, 1921, of The Triangle, his then official organ, he set forth his exorbitant claims, and gave a partial list of the secret orders, rites and universal initiatory authority under his immediate control.* He claimed for his fraudulent order, the AMORGC, “all ancient and modern Secret Rites.’ He claimed everything that Thomson claimed and more—Lewis’ scheme being more modern and of later design—and he being much smarter and more cunning than Thomson in many ways—is better planned, more complicated, intricate and confusing, and more cleverly de- signed than that of Thomson, who, in the main, dealt only with Masonry, whereas Lewis confuses Masonry and Rosicrucianism and derives his ‘“‘Rosicrucian authority” by way of, through and under ancient and primitive Masonic Rites. Thomson was con- victed of a Masonic Fraud. Lewis, his successor in fraternal rack- eteering, has improved somewhat on his fraudulent devices and swindling schemes and created for himself and his son a Hier- archy of Masonic and Rosicrucian Fraud, which shady enterprise he conducts, principally by mail and magazine advertisements sent through the mail, under a Rosicrucian appellation and as the origi- nal, ancient and only authentic Rose Cross Order in America— or in the world, for that matter.
1See The Thomson Masonic Fraud, pp. 45, 59, 84 and 159.
2For fac-simile of this Charter, see our Reproduction No. 51 and the discussion of this Charter in Part IV of this chapter.
3 For Lewis’ description of his spurious “Supreme High Council of the Universe” and his claims of authority thereunder, see pages 135, 136 and 137, Chapter III of this volume. ‘Thomson’s claims under his spurious Scottish Grand Council of Rites were very much the same and almost as fabulous and as ridiculous.
213
AN ANSWER TO LEWIS -WHIDE?() SOCK. is
Thomson’s exorbitant, fabulous, unreasonable, conflicting and impossible claims of authority proved to be badges of fraud that led to his downfall. He claimed too much, made too many impos- sible and conflicting claims,* got too bold, ventured too far, talked too much, and at the end bargained without a host, and got caught. Lewis, though cautiously yet almost exactly, is following in his footsteps. Lewis, now being exposed on every hand and involved in numerous law suits, is battling desperately to save his dynasty of fraud and to save himself from the ultimate and inevitable fate and just desserts of his illustrious predecessor in fraternal
fraud.
Thomson’s Final Claim and Conviction
Thomson had at one time been a Master Mason, in good stand- ing, and rightfully possessed many of the higher degrees; however, on account of his anti-Masonic conduct, his inclination to rule the Craft, and to be the Most Worshipful and Thrice Illustrious Grand Master General, and particularly on account of his natural pre- disposition to sharp practices, shady enterprise, fraternal racketeer- ing and trafficking in brotherly love, he was expelled as a Master Mason, from the Blue Lodge, and thereupon ceased to be a Mason, and as a result thereof all his higher degrees fell to the ground and ceased to exist, being without Masonic foundation to support them.
It was shown that his alleged sources of authority were spurious and that he could not legally exercise Masonic authority in the United States, even under a charter rightfully granted by a regu- lar foreign Masonic power, because the territory was Masonically occupied—thus recognizing the universally established fraternal usage and law upon that subject.
The gravamen, the basis or essential part of his fraud, was that he was not a Master Mason; that he did -not possess the right to confer the Craft degrees and, consequently, no right to confer or communicate any of the higher degrees.’
Thomson made many conflicting and confusing claims as to his
4 Lewis’ impossible, conflicting and spurious claims of authority will be reviewed in