The Builder Magazine
November 1922 - Volume VIII - Number 11
The Trial of the American Masonic Federation in the United States Court
BY BRO. CHARLES C. HUNT, DEPUTY GRAND SECRETARY. IOWA
In THE BUILDER for September Brother Hunt gave a general statement of the American Masonic Federation Case: in the issue for October he made a critical examination of the claims of that body to the higher degrees: he now furnishes an account of the manner in which the affairs of that organization, masquerading as Masonic, were brought to the attention of Federal authorities, and of the action taken in consequence. A careful study of this series of articles, the fourth and last of which will be published next month, will give a reader a clear insight into some of the most important principles of Masonic jurisprudence.
MATTHEW MCBLAIN THOMSON, head of the self-styled American Masonic Federation, sent out paid organizers all over the country whose duty it was to organize lodges and confer Masonic degrees. The charge for the Craft degrees ranged from $35.00 up to $50.00 or more, the usual charge being about $50.00. For the Scottish Rite degrees from the Fourth to the Thirty-Third the charge was from $135.0 to $200.00. Sometimes the Shrine and Templar degrees were given for this amount, sometimes not.
Occasionally, these organizers in different cities would be arrested by the police on the charge of obtaining money under false pretences. Sometimes convictions were had, but usually these convictions were hard to obtain, for the reason that it was difficult to disprove statements made by Thomson and his organizers. This difficulty existed because of a lack of knowledge on the part of Masons called to testify in such trials.
In 1915 one of these organizers by the name of Ranson was arrested in St. Louis. The Post Office Inspector in charge in St. Louis learned of the case, and concluded that it was a matter for the United States Government to take up since it involved a fraudulent use of the mails. He therefore assigned one of his inspectors, Brother Monte G. Price, to investigate the matter. Brother Price was not able to enter actively upon this work until 1919; from that time until the trial last May he spent much of his time making an investigation in various parts of this country, and even going to Scotland and to France.
As a result of his investigations, an indictment was found in the District Court of the United States against Matthew McBlain Thomson, Thomas Perrot, Dominic Bergera and Robert Jamieson, and the case was brought to trial in the United States District Court at Salt Lake City, Utah. As the regular judge in this district is a Mason, Judge Wade of Iowa was assigned to try the case and he impressed all who attended the trial with his absolute fairness to both the prosecution and the defense.
The writer of this article attended this trial, and procured a stenographic copy of the proceedings. Therefore, in what follows, he is speaking from his own knowledge as well as from the official report.
The indictment charged the defendants, Matthew McBlain Thomson, Thomas Perrot, Dominic Bergera and Robert Jamieson, with entering into a conspiracy and using the mails in furthering and carrying out that conspiracy. Said defendants were officers of the American Masonic Federation and the Confederated Supreme Council, organizations claiming to control the Craft and higher degrees of Masonry, respectively.
THE CONSPIRACY
The conspiracy charged was that of devising a scheme to defraud, in that, as set forth in the indictment:
"Said defendants would make written and verbal, fraudulent and deceptive representations regarding the authority, chain of title, power and history of said two corporations; that said defendants would represent to the public generally throughout the United States of America, and to the persons so to be defrauded as aforesaid, for the purpose of inducing such persons to join said corporations, among other things, the following: that Freemasonry was and is an ancient, exclusive and honourable Fraternity of great merit and respectability, that all true and regular Freemasonry in Europe and America traces its antecedents, authority and power to the ancient lodges of England and Scotland; and that said defendants would falsely and fraudulently represent, pretend and claim that said American Masonic Federation and said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation were and are the only regular, legitimate and true Scottish Rite Freemason bodies in America, and that they trace their history through regular and true charters to legitimate Scottish Rite bodies in Scotland, which said Scottish Rite bodies themselves were and are of unimpeachable authority, reputation and responsibility and which reckoned their existence from time immemorial; that said American Masonic Federation had full power and authority within itself to confer what are commonly known as the three Craft or Blue Lodge degrees and to create and charter Craft and Blue Lodges and Grand Lodges superimposed thereupon throughout the United States of America, by virtue of the right and power contained in a charter of authority from the Supreme Council A.&A.S.R. of Freemasonry for the Sovereign and Independent State of Louisiana, a corporation of said State of Louisiana (hereinafter in this indictment referred to simply as the Supreme Council of Louisiana), to said Thomson and thereafter surrendered and transferred to said American Masonic Federation; that said Supreme Council of Louisiana itself traced its Masonic authority and power to Mother Lodge Kilwinning No. 0 of Scotland, represented to be the oldest known source from which Masonic power flowed; that said American Masonic Federation and said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation had authority to confer within the United States of America what are commonly called the higher degrees in Masonry and to create and charter consistories, councils, conclaves and tabernacles by virtue of a patent granted said Thomson by the Grand Council of Rites of Scotland, under date of the twentieth day of April, in the year eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, which said patent said Thomson had surrendered and transferred to said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation; itself a part of and within said American Masonic Federation; that said Grand Council of Rites of Scotland had recognized said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation; that said Grand Council of Rites of Scotland was the oldest Masonic high degree body in the world, was self-existing, the parent of many, the offspring of none, embracing within its bosom all rites and systems which have, in the course of time, been gathered around the parent stem of Scottish Masonry, and that it was a regular, legitimate and true Masonic high degree body of good reputation and unquestioned authority; that said patent given by the Grand Council of Rites of Scotland to said Thomson was the first charter granted by regular Scottish authority to work the Scottish Rite in America and that by virtue of said alleged charter of authority from the Supreme Council of Louisiana and of said patent from the Grand Council of Rites of Scotland, heretofore described, said American Masonic Federation and said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation, had the only legitimate and direct chain of title and authority of any Scottish Rite Masons in America, that they alone in America were in regular possession of the Scottish Rite degrees, and that, because of their power and authority predicated upon the alleged charter and the patent aforesaid, they alone in America could confer true, genuine and regular Scottish Rite degrees from the First to the Thirty-Third inclusive; that said defendants, by themselves and their agents and employee, the names of said agents and employees being to the Grand Jurors unknown, therefore their names are omitted from this indictment, in the name of and by pretended authority from, said American Masonic Federation, would pretend to grant charters of supposedly legitimate, regular and authoritative origin, and to create subdivisions, branches, groups and organizations of supposedly regular Masonry, and would pretend to confer legitimate Scottish Rite Masonic degrees upon all such persons as might, by means of said false and fraudulent representations, pretensions and claims, be induced to apply for and purchase the same and to transfer to said defendants, their agents or employees sums of money therefor; and to aid and assist in conferring said pretended and fraudulent degrees, and as a part of said scheme and artifice to defraud, said defendants would make and print, and cause to be made and printed charters, diplomas, certificates and commissions purporting to give to the holders and bearers thereof true and genuine Masonic degrees, rites, powers and authority; that further, as a part of said scheme and artifice to defraud, and to aid in executing the same, and to convey and communicate to persons so to be defrauded the representations herein alleged, the said defendants would print and cause to be printed and distributed throughout the United States, books, pamphlets and statements which would be artfully and carefully prepared, containing pictures of alleged true charters of authority and affiliation to said Thomson and said corporations so as to mislead and deceive the persons who might read them and induce such persons to join said American Masonic Federation or The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation, or any of their several branches, subdivisions, lodges or chapters, in the belief and with the understanding that they were joining institutions having the true, genuine and legitimate history, power and authority, which, as hereinbefore alleged, said defendants would claim and represent them to have; that further, as a part of said scheme and artifice to defraud, said defendants would publish and print and cause to be published and printed, at Salt Lake City aforesaid, in the name of said corporations a monthly journal or magazine entitled, "The Universal Freemason," which said journal or magazine should be published every month throughout said period of time at Salt Lake City aforesaid and should be distributed by means of the postoffice establishment of the United States throughout the United States of America and should be sold to the persons to be defrauded as aforesaid; that said magazine should contain cunningly and carefully prepared articles and statements in support of the claims and pretensions of said defendants, as hereinbefore stated, and should be made by said defendants with the hope and expectation that credulous and uninformed persons, to whom said magazine or some of the copies thereof might come, would be attracted by their alluring and misleading statements and thereby induced to join said corporations, or their subdivisions, lodges, chapters or branches, and to pay said defendant or said corporations, the fees required as a privilege for so joining; and that all said printed charters, diplomas, certificates, commissions, books, pamphlets, and magazines are too numerous, voluminous and lengthy to be set out in this indictment in full and are for that reason omitted by this Grand Jury. . . .
"That said defendants and each of them throughout the period of time hereinbefore alleged, well knew of the falsity and fraudulent and misleading character of said representations, claims and pretences and of the falsity and fraudulent character and purpose of said artifice, scheme and device; and that all and regular of the false and fraudulent statements, representations and pretences hereinbefore set forth, would be and were intended by said defendants to be made, done and practised for the fraudulent purpose on the part of said defendants and each and all of them to deceive the said persons so to be defrauded, and fraudulently to induce said persons, and each of them, to pay sums of money to said defendants, their agents or employees, or to said The American Masonic Federation and said The Confederated Supreme Councils of the American Masonic Federation in return for membership or degrees in either or both of said corporations, and to cheat and defraud said persons so to be defrauded as aforesaid, with the intent then and there on the part of said defendants fraudulently obtained, in whole or in part, to the use, gain and benefit of said defendants and each of them, and of said other persons to the Grand Jury unknown, with whom said defendants conspired, as aforesaid. That said conspiracy of defendants was continuous in nature and in purpose and was continuously in existence and in the process of execution by said defendants throughout all the time from and after the said first day of May, in the year nineteen hundred and eighteen, until and including the day of the finding and presentation of this indictment, as aforesaid."
The first three named defendants only were on trial. Robert Jamieson did his part of the work in Scotland and could not be reached by the courts in this country. He had been a member of a regular Masonic lodge under the Grand Lodge of Scotland. In 1914 he was expelled by that Grand Lodge for his part in this scheme. However, he continued to sign diplomas and certificates issued by this organization, thus giving the Impression that the authority claimed from Scotland was genuine.
THE FIRST WITNESS
The first witness called by the Government was Brother Monte G. Price, the Post Office Inspector residing at St. Louis, Mo. He testified that he had been assigned to investigate this case by his superior officer in 1915, but had not been able to do any work on it until four years later. On August 6, 1919, he interviewed the defendants and obtained from them a written statement of the source of their claimed authority, which was substantially similar to that stated above. He found that the charter from the Grand Council of Rites, which was quoted in the preceding article, was the only authority Thomson had or claimed to have for conferring the higher degrees, from the Fourth to the Thirty-Third inclusive. He also found that the only authority he had or claimed to have for conferring the Craft degrees was the following endorsement on the back of the Scotch patent:
"We, Jos. N. Cheri, M.P.S.G. C. of the Supreme Council of the State of Louisiana, do heartily endorse the purposes on the reverse hereof.
J.N.Cherl,
M.P.S.G.C. of the S. C. of La,
Honourary Member of the G. C. of Rites of Scotland."
In May 1920 this patent was photographed by the Post Office Department, in New York City, when the following additional endorsement appeared on the back:
"George U. Maury,
Dec. 11th, 1918.
Most Powerful Sovereign Grand Commander of S. C. of La."
"Under this Patent by the Grand Council of Rites of Scotland, extended to cover the Craft degrees by indorsation of the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of Louisiana, as given above, the Grand Lodge Inter-Montana was instituted on January 7th, 1907, and the Confederated Supreme Council of the Early Grand National Scottish Rite for the United States of America, on the 23rd of April, 1907."
It was proved by two witnesses and by Thomson's own admission that Maury's signature was affixed for the sole purpose of authenticating Cherils signature. Maury, who was the successor to Cheri as Sovereign Grand Commander, testified that the date "Dec. 11th, 1918" and the words beginning "Under this patent . . ." were not there at the time he, Maury, signed it. Therefore, Thomson's claim that Cheri granted him a charter to confer the Craft degrees had no foundation in fact whatever, even if the patent itself had been valid, and even if Cheri had the power to grant a charter to confer such degrees. It was shown that under the laws of the Supreme Council of Louisiana no charter was valid unless signed by the first four officers and the Secretary of that body.
George U. Maury, Sovereign Grand Commander, and Rene C. Metayer, Secretary General, testified that the only authority given to Thomson was to heal some clandestine lodges in and around Boston, Mass.
It is evident that Thomson realized that he did not have the authority he claimed, for on October 31st, 1919, he wrote to Maury asking him to sign and send to him the following certificate, so that he could have it photographed to prove his authority:
"TO ALL WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN,
This is to certify that I, George U. Maury, have seen and recognized the indorsement made by the late Illustrious Bro. Joseph M. Cheri, Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of Louisiana on the Patent granted by the Grand Council of Rites of Scotland to the Illustrious Bro. Matthew McBlain Thomson confirming and extending the powers of said patent to cover the Symbolic degrees and that the American Masonic Federation created thereby is in fraternal relation with the Supreme Council of Louisiana.
"As witness my hand and seal of the Supreme Council of Louisiana this....... day of November, 1919.
.....................................................................................
Most Powerful Sovereign Grand Commander."
Note that he asked for this certificate so that it could be photographed. If his patent had given the authority he claimed, why could it not have been photographed, as well as a certificate, is the question that naturally arises and to which Thomson could give no satisfactory reply. As a matter of fact, it was photographed later by the United States Post Office authorities.
SEPARATES FROM THE SUPREME COUNCIL
Other schemes proposed were for the Supreme Council of Louisiana to become a subordinate of the American Masonic Federation and to revive Polar Star Lodge and remove it to Salt Lake City. The Supreme Council of Louisiana did not accede to any of these Propositions, and after promises and flattery failed to bring them to terms, Thomson began to threaten.
In a letter to Maury, Commander of that Supreme Council, dated December 2, 1919, he intimates that complaints have come to him regarding the regularity of the present Supreme Council of Louisiana. He then goes on to recite the history of the connection between their two bodies, but his recitation is somewhat different from the claims he had previously made. He virtually admits that the only authority he received from Louisiana was a personal endorsement of Mr. Cheri, that his connection with the Supreme Council of Louisiana had given him nothing in the way of authority, and he threatens to withdraw recognition from Maury's organization, unless he, Maury, can prove that the said Supreme Council is regular. Maury asked him what proof he wanted, and Thomson replied that the best proof he could offer would be to sign the certificate above quoted.
He goes on to say that unless he receives a prompt reply acknowledging that Cheri's endorsement on his Patent was for the purpose of allowing him to organize lodges and that Cheri had power to grant such authority, he would sever all connections with the Supreme Council of Louisiana.
Maury refused to write the letter demanded, and Thomson then severed relations with the Supreme Council of Louisiana; thereupon disregarding claims previously made on many occasions, he asserted that he had never claimed authority from Louisiana to confer the Craft degrees, but that on the contrary, he had received such authority from the Grand Council of Rites, through the Rites of Mizraim and Memphis.
In October 1921 he published, under the title of "Is it Ignorance or Malice?" a statement that some people, including certain of his own members, were making "loose and unauthorized claims, which, being incapable of historical support or proof, are maliciously seized upon by our enemies, refuted, and claimed as disproving our whole claim to regularity of descent and Masonic standing. Among these unauthorized claims is that the Supreme Lodge works by authority of a charter granted to it by the Supreme Council of Louisiana. A variation of this story claims that this charter was granted by the Lodge Polar Star of New Orleans, La. Needless to say, both these stories are erroneous, and whether the result of well-meant zeal on the part of ill-informed brethren or malicious perversion on the part of our local enemies, the effect is the same, equally hurtful. Following we give the official version of our origin taken from a pamphlet circulated by the Supreme Lodge twelve years ago, that should leave no room for misconception."
The official version he then gives goes on to say that his authority to confer the Craft degrees came through the Scottish Grand Council of Rites having control over various so-called Masonic rites, including those of Memphis and Mizraim, but this was very different from his previous claims.
The pamphlet referred to as published "twelve years ago" is "Who is Who in Masonry, and Why I am a Scottish Rite Mason," but it did not contain the explanation quoted until republished in 1920, when this explanation was interpolated without any intimation that it was something entirely new. On the witness stand Thomson was asked to produce this, or any other pamphlet, published "twelve years ago" which contained this explanation of his authority, but he could not do it, nor could he produce a pamphlet in which he had said substantially the same thing prior to the investigation by the United States Government. On the contrary, he had repeatedly contended that his authority from the Grand Council of Rites was for the higher degrees only, and that for the Craft degrees he had been compelled to go to the Supreme Council of Louisiana. It was not until the officers of that Supreme Council refused to confirm his claim that he repudiated them as clandestine and asserted other claims to authority over the Craft degrees. Witness after witness testified that it was on the basis of claims made for authority over the Craft degrees from the Supreme Council of Louisiana, behind which they believed to stand the authority of Mother Kilwinning Lodge of Scotland, that they had been induced to join Thomson's organization. In all these representations he never intimated the fact that the Supreme Council of Louisiana was an organization composed of coloured men, but gave them the impression that it was composed of Frenchmen. Maury testified that there were only two or three white men in his entire organization.
THOMSON TRIES TO EXPLAIN
On the witness stand Thomson attempted to explain the statements made in his writings to the effect that he had a charter from Louisiana by saying: "Charter is used in the general sense, as authority, a permission, a sanction, or a word of similar nature, and in all my writings I denied receiving a charter in the sense of a formal document. . . . I always said it was an endorsement upon my Patent. That is the sense in which I used the word. The general sense of an authority." On cross examination he was asked to produce any writings prior to this investigation where he had made this explanation, but he could not.
The following quotation from the cross examination is interesting:
"Q. You explained that is not accurate language and that in all your writings you have denied that you have a charter from the Supreme Council of Louisiana. Will you please refer us to these writings?
"A. Would I be allowed to say that I always said that it was an indorsation on my patent?
"Q. Will you show me any place where you had said "I deny that we have a charter from the Supreme Council of Louisiana.' Show me any place where you have ever written that until this late controversy?
"A. I don't know where I have written it.
"Q. You don't know where you have written it?
"A. I have written it, but I can't produce it. I have always affirmed the other way.
"Q. The volumes of your magazine are on the desk there. Can you turn to any volume where you said 'I deny that we have a charter from the Supreme Council of Louisiana' until the time of this controversy?
"A. I don't know that I could."
Reference has been made to a pamphlet "Who is Who in Masonry, and Why I am a Scottish Rite Mason." It was the great text-book of Thomson's organization. Many witnesses testified that Thomson always referred to it as the answer to every question that was asked him regarding his authority and as the final argument in every controversy. The preface to this pamphlet is signed by all three of the defendants, and is as follows:
"This booklet is intended for the exclusive use of members in the obedience of the American Masonic Federation, Inc., of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, so that each member may be in a position to have on hand a brief historical chain of title of our system of Masonry as descended to us by proper Masonic charters from the oldest lodge of Masons known to the living world, viz., MOTHER KILWINNING, incidentally giving the origin of the Grand Lodges of the State or Modern Masons from the cold facts of history, thus placing our members in a position to refute false statements that may be made to them by any person or persons, and enabling them to distinguish as to 'Who is Who' in Masonry.
"It is published by authority of the Supreme Lodge of the American Masonic Federation.
(All rights reserved.)
M.McB. Thomson
President-General.
Thomas Perrot
Secretary-General.
D. Bergera
Treasurer-General."
On the witness stand Thomson was asked if he had read the preface to the pamphlet before signing it. He replied: "I can't say that I did."
"Q. You see your name there at the preface?
"A. Quite possible. It might have been written with a stamp. That is not my writing. I don't see anything wrong with it.
"Q. Well, you put that out. You were publishing it as being under your approval, weren't you?
"A. I am willing to accept that as stated therein. I am willing to accept that, because there is nothing wrong in it. It is not very lucid in its statement.
"Q. Had you read page 8 before this magazine was sent out to the public?
"A. I don't remember reading, but I am willing to accept the statements in it.
"Q. Did you read it after it was put out to the public?
"A. I read it, I think yesterday.
"Q. Have you ever read it before, Mr. Thomson?
"A. I don't believe I did before."
----o----
Ye sons of fair Science, impatient to learn,
What’s meant by a Mason you here may discern;
He strengthens the weak, he gives light to the blind,
And the naked he clothes - is a friend to mankind.
He walks on the level of honor and truth,
And spurns the trite passions of folly and youth;
The compass and square all his frailities reprove,
And his ultimate object is botherly love.
----o----
The measure of capacity is the measure of sphere to either man or woman. - Elizabeth Oakes Smith
----o----
FREEMASONRY OF THE MIDDLE AGES AN INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY
BY BRO. CYRUS FIELD WILLARD, CALIFORNIA
THE ARTICLE "Travelling Craftsmen" written for THE BUILDER by Bro. E. Ellison, the wise Master of Balder Lodge of San Francisco, contains statements which show that there are some things in Freemasonry which have escaped his notice. "Even Homer nods" was a proverb among the Greeks and Brother Ellison's article shows that even he is unaware of recent developments in Masonry. "Balder is dead" wailed the old Norse Saga, which lamentation Longfellow repeated, but his spirit lives in the lodge of descendants of the sturdy vikings at the Golden Gate who now plow the Pacific as their ancestors roamed the stormy Atlantic, and of this lodge Brother Ellison is the helmsman. In his article he says:
"We have been gravely assured by the writers . . . that Freemasonry in medieval times was an international association of church builders, incorporated under a charter issued by the Pope, granting to the society a complete monopoly in the building of religious edifices. It was said that the mysteries of Gothic architecture, both operative and speculative, were the particular secrets of the corporation and whenever a new cathedral or other religious house was contemplated, requisitions for plans and specifications must he made to the headquarters of the body," etc.
Then comes this further statement which seems to be contradicted by the fact:
"But, alas, the belief in the existence of an international corporation of builders has been shattered and swept into the dust heap by Robert F. Gould, the iconoclast, together with many other venerable cobwebs which had gathered around the columns and arches of the Masonic edifice and thus prevented us from viewing the structure in the light of true history.
"Gould demonstrates conclusively that 'International Freemasonry' in the Middle Ages is a fiction. Careful search in the archives of the Vatican has failed to bring to light the slightest evidence that the Masonic Craft has ever received any special honours or favours from the pope; and the only basis for the belief in papal patronage seems to be that at various times popes' and prelates (?) issued bulls (?) promising indulgences to persons who should make liberal donations of money, lands or labour, to churches in course of construction. Nor has anyone been successful in locating the headquarters of this 'international society'."
"True the German Steinmetzen (Freemasons) were along more than local lines. In 1549 they formed," etc.
It is evident from the above statements that Brother Ellison is not in touch with modern developments in Masonic research. There is no question in the minds of those qualified to judge that "The Builders" by Brother Joseph Fort Newton, the first editor of this Journal, is a book which represents ripe scholarship and his summation of the most careful research up to the present time. He locates the headquarters of this international society on the island of Comacina of Lake Como, in Lombardy which lies in the northern part of Italy on the borders of Switzerland. He calls attention to the great work, "The Cathedral Builders," by Leader Scott, and "Further Notes on the Comacine Masters," by Brother W. Ravenscroft.
The great fault with Robert Freke Gould is that he is unwilling to accept anything except evidence that would be conclusive in a court of law. In the very nature of things, in dealing with Masonic subjects, our obligation prevents us from dealing openly and fully with such matters and the prohibition against "cutting, carving, writing or printing any of the arts, parts or points" was more strictly enforced in olden days than now. This difficulty of supplying openly the evidence demanded by such natures as Gould's occurred to my mind recently while listening to an address by Brother H. L. Haywood before a meeting of members of our lodges in San Diego. I said to him afterwards, jokingly, that if he had not been talking to an audience of Masons, it was a question whether he would have been understood and the evidence which he submitted then in elaboration of the many points in his remarkably fine lecture would have been regarded as having no evidential value.
Before Brother Ellison makes this sweeping statement that anything in Masonry is a fiction, let him remember that Troy was a myth until Schliemann came.
It is surprising that he should bring in such negative evidence as that because the desired evidence in favour was not found in the "archives of the Vatican," hence the organization never had the powers attributed. The fallacy of such argument can be shown by a question: "Supposing such evidence had existed in the archives of the Vatican down to the time of the issuance of the bull by Pope Clement in 1738, would, it have been allowed to exist after that time?" Then again, there having been two and even three popes at the same time and the records having been carted to Avignon and elsewhere and burned by the many captors of Rome, would it not have been possible for such powers to have been in existence at one time and spurlos verzenkt"?
POSITIVE EVIDENCE
But let me give some positive evidence. I find in Clavel the following:
"These colleges (of Rome) enlisted up to the time of the fall of the empire in all their vigour. The invasion of the barbarians reduced them to a small number; and they continued to decline so much that it was these ignorant and ferocious men who finally preserved the cult of their gods. But when they were converted to Christianity, the collegia flourished anew. The (Christian) priests who caused themselves to be admitted there as honourary members and as patrons, impressed a useful impulse on them and employed them actively in building churches and convents in Italy. They appeared at this time under the name of 'free corporations' and 'fraternities.'
"The most celebrated were those of Como; and on in Muratori, that they had acquired such a superiority that the title of 'magistri comacini', 'masters of Como,' had become a generic name for all the members of the corporations of architects. Their primitive organization had been maintained up to then. They had always their secret instruction and their mysteries, that they called 'Kabala'; they had their jurisdictions and their private judges; their immunities and their franchises.
"Very soon their number was multiplied tremendously, and Lombardy, which they had covered with religious edifices, sufficed no more to contain them all. Some among them were united and this constituted one sole great association or fraternity with the purpose of going to exercise their industry beyond the Alps in all the countries where Christianity, recently established, still lacked churches and monasteries. The popes seconded this design; it suited them to aid in the propagation of the faith by the majestic spectacle of vast basilicas and by all the prestige of the arts, with which they surrounded the new cult. They conferred then on the new corporation, and on those which were formed afterwards with the same object, a monopoly which embraced the whole of Christendom and which they supported with all the guarantees and all the inviolability which their spiritual supremacy permitted them to impress on it. The diplomas which they delivered to this effect to the corporations accorded to them protection and exclusive privilege to construct religious edifices; they conceded to them 'the right to erect (or build) directly and uniquely from the popes,' and freed them 'from all the local laws and statutes, royal edicts, and municipal regulations concerning either the taxes or any other imposition obligatory on the inhabitants of the country.' The members of the corporations had the privilege 'to fix, themselves, the amount of their salaries (or wages) and to regulate exclusively in their general chapters, all that which appertained to their interior government.' It was forbidden 'to any artist who was not admitted into the society to establish any competition to its prejudice, and to every sovereign, to sustain his subjects in such a rebellion against the Church.' And it was expressly enjoined on all 'to respect these letters of creation and to obey these orders, under penalty of excommunication.' The pontiffs sanctioned such absolute proceedings, by 'the example of Hiram, king of Tyre, when he sent the architects to King Solomon in order to build the temple of Jerusalem.'"
I have given this quotation from Clavel so amply because it shows he was better qualified as a historian in some respects than R. Freke Gould, inasmuch as he recognized the possibilities of the Comacine Masters and gave them their due emphasis at that period of architectural knowledge long before modern scholars had appreciated their importance. Also, he gives in quotation marks certain rights and privileges and other matters which he is evidently quoting from the diploma he refers to, and it is evident he had certain sources of information before him which he could not name publicly for some reason now not known to us.
REBOLD CITED
Now let us refer to Rebold, another French historian, in his work, "Histoire des Trois Grand Lodges de Francs-Macons en France," (History of the Three Grand Lodges of Free Masons in France), Paris, 1864, page 28, from which I translate the following:
"After the terrors of the year 1000, (it was a superstition then that the world was coming to an end at the end of the year 1000) society emerged from its long lethargy and suffered a veritable transformation. They renewed nearly everywhere the religious edifices of the Christian world. A great number were demolished in order to be rebuilt. It is then that the corporations of Lombardy (Lake Como is in Lombardy) demanded from the pope the renewal of their ancient privileges [Note: King Rotharius of Lombardy in 643, issued a royal edict giving the Comacine Masters certain rights and privileges as a corporate body. See "The Builders," J. F. Newton] which the Roman corporations enjoyed and the pope accorded these to them with the exclusive monopoly of erecting religious monuments in all Christendom; it is then also that they expanded in all the Christian countries of the south.
"Although a part of the members of these corporations belonged to a communion opposed to the popes, these monopolies, of which the first was decreed to them by Boniface IV in 614, have nevertheless been confirmed to them and preserved since Nicholas III (1277) up to Benedict XII (1334)."
Rebold then quotes all the special wording given by Clavel without mentioning the name of Clavel, showing he had been all over the same ground and in addition gives the dates above cited. He is much quoted by Gould as a reliable historian except where he takes sides with one of the Grand Lodges of France of which he was a violent partisan.
In his chapter on the Stonemasons of Germany page 176, vol. 1, history of Freemasonry, Robert Freke Gould says:
"A remarkable tradition appears to have been prevalent from the earliest times, viz, that the stonemasons had obtained extensive privileges from the popes. Heideloff gives, amongst the confirmation of the Emperors already cited, two papal bulls, viz., from Pope Alexander VI, Rome, 16th September, 1502; Pope Leo X, pridie calendarium Januarii 1517.
He Heideloff, Die Bauhutte des Mottel-alters also says that they received an indulgence from Pope Nicholas III, which was renewed by all his successors up to Benedict XIII, covering the period from 1277 to 1334."
Gould then goes on to describe the various efforts of Moss and Krause to find copies, and how Governor Pownall obtained permission to search the archives of the Vatican. The latter was politely assisted by one of the Vatican attendants.
Brother Ellison does not tell his readers that Governor Pownall after his unsuccessful efforts in the Vatican still asserted his beliefs that these bulls were issued and might still be in existence somewhere.
Now let us examine Gould's great iconoclastic efforts so eloquently described by Brother Ellison. Personally I have not much use for iconoclasts. They were the ones who destroyed the beautiful statues of Grecian art and got their name from that pursuit of destroying images which apparently (judging by present day art) can never be replaced.
This great iconoclastic effort is contained in the following mild and innocuous statement in which the "great iconoclast" does, in the words of Nick Bottom, the weaver, "roar as gently as any sucking dove" by saying on page 177, vol. 1, History of Freemasonry:
"But whether or not the tradition rests on any solid foundation it is certain that the Church, by holding out from time to time special inducements, sought to attract both funds and labour for the erection of its special cathedrals and some of these tempting offers were not quite consistent with strict morality."
He was not even able to find a copy of the bull issued by Pope Innocent IV on May 21, 1248.
Now there was reason for all this. Apparently, for some reason, Gould did not want to acknowledge that these bulls were issued and thus lay the foundation for the reason that the Freemasons, relying on the prerogatives granted by the popes, had opposed the statutes of England which tried to regulate their wages in opposition to the rights guaranteed them by the popes to fix the amount of their own wages. This they did when England was Roman Catholic and it may be that Gould, now that English Freemasonry is Protestant and ruled by the royal family, did not want to show that the Masons ever rebelled against the royal authority. What Gould thinks of such an action is shown in his description of a French lodge which admitted "the notorious Paul Jones" as he terms one who is regarded in America as a national hero.
What is his comment on the statement made by Heideloff, whom he acknowledges a worthy and accurate historian, when Hiedeloff tells about Herr Osterrieth, one of the last of the steinmetzen of Strassburg, being initiated into a lodge of Freemasons in Germany where Heideloff assisted in the initiatory ceremonies? Heideloff says that Osterrieth told him after he had been initiated that the grip of the entered apprentice and that of the steinmetzen was identical. Gould says in view of these facts (which if inquired into might have shown that the steinmetzen originated from the freemasons who were brought over from the York Cathedral in 782 by Alcuin after the cathedral had been rebuilt) that such a thing was impossible and if it were true he had no right to tell it.
GOULD NOT ACCURATE
In the very beginning; of his chapter on the steinmetzen, Gould says:
"Fallou gives a long list of churches and convents erected by the devout men from the British Isles and other holy men. Then came Charlemagne and taught the German tribes to build cities and palaces (Aix-la Chapelle, Ildesheim, etc.)."
This is just about as accurate as Gould is about many things. He gathers a great heap of materials but makes no accurate deductions from what he has gathered and misses many things of a revealing nature among the great mass of citations he has heaped up with an evident purpose of impressing his readers with his scholarship.
Now Charlemagne could not teach anyone. He was so ignorant that Alcuin, the mason-monk from the Cathedral School of York, England, was obliged to teach him to write his own name and there is an amusing word picture in the life of Alcuin of Charlemagne twisting his features up while he tried to make the stiff fingers which were used to handling the sword encompass the pen and make it trace the regular pothooks and hangers.
It was Alcuin who was brought up for forty years or more first as pupil and then master in the Cathedral School of York while the Comacine Masters brought from Rome by Egbert were rebuilding the Cathedral which had been destroyed by fire in 741 and who brought over to France the torch of knowledge in 782 which then burned only in England and introduced civilization anew into Europe among the Germanic tribes. He first started the palace school at Aix-la-Chapelle and then was instrumental in spreading the "seven sciences" which the Old Charges speak of through the monasteries at Tours, Fulda, and even as far east as Salzburg. The workmen, and particularly the masons whom he brought over from England, at that time spread all over Germany, building monasteries, churches, convents, palaces, etc. Heideloff, who was an architect, writing in 1844, said that "during the time of the Anglo-Saxons, [that is, during Alcuin's time,] building operations continued and their monuments of architecture are the finest example of the state of building during those ages. They also introduced the science into Germany and understood building, erecting convents everywhere."
In a footnote of Gould's History, page 318, vol. 1, is a statement that in an old life of King Offa, which was written by Matthew Paris, who was Alcuin's king and from whom he obtained permission to go over to France and enter the service of Charlemagne, there is a miniature showing King Offa giving orders to the master of the works where St. Alban's cathedral is being erected and the Master holds the square and compass in his left hand while a perpendicular arch is being tried by a plumb rule, while others are hewing the rough ashlar and still others are raising stones by a windlass and setting them in place.
Heideloff's words given above describe Alcuin's activities under Charlemagne and it was he who was responsible for the edict which Charlemagne signed which gave the Comacine masons liberty to travel everywhere and erect churches and other buildings while the other workers were tied to the soil under the laws of the feudal system. Alcuin was the intellectual prime minister of Charlemagne, according to Guizot, and it is not an improbable conception to attribute to him the introduction of York Masonry into Germany, and thus the identity of the entered apprentice's grip of English Freemasonry and the grip of the steinmetzen of Germany would be explained. Gould in his attention to the dead letter "which killeth" missed this as he did the inner meaning of Governor Pownall's words. The latter says, on page 258, "The pope not only had formed them into a corporation," etc. He also is quoted on the same page of Gould's history as saying after his search in the Vatican as recorded in Pownall's "Archoelogia"; "I cannot however yet be persuaded but that some record or copy of the diploma must be somewhere buried at Rome amidst some forgotten and unknown bundles or rolls."
This is the authority on whom Gould depended and Gould is the authority on whom Brother Ellison depends and it is easy to see that instead of the "great iconoclast" destroying the belief in the existence of a bull or diploma giving certain rights to the Freemasons of that time that the very authority on whom Gould depended asserted his belief in the existence of same.
The facts in the case warrant the belief in the existence of such grants of rights and privileges from the time of the Quatuor Coronate down to the time of the completion of the great cathedrals of the Middle Ages.
The popes naturally would grant such privileges in order to have such edifices erected. Tradition recorded testimony as to the existence of diplomas or bulls granting such rights and privileges are so common and universal that there must be a substratum of fact beneath it all.
We can understand how such diplomas or bulls would disappear after the masons had been fulminated against by Pope Clement in 1738. But the common knowledge of their existence previous to that time cannot be destroyed by Gould or any one else while such cloud of testimony as to their previous existence persists.
The rest of Brother Ellison's article in relation to the journeyman carpenters or "Travelling Craftsmen" is interesting.
Years ago I was brought into relationship with the journeymen hatters and then learned that they too had a system of recognition which evidently came down from the old Compagnonnage of France. In going into a strange hat shop, the traveller approached the nearest journeyman (who was one who worked by the "journee," French for "day") and said "How's trade?" who then nodded his head to or pointed toward the shop-steward to whom the traveller went and repeated the same query The steward answered "Good" or "Bad" or "Fair" as the case might be, and then asked; "Who wants to know?"
The traveller then repled: "A gentleman hatter on turn."
This expression came back to me all through the years at times as I could not see the significance and the hatters could not explain it as it was something that had come down to them in their association or union.
In looking over a history of the Compagnonnage, I saw the expression used describing their travelling or trips after they had finished their apprenticeship as being "en tournee de compagnonnage" which would be pronounced "on turn-ay" etc. Leaving off the "ay" sound as would be dropped down the years, it would be seen that the expression "on turn," which means nothing in English, would be descriptive as meaning "on tour" if taken from the French expression "en tournee."
THE KNIGHTS OF LABOUR
The Knights of Labour, an American organization which was founded in 1869 by Uriah S. Stephens, who was a Mason, had its signs of recognition and hailing signs, grips and passwords, with obligations and oaths taken on the Bible with due solemnity.
When Terence V. Powderly, a Roman Catholic, became its head, he submitted its ritual and secret work to the approval or disapproval of the dignitaries of that church with the result that all such secret work was eliminated. It was probably thought it was too dangerous to give the great mass of the working people ideas and rituals so close in form to Freemasonry.
As a result the nativistic and Protestant American element withdrew and set to work to upbuild the American Federation of Labour with such success that the Knights of Labour is now practically extinct. Now that the American Federation of Labour has grown so strong the clerical element in the United States is seeking at all times to secure control of that body by the election of a Roman Catholic as its president.
There was an occult strain about the ritual which was very appealing to those who had never taken the Masonic degrees, especially in that pertaining to opening and closing the general assembly, as the highest body was called. This part of the ritual was drawn up by Stephens and modified by Victor Drury and Charles Sotheran of New York, the latter of whom had taken all the degrees in Masonry and was well known to the writer. He is quoted at great length by Madame Blavatsky in "Isis Unveiled," in a long letter on Masonry.
Had it been allowed to continue as Stephens designed with its system of recognition of travelling craftsmen and assistance provided for them, it would undoubtedly have grown to a membership of five millions or more, as it did reach a membership of over a million.
In that case, the half-baked and undigested economic provisions that constituted its so-called principles would undoubtedly have been put into practical operation to a greater extent than they were with even greater damage to our constitutional polity.
Brother Ellison has opened up a very interesting subject and there is no doubt but what there is much to be gleaned from members of old trade unions which have brought down traditions and methods of recognition from past centuries. There was a journeymen freestone cutters' union in Boston at one time which might yield interesting material as it has been alleged that the Free Masons took their name from "masonne de franche per," as Gould quotes it, which meant "mason of free stone." The shipbuilders of East Boston and of Maine had also interesting traditions and organizations which came down the centuries from England and elsewhere.
----o----
THE LEWIS OR LOUVETEAU
The words Lewis and Louveteau, which, in their original meaning, import two very different things, have in Masonry an equivalent signification - the former being used in English, the latter in French, to designate the son of a Mason.
The English word Lewis" is a term belonging to operative Masonry, and signifies an iron cramp, which is inserted in a cavity prepared for the purpose in a large stone, so as to give attachment to a pulley and hook, whereby the stone may be conveniently raised to any height, and deposited in its proper position. In this country the lewis has not been adopted as a symbol in Freemasonry, but in the English ritual it is found among the emblems placed upon the tracing board of the Entered Apprentice, and is used in that degree as a symbol of strength, because, by its assistance, the operative Mason is enabled to lift the heaviest stones with a comparatively trifling exertion of physical power. Extending the symbolic allusion still further, the son of a Mason is in England called a Lewis," because it is his duty to support the sinking powers and aid the failing strength of his father, or, as Oliver has expressed it, "to bear the burden and heat of the day, that his parents may rest in their old age, thus rendering the evening of their lives peaceful and happy."
By the Constitutions of England, a lewis or son of a Mason may be initiated at the age of eighteen, while it is required of all other candidates that they shall have arrived at the maturer age of twenty-one. The Book of Constitutions had prescribed that no lodge should make "any man under the age of twentyone years, unless by a dispensation from the Grand Master or his Deputy." The Grand Lodge of England, in its modern regulations, has availed itself of the license allowed by this dispensing power, to confer the right of an earlier initiation on the sons of Masons.
The word "louveteau" signifies in French a young wolf. The application of the term to the son of a Mason is derived from a peculiarity in some of the initiations into the Ancient Mysteries. In the mysteries of Isis, which were practiced in Egypt, the candidate was made to wear the mask of a wolf's head. Hence, a wolf and a candidate in these mysteries were often used as synonymous terms. Macrobius, in his Saturnalia, says, in reference to this custom, that the ancients perceived a relationship between the sun, the great symbol in these mysteries, and a wolf, which the candidate represented at his initiation. For, he remarks, as the flocks of sheep and cattle fly and disperse at the sight of the wolf, so the flocks of stars disappear at the approach of the sun's light. The learned reader will also recollect that in the Greek language "lukos" signifies both the sun and a wolf.
Hence, as the candidate in the Isiac Mysteries was called a wolf, the son of a Freemason in the French lodges is called a young wolf, or a "louveteau."
The louveteau in France, like the lewis in England, is invested with peculiar privileges. He is also permitted to unite himself with the Order at the early age of eighteen years. The baptism of a louveteau is sometimes performed by the lodge of which his father is a member, with impressive ceremonies. The infant, soon after birth, is taken to the lodge room, where he receives a Masonic name, differing from that which he bears in the world; he is formally adopted by the lodge as one of its children; and should he become an orphan, requiring assistance, he is supported and educated by the Fraternity, and finally established in life.
In this country, these rights of a lewis or a louveteau are not recognized, and the very names were, until lately, scarcely known, except to a few Masonic scholars.
* * *
To the interesting paragraphs printed above, which appeared in The American Freemasons' Magazine for November 1860, it may be added that the custom of conferring special benefits on the sons of Master Masons in France became in time a source of trouble. The servants and uninitiated rough-laborer employed by Master Masons organized themselves into bodies that became affiliated with the Compagnnonage. As time went on these organized laborers, jealous of the privileges enjoyed by Masters and their sons, often engaged in bloody combats over differences, and finally were able, owing to their numerical preponderance, to gain control of industry in general. It is probable that the custom of granting special privileges to their sons was one method employed by Master Masons to retain their privileges for their own families and in as small a circle as possible.
But it is now a time long gone in which the “lewis" thus figured in organized Crafts; conditions have so changed, and Masonry likewise, that the Fraternity might well revive the “lewis" customs without in the least endangering the democrat of the Order. And the custom would have this advantage, that it would make for a more compact solidarity and continuity a Freemasonry. We should in all ways encourage young men to follow in the footsteps of their Masonic fathers.
----o----
MEMORIALS TO GREAT MEN WHO WERE MASONS - RICHARD W. THOMPSON
BY BRO. GEORGE W. BAIRD, P. G. M.. DISTRICT OF COLUMBiA
RICHARD W. THOMPSON, patriot, protestant, and Mason was one of those stalwart leaders of the Republic whose memory we have too early let die. He was born in Culpepper County, Virginia, June 9, 1809, of English ancestry; he died in 1900 at the great age of ninety-one, known the country over as "Uncle Dick," and loved dearly by all his friends, his whims and idiosyncrasies to the contrary notwithstanding. After having received "an excellent education" he moved to Louisville, Kentucky, where for a time he clerked in a store, after which he moved to Indiana where he studied law at odd times and with such success that he was soon admitted to the bar at Bedford, Indiana. His habits, his industry, and his thrift were such that soon he forged ahead, and was able, in the Yankee vernacular, "to take care of himself," which qualities made a leader of him in those early communities.
From 1834 to 1838 he was in the state legislature; and from 1841 to 1843 he was a United States Representative, being a colleague of Lincoln. He again served in the United States Congress from 1847 to 1849, but refused another nomination. He also declined the Austrian Mission, tendered by President Taylor, likewise a position as recorder in the Land Office, a place offered to him by President Fillmore. While a delegate to a Republican National Convention he had the distinction of nominating Oliver P. Morton for the presidency.
On March 12, 1877, he became Secretary of the Navy under President Hayes which office he held until 1881 when he resigned to become chairman of the American Committee of the Panama Canal Company. So thorough was Judge Thompson's knowledge of politics (he was judge on the eighteenth circuit district of the state of Indiana in 1867-8-9) that he was given the task of writing several party platforms. As Secretary of the Navy he had few peers, even if the public did good-naturedly twit him about his never having seen a ship before accepting the office; he proved that it is executive capacity, not maritime knowledge, that fits a man for that position, which is a civil office rather than military in its nature.
Judge Thompson wrote several treatises on financial and political subjects. One of his productions, "Personal Recollections of Sixteen Presidents," has of late years been republished in de luxe form by Bobbs Merrill of Indianapolis; it is a richly rewarding work in two volumes, and of value to the student of history in that its author enjoyed the absolutely unique privilege of having known personally so many Presidents. He said himself that he had seen with his own eyes every President since Washington and Adams. From the days of the campaign of 1840, when the slogan was "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too," until his death in 1900, he was a picturesque and active figure in politics. His most distinctive work was "The Papacy and the Civil Power, published in New York in 1876; it is still a live and vivid book, and should be widely read. His "History of the Tariff," published in Chicago in 1888, may also be mentioned. These books, and this political record, however, give one a meagre idea of the abounding vitality and far-spreading influence of this remarkable man, who was, as well as being a writer and scholar, a public speaker with a golden tongue, remembered to this day for the telling stump speeches delivered during some of the famous old time campaigns.
Brother Richard W. Thomson was one of the founders of the Masonic Veterans Association in Washington, and attended its meetings whenever possible, and delivered many speeches before it. He was a close personal friend of the Sovereign Grand Commander, Albert Pike. The records show him to have been a member of Terre Haute Lodge No. 19 in the State of Indiana.
----o----
RICHARD TV. THOMPSON MEMORIAL
Who can rehearse the praise
In soft poetic lays,
Or solid prose, of Masons true,
Whose art transcends the common view ?
Their secrets, ne'er to strangers yet expos'd,
Preserved shall be
By Masons Free,
And only to the Ancient Lodge disclos'd.
----o----
THE NEW AMERICANIZATION
BY PROF. EMORY S. BOGARDUS, PH. D., HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Emory Stephen Bogardus was born near Beludere, Illinois, February 21, 1882. He took his A.M. Degree in Northwestern University in 1909, and did his post-graduate work in the University of Chicago in 1910-1911. In 1911-13 he was assistant professor of sociology in the University of Southern California; since then he has been professor and head of department. Aside from his work on various boards and his membership in several learned societies, he is the author of “The Relation of Fatigue to Industrial Accidents"; "Introduction to Sociology"; "Essentials of Social Psychology"; “The Technique of Writing Social Science Papers"; "Essentials of Americanization"; "A History of Social Thought"; and also various papers in sociological and other magazines. He is editor of The Journal of Applied Sociology. His address is 3557 University Avenue, Los Angeles, California.
Professor Bogardus has established himself in the esteem of thinking people up and down the Pacific Coast as an apostle of common sense in the storm-harried domain of Sociology. His books and lectures prove that a man may be original and untrammeled while dealing with sociological problems without selling himself out to extremists, or lapsing into an unthinking jingoism; and that it is possible for a clear-headed man to think out social problems in the terms of fact, instead of in the terms of theory, as is so often the case.
THE PRESENT Americanization movement began in 1914 when the European War was started. Americanization Day had its beginning on July 4, 1914, in Cleveland, Ohio; it was fathered by "the sane Fourth Committee" of that city. In 1915 at least 150 cities observed Americanzation Day; the idea was to lessen the emphasis on "spread eagle oratory" and on trite boasting about the greatness of the United States, as well as on noisy celebrations and the use of dangerous explosives. The emphasis was laid on sane considerations of the nation's need, on making the Fourth of July a day for national stock-taking, and particularly on making the newly naturalized immigrants feel in new ways the deep significance of their recently pledged national loyalty.
In 1915, also, the National Americanization Committee was organized by citizens interested unselfishly in the welfare of our nation. The purpose of this committee was to further a nationalization movement that would unify the various peoples of the United States in behalf of the principles of democracy. In 1918, the Federal government undertook specific Americanization work through six different governmental departments. These activities were coordinated in January, 1919, and were centered upon the general problem "of the assimilation of the races and the general education of the foreign born," and upon the problem of naturalization.
During the eight years since the Americanization movement began significant principles have been established as a result of practical experience. These principles constitute the basis of the new Americanization, which is by no means generally understood or practiced. Certain of these essentials will be presented here.
1. Americanization applies to the native born first. If native Americans do not express in their lives the best American principles, the immigrants cannot be expected to do better. If natives violate the speed laws jauntily and boast of their ability to buy freedom from punishment in the courts, immigrants will feel no necessity of respecting the laws of the land and the Constitution.
Every native must go through the process of becoming Americanized. He is not born with his head full of American patriotism. He has to acquire this patrotism through a long educational process. Twenty-one years is the ordinary length of time required of a native before he is considered fit to vote. Not all natives, after having been born on American soil and living amidst American traditions, have become worthy citizens. To the extent that many persons are bigots, men of narrow vision, profiteers, labor shirkers, exploiters, and selfishly inclined they are not well Americanized. Americanization therefore begins at home.
2. Americanization is a process. It is not a big stick, nor a complacent, easy-going attitude that all will turn out well. You cannot compel a person to love a country. You can force obedience, but not love. The matter of creating loyalty is an exceedingly delicate psychological process. It is easy to crush the tender sprouts of incipient loyalty between the upper and nether millstones of force. No one ever develops a loyalty for a nation suddenly.
3. Americanization means understanding what American ideals really signify. If one were to ask fifty native Americans today what Americanism is, he would be met with no unanimity of opinion. If he mentioned "liberty," he would get a medley of interpretations. If he suggested "democracy," he would receive contradictory definitions, ranging from platitudinous phrases to a denial that the United States is a democracy at all. If he were to say that America's ideal is "brotherhood," he would be challenged even by many native Americans.
In other words, Americanizaton involves the acceptance of a common interpretation of American ideals. How can we Americanize when we are not agreed as to the object of Americanism? The solution rests in patient, thoughtful, open forum, and scientific educational programs.
4. The term, Americanization, cannot be used directly, in dealing with the newcomers. The average immigrant on arrival is not keen about being "Americanized." He has come ordinarily to seek new economic opportunities. His attitude can be appreciated if the reader will imagine himself arriving in Italy because of own anticipated chance to make money, and being informed that an Italianization program is in effect, and that he, the immigrant from America, is about to be Italianized. What would the response be? Quick as a flash it would come, "I don't want to be Italianized; I love America; I have come to Italy to make money."
5. The Americanization of the immigrants must take place indirectly. It is not the programs that we promulgate and expose or subject the immigrants to, that count, but rather the attitude we manifest toward them. Too many Americans take a snobbish attitude toward or "look down upon" the foreigners. We do not realize that these same foreigners see our faults and look down upon us because of some of our unattractive ways. This point is especially true of those immigrants who come from civilization and cultures that are five, ten, or twenty centuries old. The immigrant is often chagrined by American thoughtlessness. Everybody is going about his own business, but very few persons seem to be really interested in an ordinary, strange foreigner, except to cast side glances at him, and thus unintentionally to make him feel miserable.
6. The indirect influence of a constructive social environment cannot be overestimated. If we protect the immigrant from exploitation and insist on better standards of living, of sanitation, of recreation, of education, he will almost automatically in due season become an American. The public must see the need of giving the honest but unlearned immigrant a social handshake, sympathetic glances of the eye, and full opportunities for a self-expression that is in harmony with the best American principles. If we will give the immigrant a cordial welcome, a practical fraternalism, and democratic opportunities in our work-day world, he as a class will give his all to America. As a class, the immigrants are teachable and patriotic. Often they appreciate better than we the meaning of freedom. When they learn about Americanism at its best, they repudiate autocracy and enlist in the cause of democracy.
7. Americanization is denationalization for the immigrants. Before an immigrant can become an American he must give up his loyalty to his native soil. One's love for his place of birth remains with him persistently. Notice how the Iowans, the Buckeyes, and the Hoosiers constitute to hold state picnics in Southern California long after they have emigrated from their native states. The place where one was born and has spent the years of his childhood tend to remain dear. They hold sacred memories. They often represent loved ones whose voices have been silent for years. The deepest loyalties of life cannot be entirely foresworn. Americans need to remember how hard it would be for them to swear away their loyalty to Illinois, New England, or Virginia, if they were in a foreign land. Americanization thus means a transfer of loyalties for the immigrant. He must renounce something dear, which is not always easy.
8. The immigrant must assume responsibility. Too often he comes from a country with traditions and cultural viewpoints so different from ours that he cannot readily understand America. He seeks one kind of democracy, and we offer another. He may even come as a propagandist, seeking to make over our country. This of course is an erroneous attitude, although it is similar to that which missionaries and other religious leaders, commonly manifest. The constructive results of American life justify, however, that we require of immigrants an attitude, first of willingness to learn as far as possible the meaning of American principles, and second, an attitude of trying to contribute constructively to the development of these principles.
9. Americanization includes education, beginning with the teaching of the English language. Without the language of the country the immigrant is isolated, subject to all forms of exploitation and prejudices, and unable to become Americanized. As a condition of entrance we may require of immigrants that they assent to learning the English language within a reasonable length of time after entrance. Such a requirement puts upon us the responsibility of making possible such a process.
Our night schools are doing wonderfully well in teaching English to immigrants, but they cannot meet the need. American adult laborers in a foreign country after working during the day time would not as a class do well in mastering the foreign language in the hours of the evening. Adult minds trying to master a difficult foreign tongue cannot uniformly succeed when the mental processes are slowed up not only by habit but by overfatigue.
Carrying the school to the factories where the immigrants are employed is a plan that has met with a surprising degree of success when given a fair trial. At its best it works as follows. The employer gives the employee one-half hour on pay to attend a class in English providing the laborer will give one-half hour without pay. The classes meet from four-thirty to five-thirty or at some other convenient time. The employer gives the use of a room in the factory and furnishes heating and lighting; while the public school system furnishes the services of special teachers. As a result the employees become better citizens; they are also of greater economic value to the employer.
10. Americanization includes the foreign-born mothers. It has been the custom in our country to neglect immigrant women, especially the mothers who, although residing in the United States, continue to think in European terms, read foreign language newspapers, and have almost no contacts with American life. While the children are being Americanized by the public schools and the men are coming in contact with America in the factories and mines and mills, the immigrant mothers remain closely at home and scarcely know America at all.
The visiting teachers or home teachers of the public schools are doing a superb type of Americanization work. They go into the immigrant homes, carrying modern ideas of child caring, sanitation, and home making, but most important of all, they carry the American spirit and the atmosphere of democracy into the habitations of the foreign-born, and by their counsel arouse new ambitions. They also conduct cottage classes in English, sewing, and cooking at places and hours convenient for immigrant mothers.
11. Americanization is not a process to be left in the hands of Americanization workers as a class, or even in the hands of public educators. Employers, landlords, and their agents, may render, if they will, tremendous and fundamental aid to the cause of Americanization, or they may through the use of exploitation, injustice, and hypocrisy offset the good that nearly all other persons can do in behalf of immigrants.
Americanization is a responsibility and an opportunity which comes to everyone who is a citizen of the United States. The best principle of procedure is to, begin, not with the weaknesses, but with the good will and intelligence of immigrants. The immigrants also must bear a part of the responsibility and share in.the opportunity of becoming true Americans - they must will to become good Americans. The process of Americanization then depends upon good will, social attitudes, and the spirit of co-operation, and patient and understanding effort upon the part of all who live in the United States.
----o----
THE VISITANT
BY BRO. H.L. HAYWOOD
Every art to the artist, poetry, which is the finest of all the fine arts, most of all! therefore is it that we of the laity are ever shy about permitting others to read our compositions. The writer of these pieces confesses to a more than usual reticence, and that for obvious reasons. "The Visitant" was written to preserve the memories of an experience of ineffable things - an experience as unsought as it was mystical and mystifying: therefore the poems were not intended for other eyes; but gradually, and through accident and often in secret, they made their way about among a circle of friends, several of whom have since urged their publication. In deference to them, and with many misgivings, the pieces are here exhibited in print. To Freemasons they will not be without meaning or interest it is hoped, seeing that thev express in simple wise. and after a fashion of their own, that which the Fraternity teaches in its own Holy Places. H. L. H.
The Visitant.
In the eventime which Thou lovest
There was no notice of Thy approach,
There was no knock upon the door or footfall upon the stair;
I was not thinking of Thee, when suddenly Thou wert here!
Thou wert not visible yet I saw Thee
And the walls were turned to mist in Thy presence.
There was no sound made, yet Thy words passed through my ears as never a voice has, and my heart felt Thy words;
They said that which never had any speech said.
Thou didst surround me as the air,
And I felt myself standing in the center of Thee,
Seeing and hearing all things through Thee,
Seeing and hearing them as they are.
Thou art the Answer to all my questions;
Thou art the Solution of all my problems;
In Thee I found that which is really myself,
And there has come that Great Peace
When the labors of hand and mind fall into the rhythms of the soul.
Thou art here and now I know not if anything beside is here;
The familiar things are strange and uncertain.
When Thou comest a second time bring back my human world to me,
Lest when I go among my fellows they consider me mad.
What can a human being do without his human world?
Yes, let my human world be in Thee as Thou comest,
For not otherwise shall I possess it for ever!
The Great Love.
While I was wondering to what purpose I had been granted this great gift of life:
While I was puzzled as to what it was I had been brought here to do,
Suddenly Thou wert with me to ask for my love!
To love Thee I must gather into my nature all that is beautiful and good in the world;
To love Thee I must make continual war on whatever is the enemy of life;
To love Thee I must have eyes to see Thy face shaping itself behind the million faces of my fellows;
I must learn to recognize Thy words as they come to me over the tumults of creation:
Ah, my Lord, Thou must give me all the keys that open Thy resources of power
If I am to carry on this great work of loving Thee!
Thy Heaven.
At midnight I saw Thee coming through the heavens:
All the stars were jangled by Thy feet like ten thousand thousands of bells;
The breast of Space rose and sank like the bosom of a girl in love;
Thy laughter went up into the heavens as in the beginning of Creation;
And it was as if perpetual sunrises broke from Thy smiles,
When lo! Thou wert knocking quietly at my door.
"Hast Thou come to this poor destination after such a journey," I whispered!
"I am coming into thy soul," Thou saidst, "for breathing space and for room."
The Willow Tree.
The willow stands by the dark water in the dusk stretching down its hands toward the shadow of itself;
It bends low as if a great weight were pressing on its soul;
It gathers the dark to itself as if it were fain to hide a sorrow at its heart;
The winds come very soft through its pendulous branches lest it wound the grieving spirit of the willow.
I stand pensive beside it thinking of many things!
Old memories of my race hover about me and sad echoes trouble my heart like the shadows which lie upon graves.
As I stand thus brooding, Thy stars come up and gaze at me through the leaves of the willow:
In a time like this, when so many sighs are going up from the lips of men,
It reassures me to see Thy stars shining through the branches of the willow tree.
A Prayer for Blindness.
Open my eyes I prayed, open my eyes,
Give me to see, O Lord, as Thou dost see.
Thus as I prayed Thou liftedst up a grain of dust and bade me look.
I saw world behind world wheeling for ever,
World beyond world, and each world moved with the swiftness of light,
So that I turned and rested my eyes upon Thee.
I looked again and saw skies behind skies and every sky full of planets and stars;
Far as I could look into the infinitude of the dust I saw sky beyond sky;
And again I sought Thy face, as a bird, wearied of flight, rests upon a branch.
I looked again and lo! in the uttermost depths of the dust
Were angels, angels and cherubim and seraphim, and God, raised above ten thousand thrones!
Sick with dizziness and awe, I turned to Thee and cried,
"O Lord, restore my blindness!"
Be Not Too Near.
While I was sitting bewildered by the strangeness of things,
Overcome by the complexity of all my problems,
While I could not think my way in thought or learn what it was that I should do,
