The Builder Magazine

March 1930 - Volume XVI - Number 3

 

Freemasonry in Egypt

By BRO. ROBERT C. WRIGHT, Oregon

OUR estimable Grand Secretary, Bro. D. R. Cheney, receives many communications and pamphlets in several different foreign languages. Not being adept in them, he has for some years past enlisted the writer's assistance to translate important matters.

 

Last summer he informed the writer that he had heard of some trouble in the Grand Lodge in Egypt, and asked for examination and report of what was in a copy of its 1928 proceedings, which he furnished. This pamphlet turned out to be partly in Syrian and partly in French. A brief report was furnished to the Grand Secretary for his files. Discovering the name of our Grand Secretary mentioned in Syrian, because he had sent them his photograph, a copy of his name was sent to him. He said it looked easy but was hard to write, so he gave up using it officially.

 

Believing that something about Egyptian Masonry and their dissension might interest others, this article has been prepared. The proceedings mentioned contain much detail of the unfortunate events. Therefore only a summary of this will be given and a little space taken in addition to tell of the splendid humanitarian work carried on by that Grand Lodge.

 

Sometime in 1900 or 1901, Abd el Meguid Youne was Grand Secretary of the National Grand Lodge of Egypt. During that time Prince Mohammed Aly, brother of the ex-khedive, was initiated but held no office. Youne and some colleagues conspired with the Prince virtually to capture the Grand Lodge, and to amend its constitution or by-laws to allow the election of the Prince as Grand Master. Youne and the Prince were both well known in foreign jurisdictions. The official signature of the former was very familiar.

 

In 1901 an attempt was made to carry out their plans. This brought a strong reproof from Idris Ragheb, then Grand Master, who obtained from the Prince a letter dated April 6, 1901, written on Grand Lodge stationery, signed by Mohammed Aly and endorsed by Idris as witness. Therein the Prince acknowledged fidelity to his Masonic obligations, and promised obedience to the laws and rules of the National Grand Lodge, which he thereby also recognized. A photo print of this letter is published, showing the original signatures.

 

Evidently Youne and his fellow conspirators were not done. They wanted the prestige of the Prince, and the latter's conceit was so flattered that he was willing to join them and become a party to these iniquitous schemes. Thus the disturbances were continued until 1922, when the Prince was in it personally.

 

In the summer of 1922 some brethren who were not in good standing, and lodges suspended for cause, combined to petition for a change of the laws in order to make the Prince eligible as Grand Master. It appears a Grand Master was to be elected later, and this was the time when they proposed to act. The Prince agreed to be a candidate. He had never been warden or master, not even what they term an "active member" of a lodge, and according to the constitution was ineligible.

 

Idris Ragheb was again Grand Master that year. After a perusal, he issued a decree denying the petition, and cited laws forbidding its allowance. The dissident group then sought to arrange matters by making the Prince an active member of Lodge "The Nile." The Grand Master responded by giving that lodge a certain time to rescind its irregular action. It refused to do so and its charter was suspended, and some members of other lodges who were involved in promoting the action were also suspended. The Prince was disciplined on the ground of his ignorance of Masonic law, and that he was supposed to have acted in good faith.

 

The suspended members organized to go to the Grand Lodge meeting of September 28, 1922, to carry out their schemes. They appeared in force, invaded the Grand Master's office and demanded their reinstatement. To restore quiet he said those qualified as delegates could take part in the work. After inquiry from the chair as to whether all present were lawfully there, he began the session. Immediately a demand was made to change the laws to allow the candidacy of the Prince. The Grand Master ruled it out of order and refused any debate. The revolting group persisted in discussion and caused a tumult and confusion. To safeguard the dignity of Masonry, the Grand Master was obliged to close the Grand Lodge, which was done in form, the election being postponed to a later date to be announced. The officers then left the room.

 

Thereupon an assistant deputy Grand Master, Taha Ibrahim, seized the gavel and caused those present to proceed with the election. The Prince was declared elected Grand Master by acclamation.

 

The following day Grand Master Idris Ragheb and brethren went to the temple in the morning, as was customary, but the rebellious group, assisted by profane, roughly refused them admittance. On October 3 the Grand Lodge met again and re-elected Idris Ragheb, and elected other officers, including Mohammed Rifaat as Grand Secretary, who is still in that office. Since then, however, Sayed Aly has been elected Grand Master and was in office when the proceedings were published.

 

Youne took the records, seals and archives and used them to send out communications in the name of the schismatic party, under the name of the Grand Lodge. They took possession of furniture and personal property, which they were later forced to return by court proceedings.

 

Prince Mohammed also had the audacity to pretend to be Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite. This brought forth a decree on March 20,1925, from Mohammed Heddaya, the real Sovereign Grand Commander, suspending the Prince and depriving him of all his rights and privileges. It would appear that he is still suspended and persona non grata.

 

The conduct of Youne, and the lack of information, has caused confusion in foreign jurisdictions. The Grand Lodge of Montana in 1927 returned to the rightful Egyptian Grand Lodge the appointment certificate of a Grand Representative. Later learning of the mistake, an apology was made, accompanied by a request that the certificate be returned to them. This shows the result brought about by such unfortunate troubles, which are not to be overcome for years.

 

All through this lengthy period the Grand Lodge not only had to deal with the fraud and misrepresentations of Youne and his associates, in deceiving well-disposed persons in Egypt, and seriously interfering with domestic Masonic activities, but it was continually annoyed by these acts carried on in foreign jurisdictions. In June, 1926, they took advantage of the visit in Egypt of Bro. John Er. Cowles, Sovereign Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction, A. & A. S. R. They appealed to him to make a careful investigation of official documents. This he did and delivered to them a certificate stating that he found the regular and recognized Grand Lodge is the one of which Ferik Sayed Aly was then the Grand Master. This was deposited in its archives, and later an article relating this was published in The New Age.

 

In spite of these exasperating occurrences, the Grand Lodge shows it is not revengeful. It states in the 1928 proceedings, forgetting the evils caused by the dissidents, it has charitably opened its doors. More than once has it offered them its hand in the hope Masonry would pardon them upon repenting. In recalling to the sheep-fold these misguided brothers, the Grand Lodge would rejoice in their presence, regretfully broken since their departure. This noble sentiment rings clear and true. The Grand Officers are men of high reputation and occupy responsible government and civil positions.

 

Now what has this harassed Grand Body done for humanity? The National Grand Lodge of Egypt has founded an orphanage. Poor lads from seven to twelve are accepted, regardless of their religion. They receive school instruction and are taught trades. There are illustrations showing the boys in comfortable surroundings, being instructed in carpentry, chairmaking, weaving rugs, printing, etc. It is intended to use land about the buildings for a course in agriculture. One illustration shows a real lively band in uniform and with modern instruments, led by their adult instructor. King Fuad I gave this orphanage a liberal donation and is friendly to Masonry, although probably not a member of the Order.

 

The Grand Lodge has also taken great interest in education. It has a strong desire to eliminate ignorance in its native country. Promoting this object they founded and carry on the "Wadinnil" primary school. They found a demand for secondary or advanced grades, of which many children were deprived in the state schools for lack of accommodation. They met this need by organizing a secondary school. Boys and girls are admitted in both schools and the illustrations show a contented and happy lot of teachers and pupils.

 

Thus Masonry is doing its duty for little brothers and sisters in Egypt, just as we aim to do in our great and powerful country. It proves that Masonry is universal, knows but one Supreme Architect, and recognizes no political boundaries in its good works. When the true and noble realm of the brotherhood of man is recognized, a clear vision discovers there no battleships, no poison gases. That vision believes in what an Italian proverb says, " with the dawn of every day, a happiness." Let that be the unceasing work inherited from the Tyrian Grand Master, whose monument our real masters never have been forgotten - never shall forget.

 

Since preparing the preceding article the writer's attention is directed to the 1929 Foreign Correspondence Report of the Grand Lodge of Connecticut, covering Egypt for 1927. It is only fair to my readers that the claims of the opposition be stated. The only present source available is that mentioned, the writer not having the original proceedings in hand.

 

Prince Mohammed Aly appears as Grand Master of the schismatic body, and in his address of 1927 states that their foreign affairs are "marvelously good." Grand Officers of New York visited them. Following this are statistics relating to what they label "The National Grand Lodge of Egypt." There are seventy-five lodges, working in Greek, Arab, Hebrew, French and English, "approximately 6,000 members." It is asserted that the Grand Lodge, of which M.W. Bro. His Highness Prince Mohammed Aly is Grand Master, is the lawful continuation of the National Grand Lodge of Egypt, of which M.W.Bro. Idris Bey Ragheb was Grand Master for thirty-five years. The schism dates from 1922, when a majority, wanting a change, elected the Prince by a large vote. Idris left with a minority, and under this aged leader they continued to function under the official title. The courts decided against this organization in "several actions" which were instituted. In 1924-25, ninety-eight old members "returned" to this organization. It is recognized by forty-five Grand Jurisdictions, among them England, Ireland, Scotland and "several" Canadian, Australian and United States Grand Lodges. Mohammed Aly and Younis are Grand Master and Grand Secretary.

 

The account of the meeting Sept. 28, 1922, is recited as above, except it is said that there was a dispute about constitutional qualifications for Grand Master, and the Grand Treasurer asked that it be submitted to vote. ldris, refusing this, vacated the chair "sor a moment," returned, disposed of a few matters, left with his Deputy Grand Master and seventeen members, taking home with him, "so it is reported, " the great seal and important registers of the Grand Lodge.

 

Then election took place and the Prince was declared elected by overwhelming vote. Idris formed his own organization and used the Scottish Rite to defeat his opponents, which prevented healing of the breach.

 

The Connecticut writer remarks in his review as follows:

 

It is regretted that a small fraction of members endeavor to function as schismatic Grand Lodge, headed by a deposed Grand Master. There is some surface evidence that they are encouraged by certain U.S. Scottish Rite influences.. This has caused inadvertent errors on the part of some U.S. Grand Secretaries, the writer among them, who wrongly listed in 1928 proceedings Mohammed Rifaat as Grand Secretary. The legitimate Grand Secretary is Abdul Meguid Younis. Prince Mohammed Aly continues as Grand Master.

 

The present writer regrets that he has not access to the original 1927 text that the good Connecticut brother reviewed, also that this brother did not have the 1928 answer of the other body hereinbefore reviewed. It might have altered his judicial opinion of who are the legitimate Egyptian Grand officers, and also as to Scottish Rite interference.

 

It is appropriate, however, to mention a few other things for the better guidance of American Freemasonry. The 1928 proceedings evidently try to answer the accusations with great length and care. The exact text of parts of the constitution involved is set out.

 

Art. 29. No brother can be elected Grand Master if he is not an active and contributing member of a constituent lodge of the National Grand Lodge of Egypt, and unless he has filled the office of Grand Warden.

 

The amendment petitioned for was:

 

A prince of the royal family having the degree of Master may be elected Grand Master, setting aside the conditions required by Art. 29

 

The "aged" Grand Master directed attention to other articles, which forbade receiving any proposition contrary to the fundamental principles of Freemasonry. That the petition modifying Art. 29 was solely in favor of a member of the royal family, and manifestly opposed to the principle of equality, a basis of our Order. That the decree of the Grand Master was legal on this fact.

 

Furthermore he sets out Art. 49, that all amendments must be submitted to the Permanent Committee one month before meeting of the Grand Lodge which is to consider them. That statutes cannot be altered except by a majority of not less than three-fourths of the members of the Grand Lodge. Also that no proposition for amendment can be considered unless in writing, signed and supported by one- third of the members present at the Grand Lodge. The petitioners ignored the Permanent (i.e. Standing) Committee. The Grand Lodge had 408 members, the petition had 110, a protest had 144.

 

In 1928 we find that Taha Ibrahim is member of a standing committee, having evidently regretted his part in that disorderly proceeding. "Al Nil" Lodge, No. 243, is on the list and appears in good standing again.

 

Sayed Aly, Grand Master, is a Division General, and Secretary to the Minister of War and Marine; other Grand Lodge Officers hold notable positions under the government, and are evidently dignified and respected citizens.

 

The roster shows actual names and addresses of 103 lodges and officers. There are 71 Arab, 11 French, 9 Greek, 6 Italian, 4 Armenian, 1 Russian, 1 Turkish.

 

In the disorderly meeting, a Bro. Bryant was a leader of the petitioners. No English lodge is on this list, and the Prince's organization seems to have them. It leads to a suspicion of some political quarrel having brought on the strife. This may have led to recognition by English Grand Lodges. How, ever that may be, Idris appears to have presented a very strong ease on both facts and law, in favor of the lodge he represents.

 

In the foreign section they name a number of U.S. Grand Lodges, a large number of European and South American, New Zealand, the Scottish Rite Northern and Southern of U. S. and of Canada, as all recognizing that body.

 

The Prince's body does not seem to show any Masonic charity work, or any answer whatever to the constitutional questions distinctly involved in proper upholding of that organization. It is certainly not clear how the constitution was amended to make the Prince lawful Grand Master. There is no assertion on his part that the text stated by Idris, or the amending petition are incorrectly quoted. Nor any explanation by him how the constitution was law fully changed to qualify him a Grand Master. No explanation or denial of his letter is referred to. The Grand Lodges of America would do well to call for complete translation of the Egyptian constitution, and a complete statement, with proper exhibits, in behalf of the Prince, as to changes which make him Grand Master or his organization legal.

 

It should be kept in mind his body claims to continue from the admittedly legal one, of which Idris was Grand Master, therefore the succession must be proved to be legal Grand Lodges would then be in better position judicially to decide which is the lawful body in Egypt than to have the Prince, or some Prince's ghost writer, settle it for them.

 

NOTE

 

The 1927 report of the Prince Aly organization gives seventy five lodges as adhering to it. The Annuaire published by the International Masonic Association, lists seventy-seven. These are grouped by localities, and apparently retain their original numbers. The lowest number is 37, and the highest is 278. Al Nil, No 243, mentioned in the article, appears on this list so that it has evidently returned to the allegiance of the other Grand Lodge since this list was compiled.

 

It is evident that the group headed by Prince Aly has had a "better press" than its rival. The Annuaire has no information to offer about the latter except the names of the Grand Master his Deputy, and the Grand Treasurer and the Grand Secretary. It offers no opinion as to the rights and wrongs of the Schism. - Ed.

 

----o----

 

The Broken Men of the Great War

 

BY BRO. LEONARD G. COOP, Missouri

 

It is almost a general rule that knowledge of the man is the force that gives life to his cause. For this reason we here give a brief account of the author of this article, in spite of his reluctance to allow us to do so.

 

Bro. Coop was rejected as medically unfit for Service soon after war broke out, and in 1918 was appointed to the U. S. Public Health Service and stationed in the training camps. He was Assistant Superintendent of the Health Department at Camp Kearney, and at the San Diego Naval Training Station, in 1917, and in 1918 was assisting the Draft Board at Fort Worth. In 1919 he entered the Service of the American Red Cross, and was engaged in demobilization and hospital work. In 1923 he was sent to St. Louis to act as Liaison Representative of the American Red Cross at the Veterans' Bureau, and he continued in this position till the end of 1928. A growing dissatisfaction with the functioning of the Veterans' Bureau led him to resign, and to undertake the voluntary and unremunerated task of assisting those veterans who had equitable and well-founded claims, but whose applications had been rejected on technicalities. In this work he has had marked success so far as he has been able to go, and he has, incidentally, also succeeded in very seriously disturbing and annoying the executives of the Bureau; for it seems as i! it may become necessary to consider the merits of a case as well as the comfortable, well-worn precedents and technicalities of the department, and, worst of all, that the beautiful webs of red tape that have been spun may have to be broken through.

 

Something of the condition of affairs may be gathered from the article, restrained as it is, and the author will be only too glad to give further information to anyone interested. And his information is not generalities or impressions, but cases, with all the documents.

 

In addition it may be mentioned that Bro. Coop is a First Lieutenant of the Medical Administration Reserve, and is also a member of the Sojourners' Club.

 

EVEN the casual reader of THE BUILDER may note that mention is frequently made of Masons who have served their country, either during the World War or in other conflicts in which the United States has been engaged from time to time. The pages of history are replete with outstanding Masons who served their country faithfully and well.

 

The World War has passed, but its hideous aftermath has not, and I bespeak space in your valuable publication for a few words concerning what might be termed the "Forgotten Legion," for such there are, even although they may be somewhat unknown to the general public.

 

The United States Veterans' Bureau is the Federal organization charged with the responsibility of furnishing relief to the veterans who became, or have become, disabled in the service of their country, and whose disabilities may be justly considered as "due to service."

 

The laws under which this Bureau functions are generous in their intent, in fact it is doubtful if any country in the world has provided such liberal benefits in recognition of their disabled veterans as obtains in these United States.

 

But unfortunately there is a phase of the administration of the law which is defeating its basic purpose, and, so long as it continues, will bring much dissatisfaction, suffering and privation, all of which are entirely unnecessary.

 

To attempt to condense this very vital matter in a few words is a difficult undertaking, for it is most complex and has numerous ramifications that would lead to much discussion.

 

My object is to stress a few of the main points; based upon eleven years' practical experience on the draft board, in the camps, during demobilization, in hospital work, and six years endeavoring to straighten out some of the more complicated claims of the disabled veterans. What I have to say may be conveniently submitted under three headings, CAUSE, EFFECT, CURE, but before these are discussed it is necessary that we know that a problem does exist, and in what that problem consists.

 

"Figures may lie and liars may figure," so that I shall not discuss dry statistics, but will content myself with making but one statement, and then endeavor to show conditions as they really are.

 

A recent official Veterans ' Bureau report shows that nearly 900,000 claims have been filed for compensation, and out of that number 436,000 have been denied.

 

Allowing for "Gold Bricks," "Compensation Hunters" and claims that may be fairly classed as questionable, a very liberal estimate (even from the standpoint of the Bureau) would be, that 94 per cent of these disallowed claims are without merit. In my opinion such a percentage is grotesquely fantastic, but we will, for the sake of argument, give the Bureau the benefit of the doubt. Now eliminating all of this 94 per cent it may be observed that there yet remains over 26,000 disabled veterans who have been denied compensation.

 

It is my positive belief, based upon a very extensive personal study of the question, that there are over 25,000 veterans who are seriously disabled, whose disabilities are undoubtedly due to their service, but who are receiving no compensation from the Veterans' Bureau.

 

Before discussing the three main headings I desire to make one or two statements that will tend to render my personal conclusions more readily comprehensible.

 

In my estimation the majority of the disabled U. S. veterans of the World War are receiving more compensation than almost any other veterans who participated in that disastrous conflict.

 

Of these there is a substantial number who are receiving compensation which the public might fairly question as to whether their disabilities had any connection with their war service; there is abundant explanation for this statement, but space will not permit its discussion.

 

Last, but not least, there are far too many seriously disabled veterans whose disabilities are undoubtedly due to their service, but who are not only denied compensation, but they and their dependents are in actual want.

 

The reasons for this outrageous condition follow:

 

THE CAUSE

 

It would take far too long to attempt to give all of the causes that have led up to the present deplorable state of affairs. In my judgment they appear in about the following order of importance: lack of preparedness to handle such a huge undertaking; the inability of medical science to assign the precise extent of the disability of a man in any particular case, the exact cause of it, and the absolute extent to which he is disabled; the very questionable possibility of medical and legal minds to state that any given disability is a certain per cent disabling, which is particularly true in the difficult field of mental diseases; salaries, and opportunities for advancement inadequate to attract the best members of the medical profession, or to keep them upon the Medical Staff of the Veterans' Bureau; and last, the proven fact that constant and dogmatic denying of legitimate claims by means of absurd technicalities, which forces more and more liberal legislation, yet which, paradoxical as it may seem, nevertheless leaves thousands uncared for.

 

THE EFFECT

 

Dissatisfaction, injustice, suicides, death (from lack of attention), and an untold amount of unnecessary suffering and privation among the disabled veterans and their dependents, and a constant burden upon local philanthropic agencies that cannot always be carried with any degree of satisfaction to the veteran or to the organizations which are endeavoring to supply has need. And as a result, constant, widespread and thoroughly justified criticism of the Veterans' Bureau.

 

In order to illustrate the injustice in some of the decisions of the Veterans' Bureau (and it must be remembered that the writer has complete information on many other claims fully as meritorious and appealing) the following case is submitted: The name used is fictitious in order that the family of this deceased veteran may be saved embarrassment, authority in writing has been secured to utilize this case merely to assist in placing before the public a concrete example of what may be found in many communities of the United States.

 

A normal boy prior to being inducted into the Army, fond of outdoor sports, stood well in his studies, and won a scholarship in the State Agricultural college prior to service. Following the steps of his father and his elder brothers, he had sought the light of Freemasonry as soon as his age permitted.

 

Entered the Army September 5, 1917, served in the Infantry, was overseas, participated in several of the major engagements and his outfit suffered very heavy losses; he was wounded in action and finally discharged, May 12, 1919, with character "Excellent."

 

The story of the suffering of this boy from the day he was discharged until the day he committed suicide, March 5, 1924 (his mind having become affected due to his experience overseas, with little or no treatment and with no subsequent financial relief), reflects anything but credit on the Veterans' Bureau.

 

The denial of this claim was apparently based upon a diagnosis given at one hospital a thousand miles away from his home, where he was unknown, and where he was a patient for only a few days.

 

At this hospital he was considered a constitutional psychopath. After reading the report of the doctor who examined him, it is amazing that such a diagnosis could have been given on the meager information at the disposal of the Medical Officer in charge of his case.

 

Competent physicians who knew him intimately, both before and after his discharge, and likewise prior to and subsequent to his admittance, in July, 1923, to the hospital above noted, all agree that this diagnosis was absolutely incorrect.

 

Joseph a. Bolland came from a highly respected family. He was one of three brothers (all Masons) who served their country faithfully and well, and although he was greatly needed at home at the time, no complaint was made by either the father (a Mason himself, and at that time over 55 years of age) or by the son, when the call came for the last one of his boys to go.

 

The following excerpts are taken from a letter received by the writer while employed as Liaison Representative of the American Red Cross at the Veterans' Bureau, and as soon as it was received immediate steps were taken to try and secure treatment and compensation. The letter, however, came too late; the boy had blown his head off with a shotgun before any decision was secured from the Bureau officials:

 

Dear Sir: Have you any aid for a disabled ex-service soldier . . . having to work handicapped by other troubles in the way of injuries and worrying. . ., I suffered another attack of nerves . . . life has been one continual round of misery . . . not able to work, I have lost sleep so that I am in a daze. Everybody seems far away. ., . For God's sake get me into a place where I can get cured. I have lost my nerve and can't tell anyone just how I feel. I would rather be dead than be under the high nervous strain I am now.... If I don't get relief before many days it will be all off. one more disappointed man will be gone, so far I have lost in my fight for Government aid. It is driving me to insanity....

 

This letter was written in February, 1924, treatment was denied by the Veterans' Bureau (this will be found in the official records) and he committed suicide March 5, 1924.

 

While this case was being discussed with one of the Bureau physicians, a medical member of the Bureau Rating Board came up and informed us that the boy had committed suicide at his home.

 

This Bureau doctor was asked if he knew him, and stated that he did, very well. He was asked to make a statement for the Bureau files, and excerpts from this doctor's statement, sworn to before a notary public are as follows:

 

. . . known . . . claimant all his life . . . family physician for a number of years . . . had a splendid opportunity to observe this boy prior to his enlistment,, . mentally he was an ordinary, average boy. I at no time noticed any symptoms of a mental subnormality or any psychic reaction. During the summer of 1919, shortly after discharge he was in my office a number of times. All conversations were of a rambling and disconnected nature . ., mentally he was an entirely different individual from that of the boy he was before his enlistment. . ., My impression of this contact with the claimant was that he was not mentally responsible and that he was insane.... I am very strongly of the opinion that the diagnosis of constitutional psychopathic state made in examination of July 19, 1923., at . . . hospital does this claimant a very great injustice, It is my opinion that this claimant has been suffering from some type of psychosis since discharge.

 

In addition two other doctors who had examined him since discharge, one who had him under observation within thirty days after his return from the Army, both gave definite symptoms and diagnoses of a form of insanity.

 

Section 200, of the World War Veterans' Act of 1924, in part, provides:

 

That an ex-service man who is shown to have or, if deceased, to have had, prior to January 1, 1925, neuropsychiatric disease . . . developing a 10 per centum degree of disability or more . . . shall be presumed to have acquired his disability in such Service....

 

You will recall that three physicians pronounced him insane almost from date of discharge, and that he committed suicide March 5, 1924.

 

There is no question of any misconduct disease in this ease and the Bureau has been given ample opportunity to know the facts, these have repeatedly been brought to their attention, in addition the Director of the Bureau has been fully advised several times regarding this particular case and it is now six years since the boy committed suicide and the claim still remains disallowed to date (Feb. 14, 1930) .

 

It is amazing that the Director of the Veterans' Bureau would permit the incidents surrounding this distressing case to be published, when he had it readily within his power to make a correction of this miscarriage of justice; if such had been done, this story would not have been published.

 

This is but another illustration of many that the writer has thoroughly investigated.

 

THE CURE

 

This is surely difficult if not frankly dangerous ground; and those who are not thoroughly familiar with this subject should hesitate before advocating a cure, for much damage may be done unless careful thought has been given; and any "cure" that may be suggested must be based upon abundant actual experience with all that complicates the problem as a whole and in particular.

 

A little medical knowledge is a dangerous thing if used without advice of competent medical men, so, to the uninformed, a little Veterans' Bureau knowledge may do more harm than good.

 

There is a constant stream of bills being presented to Congress, either entirely new, or yet further liberalizing the present laws covering relief for disabled veterans, and the cost is running into enormous sums. A great deal of the proposed new legislation will simply make a bad matter worse, and the current and ultimate cost will be staggering.

 

One of the suggestions I would urge is to endeavor to get your Senator or Representative to take up this case as presented, name and compensation number will be sent to him upon request; or if he prefers, one within his own district that illustrates the injustices that are now so common, make a direct issue of the claim, follow it through at the Veterans' Bureau and demand punishment of those responsible for the decision.

 

There is one bill recently presented by Representative Robert G. Simmons, Nebraska (H. R. 9112), which is now being considered by the Committee on World War Veterans Iegislation, which I am inclined to think will go far towards correcting the injustices now so prevalent, it is suggested that the reader secure a copy of this bill and endeavor to have his representative in Congress vote in its favor. I do not believe it is a "cure all," but it will at least give some measure of relief to those who are now uncompensated and will, I predict, force the Veterans' Bureau to review thoroughly many denied claims, which they will rectify before they allow them to be presented to this "Reviewing Board" provided for in the bill, which while it is a part of the Veterans' Bureau, will operate under a separate law, and will have full power to make decisions based on good judgment and equity, and will not be hampered by the fantastic technicalities that are such a fetich with the present administrators of the Veterans ' Bureau rules and regulations.

 

The Director of the Veterans' Bureau, Gen. Frank T. Hines, has the power, if he elects to use it, to allow relief to thousands of disabled veterans who are now uncompensated; repeated efforts have been made by many organizations and prominent individuals (with but scant success), to get him to insist that his own orders, and oft repeated wishes, are carried out with unvarying consistency.

 

In closing I would like to mention that delayed action, if persisted in, can be fully as fatal as an adverse decision, and the numerous needless delays, and their results, instances of which the writer can furnish in abundant measure, will prove this statement beyond the question of a doubt.

 

----o----

 

The Real Cagliostro His Memorial to the French Parliament

 

BY BRO. CYRUS FIELD WILLARD

 

BEFORE me as I write lies a little pamphlet, four and a quarter inches wide and six and three-quarters long. It is nearly one hundred and forty-four years old.

 

It bears the date of 1786, and though no place of publication is given, it was evidently printed at Paris. It was picked up at an auction sale in London by the agents of that well-known Mason and bibliophile, the late R.P. Bower. his collection of old and rare books was acquired by the library of the Grand Lodge of Iowa in 1882, this pamphlet among them. By the kindness of the Iibrarian, Bro. C. C. Hunt, the present writer was permitted to borrow it and translate it.

 

It contains 80 pages, which are roughly cut and somewhat yellowed by age, though in the main it is remarkably well preserved. It has been bound into a cover to protect the original paper covers. Inside this outer cover is the book-plate of Theodore S. Parvin, the founder of the Iowa Masonic Library, and its first Iibrarian. This has the legend "Founded in 1844," and the motto, Vita sine litteris Mors est. "Iife without books (letters) is death."

 

On the outside of the original paper cover is a short title, which is rendered into English as follows:

 

MEMORIAL OF THE COUNT DE CAGLIOSTRO

 

"M de Cagliostro asks only for tranquility and safety: Hospitality assures him these." Extract from a letter written by the Count de Vergennes, minister of Foreign Affairs, to M. Gerard, Judge of Strasburg, March 13, 1783.

 

Inside this comes the title page, which runs to greater length, but repeats much of the short title. It is thus rendered:

 

MEMORIAL FOR THE COUNT CAGLIOSTRO Accused AGAINST M. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Accuser

 

In the presence of M. the Cardinal de Rohan, the Countess de la Motte and other Co-Defenders.

 

"M. de Cagliostro asks only for Tranquility and Safety. Hospitality assures him these." Extract from a letter written by the Count de Vergennes, Minister of Foreign Affairs, to M. Gerard, Judge of Strasburg, March 13, 1783.

 

At the foot of the page is the date, 1786. No place of publication is given as was noted above, but from a reference in the text of the petition it appears that it was printed at Paris.

 

There has recently been a revival of interest in Cagliostro, in part stimulated by the misleading, inaccurate and salacious work by von Guenther, a translation of which has recently been widely sold in this country. The original work appeared in Germany at the same time as the mad attacks on Freemasonry made by the quondam Chief of Staff of the Kaiser's armies, General Ludendorff. Von Guenther shows himself so willing to misrepresent and malign Masonry in his work that we can hardly avoid the suspicion that he was actuated by similar motives as Ludendorff, and that it may be regarded as part of the great push, on a world wide front, that is now being made against the Fraternity by its enemies.

 

A quotation from the work of Dr. Marc Haven, Le Maitre Inconnu; Cagliostro, " a historical and critical study, " which was published in Paris in 1910, will be in order here, as it exposes the source and inspiration of the continuous attacks that have been made on Cagliostro, which in itself is a most curious phenomenon. Why should a man who never injured anyone, or did any harm, be pursued through the centuries with such malignity? For it must be remembered that in spite of the torrents of abuse and accusation that have been poured upon him not one single instance of actual wrong doing has ever been alleged, excepting the famous affair of the necklace, with which his Memorial deals, and in which even his enemies have been forced to admit his complete innocence.

 

Returning to what Dr. Haven has to say, it will be recalled that Cagliostro went to Italy in 1789 and was arrested by the Inquisition in Rome, by which he was condemned as a Freemason, heretic and sorcerer. In defense of its action, or as a further attack on Freemasonry, the Inquisition caused to be written, and published, a Life of Joseph Balsamo. It is the work to which Dr. Haven refers.

 

Finally the Holy Office (the Inquisition) which at the time of his capture, knowing that it held in him one of the open or secret heads of Freemasonry, wished to make a double stroke -  to tarnish forever the memory of this representative of liberal ideas which were then boiling in so many minds, and on the other hand to cause to fall on the entire Order any discredit thrown on the Grand Master of Egyptian Freemasonry.

 

The "Life of Joseph Balsamo," published by the direction of the Holy office as an apology for its inquisitorial action, is a masterpiece of hate and hypocrisy; the libels of Saehi and Morande and of Madame de la Motte pale beside the address of its prosecutor, and yet these three persons have not been sparing of Cagliostro.

 

But perfected by the Holy Office the work takes on a greater amplitude. All that they could gather of the most scandalous nature from the above named authors are found therein, mined to what the Inquisition was able to wring out, by promises or by torture, from Cagliostro and his wife, that was compromising

 

Add to that, all that the Italian priests in 1791 (when this alleged Life was published), when frightened by the French Revolution, were able to invent against Freemasonry in general and against the founder of a mystic rite in particular, and one will have some idea of the violence of this libel. The skillfullness with which the writer, by playing on his words, confounds, designedly, religion and Catholicism, atheism and heterodoxy, liberalism and skepticism, is such that the reader is led insensibly to follow him and accept his conclusions, if he is not cautious and does not discover the ruse.

 

It is this work, which was translated into other languages, and published in different countries practically at the same time as it appeared in Rome, that has served a basis for practically every notice of Cagliostro that has since appeared. By saying he was Balsamo it was possible to saddle Cagliostro with the criminal deeds of the former. But since the fresh investigation of the subject by W. H. K. Trowbridge, in Miseries and Mysteries of a Master of Magic, it is fairly well established that this identification is an impossible one, and that the Holy Office must have known that it was. Dr. Haven, too, shows that Balsamo, was a dark, ugly man, with a crushed and flattened nose. Cagliostro was fair, with a fresh colored face and a clear complexion. His appearance was agreeable and even handsome. The sculptor Houdon, who came to America to make the well-known statue of Washington, made a bust of Cagliostro, which shows him to have had a slightly acquiline nose. Dr. Haven reproduces a number of portraits and cites other evidence to show that Cagliostro and Balsamo were two different men, who did not even superficially resemble each other.

 

In the usual accounts of his life are to be found references to his own statement, and sometimes brief quotations or a condensed resume of it are given. From these the reader naturally gains the idea that the whole story is preposterous. Indeed the Encyclopedia Brtftanica is doubly unfair, for it says that in the affair of the necklace " Cagliostro escaped conviction by the matchless impudence of his defense," but that "he was imprisoned for other reasons in the Bastille." The French Parliament was hardly a body to acquit anyone of a serious crime with implications of high politics, because of the impudence of the accused, whether matchless or not. Nor was there any other reason for his imprisonment in the Bastille except the accusation that he was a party to the theft of the necklace, and as soon as his innocence was discovered he was released. That the Countess de la Motte was really implicated in the famous fraud, the Affair of the Necklace, is certain. That the accusations against the Cardinal de Rohan and Cagliostro were desperate attempts to shift the blame elsewhere is equally certain. In modern criminal parlance, they were to be "framed."

 

After having gained one's impressions of what Cagliostro was and did, from such accounts as these, it is like coming to a totally different climate to read his own account. Extraordinary as his story is, incredible as it may be judged, it is at least consistent. But it will be better to leave it to each reader to form his own opinion for himself.

 

The memorial proper begins on the fifth page of the pamphlet, and is headed thus:

 

PETITION TO THE PARLIAMENT IN CHAMBERS ASSEMBLED Declared to the Attorney-General the 24th February, 1786. To Serve as an Addition to the Memorial Distributed the 18th of the same month:

 

TO OUR LORDS OE PARLIAMENT

 

IN CHAMBERS ASSEMBLED.

 

Humbly Implores Alexander, Count de Cagliostro, in his own Name and as Husband and Exercising the Rights of Seraphina Feliciani, His Wife.

 

Saying that he has every reason to hope that the first Senate of France will not reject the Petition of a Foreigner who asks for the liberty of his Wife, who is dying in the dungeons of the Bastille.

 

The Petitioner and his Wife have been arrested by orders of the King, and taken to the Bastille, August 22, 1785.

 

They have learned that a few days after their being taken away, the Court, on the information of one of the gentlemen, was occupied with the fate of the prisoners, and that the Assembly had been continued to an early date.

 

The Grand Chamber assembled and having since been made acquainted with the details of the offense when the administrative warrants [lettres de cachet] were issued, the Court has not taken up the continued deliberations on this subject.

 

The Count de Cagliostro implores it to be kind enough to take into consideration as soon as possible the alarming circumstances in which he finds himself.

 

The Petitioner asks nothing for himself. Decreed under arrest, he will wait in chains the moment when Justice, at last undeceived, will render a brilliant testimony to his innocence.

 

But his wife is neither decreed against nor accused; she has not, they say, even been called to testify, and yet she has been confined for six months in the Bastille without the Petitioner being able to obtain permission to see her.

 

Today when it is no longer possible for those who surround him to conceal from him the condition of this unfortunate wife and the danger which threatens her life, the Petitioner is penetrated with the most profound affliction and seeks shelter with confidence in the hearts of the magistrates and beseeches them in the name of the Sovereign Judge to be kind enough not to betray her and to convey to the feet of the Throne his respectful protest.

 

The Parliament is not only the dispenser of the supreme Justice of the King; if it is by it that the will of the legislator is manifested to the People, it is also by it that the groans of the people come to the ear of the Sovereign.

 

The Petitioner asks that Parliament will today be kind enough to use in her favor the most beautiful of its rights - the right to enlighten authority and lighten oppression.

 

The Petitioner and his wife, it is true, are both foreigners. But since when was it forbidden to oppressed foreigners to make their groaning voices heard in the Courts of Justice?

 

All Europe has its open eyes on this famous law suit, at whose beginning my wife and I were taken to the Bastille. The slightest circumstance becomes fuel for the universal curiosity. The Parliament knows of the innocence and the imprisonment of the Countess de la Cagliostro, and the Petitioner has informed it publicly of the illness which threatens her life. Will it allow her to perish without being able to receive the help of the medicinal art exercised by her husband? And if it be true that the latter has had the happiness to snatch from the arms of Death a thousand Frenchmen, will he be condemned to suffer his poor unfortunate wife to perish near him without being able to give her either attention or consolation?

 

The Petitioner has tried every means without avail to make known to the Dispensers of Power the frightful situation in which he now finds himself. He thought that the Memorial which he caused to be distributed some days ago, which carried in it the unanswerable proofs of his innocence and that of his wife, would bring at least the liberty of the latter. Vain hope ! The public voice is for him, and yet his wife is dying in the Bastille without his being permitted to receive her last breath, or to attempt some means whereby he might restore her to life.

 

The only resource which now remains to the Petitioner is in the justice and generosity of the Magistrates. Informed as they are of all the circumstances of this Trial, they can testify to the innocence of the Countess de Cagliostro. Should the Petitioner fear refusal when the only favor he asks is that the Truth be made to reach the feet of the Throne?

 

The Lady la Tour, sister of the Count de la Motte, who was detained for several months at the Bastille, has just been set at liberty. Is she any more innocent than the Countess de Cagliostro or should the latter have less right to the kindness and justice of the King because she is a foreigner, and because she is my wife?

 

Far from us be such an idea, for the sentiments which animate His Majesty are known to all Europe. They are particularly so known to the Petitioner for they are recorded in the three letters written in his name in 1783 by M. the Keeper of the Seals, by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of War.

 

It is on the faith of this Royal Protection and of the promised hospitality that the Petitioner came to live in France with the intention to here end his days.

 

Persecuted, arrested and calumniated, he has not despaired of Justice and is persuaded that the French magistrates will not act contrary to the desires of a foreigner who, without complaining of the error which fetters his liberty, limits his wishes to the liberty of his wife.

 

Do they fear on the part of the Countess de Cagliostro troublesome proceedings, vain solicitations and powerless tears? Ah, well. Let the gates of the Bastille be closed on her, but let at least her unhappy husband have the sad satisfaction of giving her relief, and if that is of no avail, then that of closing her eyes in death.

 

THIS BEING CONSIDERED, MY LORDS, May it please you to give permission to the Petitioner to put the lady, Countess de Cagliostro, his wife, under the protection and safeguard of the Court and to order in consequence that the Court will interpose its good offices with His Majesty to the effect of obtaining the revocation of the lettre-de-cachet by virtue of which the said Countess de Cagliostro is detained in the prison of the Bastille, with the permission for her to come to see the Petitioner when the state of her health will permit; and you will do well.

 

(Signed) THE COUNT DE CAGLIOSTRO, M. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, M. THILORIER, Barrister. BRAZEN. Solicitor.

 

MEMORIAL

 

I have fulfilled everywhere the duties of a citizen; everywhere I have respected religion, the laws and the government. Such is my life history.

 

Settled for the past six years with an intellectual, generous and hospitable people, I thought I had found my adopted country. I congratulated myself in advance on the good I could do to my new fellow citizens.

 

Like a flash of lightning the illusion has been destroyed and I have been thrown headlong into the dungeons of the Bastille. My wife, the most amiable and virtuous of women, has been drawn into the same abyss. Thick walls and multiplied bolts separated her from me; she groans and I cannot hear her.

 

I question my jailers; they are silent. Perhaps, alas, she no longer exists. A feeble and suffering creature, how will she able to live six months in a place where men have need of all their strength, all their courage and all their resignation to fight against despair. But I am entertaining the reader with my troubles and forget I am ordered to vindicate myself.

 

I am decreed prise de corps(1). What crime have I committed? of what am I accused? Who is my accuser? Are there any witnesses testifying against me, I do not know. They do not even give me any knowledge of the complaint on which this decree was rendered, and yet they want me to vindicate myself How ward off the blows struck by an invisible power? They answer that the criminal laws wish it thus. I hold my peace, and bow myself, with groans, before a law so harsh and alarming for accused innocence.

 

Then I can only suspect the kind of offense of which I am accused. If I am wrong, then I will have fought creatures of the imagination and shall have spoken, at least, in favor of Truth, and put the sound part of the Public in a state to understand the libels circulated against an unfortunate man, when he is a prisoner in chains and threatened with the double sword of Justice and regal authority.

 

STATE OF THE CASE

 

It appears certain that Messrs. Bohmer and Bassanges have delivered to M. the Cardinal de Rohan, a necklace of diamonds of the value of 1,600,000 francs;

 

It is also equally certain that M. the Cardinal de Rohan announced to the jewelers that he was only the negotiator of this purchase, that the real buyer was the Queen and that he showed them a writing to this effect which contained the conditions of the sale and in the margin of which were the words " good - good - approved - Marie Antoinette de France?

 

The Queen has declared that she has never given any orders for the purchase of the necklace, that she never approved any condition of purchase and that she has not received the necklace.

 

There exists then an assured body of offense. What is this offense?

 

Common sense and my counsellors tell me that this is not a real forgery. No one has sought to imitate the writing of the Queen, and the signature which deluded Bohmer and Bassanges is not even the one the Queen is in the habit of using.

 

What is it then? It is a supposition of a signature, imagined in order to deceive the jewelers and engage them to deliver, on credit, jewels of great value, which they otherwise might not have delivered, if they had known that it was intended for someone other than the Queen.

 

What is the penalty for this offense? For the abuse of a sacred name? I do not know and have no interest in knowing. In this affair I confine myself to asking justice for myself and forgiveness for the guilty. Resigned innocence has the right to express itself thus.

 

But who is the guilty one ?

 

Did the Cardinal de Rohan know that the signature was false? Did he know that the Queen had given no orders for buying the necklace? Did he know that the necklace would not be delivered to the Queen, after all? Has he not been the innocent author of a deceit of which he was the first victim? Did he not believe, was he not obliged to believe, that he had been chosen as the negotiator of a transaction pleasing to the Queen and that Her Majesty wished to envelope it with the shadows of secrecy for some time ?

 

Involved, I do not know how, in such great interests, I shall not deny on this occasion the title of friend to men who have conferred it on me at some other time and which I have perhaps deserved. I shall, however, defend my own innocence without taking sides. Slandered in the strangest manner by a woman to whom I have never done any wrong, I utter the most sincere wish that she may be able to vindicate herself. I shall be happy if Justice finds no guilty one to punish in this affair.

 

M. the Cardinal de Rohan has claimed that he was deceived by the Countess de la Motte. The latter, before there was any decree, hastened to have a memorial appear in whieh she accused me of swindle, sorcery, and theft, and particularly of having coneeived and executed this project in order to ruin the Cardinal de Rohan and take possession of the necklace of which I was the depositary, in order to enlarge with it the occult treasure of an unheard-of fortune.

 

Such in a few words are the accusations inserted in the examination of the prosecutor which caused my wife and myself to be taken to the dungeons of the Bastille, and which she has repeated sinee in a memorial, imagined at leisure and printed with atrocious details which caused a decree of prise de corps to issue against me.

 

Since I am obliged to do so, I shall answer these charges, which under other circumstances I would scorn to notice.

 

But first I believe that I should describe myself as I really am. It is time that people should know who is the Count de Cagliostro about whom there have been circulated so many extravagant stories. As long as it was permitted for me to live as an obscure man, I constantly refused to satisfy public curiosity. Today, when I am in chains and when the law demands an account of my actions, I shall speak, and will say with frankness what I know of myself. Perhaps the story of my life will not be the least important evidence in this vindication.

 

CONFESSION OF THE COUNT DE CAGLIOSTRO

 

I do not know the place where I was born nor the parents who gave me birth. Different circumstances in my life have aroused in me doubts and suspicions which the reader may share. But I repeat that all my researches in this respect have resulted only in giving me, it is true, great but vague and uncertain ideas as to my birth.

 

I passed the first part of my childhood in the city of Medinah, in Arabia. I was educated there under the name of Acharat, a name which I kept in my travels in Asia and Africa. I lived in the palace of the Mufti Salahaym (2).

 

I remember perfectly that I had around me four persons, a tutor aged from 55 to 60 years, named Althotas, and three servants, one white, who served me as valet, and two blacks, of whom one or other was with me day and night.

 

My tutor always told me that I was left an orphan at the age of three months, and that my parents were noble and Christians, but he kept the most absolute secrecy as to their name and the place of my birth. Some words spoken at random have made me suspect that I was born at Malta, but this is a matter which it has always been impossible to verify.

 

Althotas, whose name it is impossible for me to pronounce without emotion, had for me the care and affection of a father. It was a pleasure for him to cultivate the tendencies for the sciences which I showed. I can say that he possessed them all, from the most abstract to that of ornaments of dress. Botany, physics and medicine were those in which I made the most progress.

 

It was he who taught me to adore God, to love and serve my neighbor, and to respect religion and the law in all places .

 

I wore the Mahometan dress as he did, but the True Religion was impressed on our hearts, although we professed Mahometanism in appearance.

 

The Mufti came to see me often; he treated me with kindness and appeared to have a great deal of esteem for my tutor.

 

The latter taught me most of the languages of the East. He spoke to me often of the pyramids of Egypt and of their immense subterranean chambers excavated by the ancient Egyptians, in order to contain and protect against the ravages of time the precious deposit of human knowledge.

 

When I attained my twelfth year the desire to travel and see for myself the marvels with which he entertained me took possession of me to such an extent that Medinah and the sports of my boyhood lost all charm in my eyes.

 

One day Althotas announced to me that at last we were going to leave Medinah and begin our travels. He caused a caravan to be prepared, and we departed after taking leave of the Mufti, who was pleased to testify to us his regrets in the most courteous manner.

 

We arrived at Mecca and alighted at the palace of the Sherif (3). They made me dress in clothing more magnificent than any which I had worn up to that time. On the third day after my arrival, my tutor presented me to this sovereign, who gave me the most tender caresses. At the sight of this Prince, an inexpressible emotion took possession of me and my eyes were filled with the sweetest tears I have ever shed in all my life. I was witness to the effect he made to retain his own composure. The moment was one of the events of my existence which it is impossible for me to recall without the most vivid emotions.

 

I remained three years at Mecca. Not a day passed that I was not admitted to the Sherif and each day saw his attachment increase and my gratitude also. Often I surprised him with his eyes fixed on me, then raising them toward Heaven with all the marks of pity and emotion. I turned from him, pensive and devoured with a fruitless curiosity. I did not dare to question my tutor, who reprimanded me with severity as if I could not without offense seek to know the authors of my being and the place of my birth.

 

At night I sometimes talked with the negro who slept in my apartment, but in vain I tried to pierce his secrecy. If I spoke of my parents he would become deaf to all the questions I might ask him. one night when I pressed him harder than usual, he told me that if I ever left Mecca I was menaced with the greatest of misfortunes, and above all I should beware of the city of Trebizond (4).

 

My desire for travel prevailed over his gloomy forebodings. I was weary of the regular life I led at the Court of the Sherif.

 

One day I saw him enter the apartment I occupied. My astonishment was extreme at receiving such a favor. He clasped me in his arms with more tenderness than he had ever shown, recommended to me that I should never cease to adore the Eternal One and assured me that in serving Him faithfully I would finish by being happy and would know my fate. Then he said, bathing my face with his tears: "Adieu, unfortunate child of Nature."

 

These words and the tone in which he pronounced them will remain eternally engraved in my memory. It was the last time I was able to enjoy his presence. A caravan expressly prepared for me was waiting for us; I departed and left Mecca, to return no more.

 

I began my travels with Egypt, and visited the famous pyramids, which are to the eyes of superficial observers only enormous masses of marble and granite. I made the acquaintance of the heads of the different Temples, who were kind enough to introduce me into places where ordinary travelers never penetrated. Later I traveled through the principal kingdoms of Africa and Asia, during the course of three years.

 

This is not the place to give the public knowledge of the different observations that I made in my travels and the truly extraordinary adventures that happened to me. I believe that this part of my story should be put off to a more favorable moment.

 

The necessity for my vindication being the only thing which should now occupy my mind, I shall speak only of my travels in Europe and shall name the persons who have known me there, and it will be easy for those whom my fate may interest to verify the greater part of the facts I am going to relate.

 

I arrived in 1766 at the Island of Rhodes, with my tutor and the three servants who had been with me since my childhood. There I embarked on a French vessel which set sail for Malta.

 

In spite of the rule that requires vessels coming from the East to wait in quarantine for forty days, I obtained permission to land at the end of two days at Malta. Grand Master Pinto gave me, as well as my tutor, lodgings in his palace, and I recall that the apartment I occupied was near his laboratory.

 

The first thing that the Grand Master did was to invite the Chevalier d 'Aquino, of the illustrious house of the Princess of Caramaniea, to be kind enough to accompany me everywhere and to do the honors of the island for me. I assumed then for the first time, with the European dress, the name of Count de Cagliostro, and was not a little surprised to see Althotas invested with the habit of an ecclesiastic and decorated with the Cross of Malta.

 

The Chevalier d'Aquino had me make the acquaintance of all the Grand Crosses of the Order of the Knights of Malta. I even remember to have dined with M. the Bailiff de Rohan, today the Grand Master. I was then far from foreseeing that twenty years later I would be arrested and taken to the Bastille for having been honored with the friendship of a Prince of the same name.

 

I have every reason to believe that the Grand Master was informed as to my origin. He spoke to me several times of the Sherif of Mecca and Trebizond, but never wished to talk plainly on this subject. Nevertheless he always treated me with the greatest respect and offered me the most rapid advancement in the order of Knights of Malta in case I should decide to take the vows. But my desire to travel and the influence which inclined me to practice medicine made me refuse offers so generous and honorable.

 

It was in Malta that I had the misfortune to lose my best friend, my master, the wisest and most enlightened of mortals, the venerable Althotas. Some moments before his death he grasped me by the hand and said, in a voice nearly extinct: " My son, always have before your eyes the fear of God and love of your neighbor; you will very soon learn the truth of all I have taught you."

 

The island where I had lost the friend who had long held the place of Father to me now became an insufferable place of abode. I asked permission of the Grand Master to leave it and travel through Europe. He consented to this with reluctance, and made me promise that I would return to Malta some day. The Chevalier d'Aquino was kind enough to take charge of accompanying me in my travels and supplying all my wants. In fact I departed with him. We visited at first Sicily, where the Knight procured me the acquaintanceship of the nobility of the country. From that place we visited different islands of the Italian archipelago and after looking over the Mediterranean again, we landed at Naples, the native country of the Chevalier d'Aquino. His affairs requiring some individual journeys, I departed alone for Rome with letters of credit on Sir Bellonne, a banker of that city.

 

I resolved to preserve the most perfect incognito after arriving in this capital of the Christian world. One day when I was shut up at my home, occupied in perfecting myself in the Italian language, my valet announced the visit of the secretary of Cardinal Orsini. This secretary was charged with the duty of asking me to go and see His Eminence, and in fact I went there at once. The Cardinal showed me all the courtesies imaginable, invited me several times to dine at his house and made me acquainted with most of the Cardinals and Roman Princes; notably the Cardinal of York (5) and the Cardinal Ganganelli, Pope since May, 1769, under the name of Clement XIV.

 

Pope Rezzonieo (6) then occupied the chair of St. Peter, and having expressed a desire to know me, I had the honor several times to be admitted to private conferences with His Holiness.

 

I was then in my twenty-second year. Chance procured me the acquaintance of a young unmarried lady of quality, named Serafina Felichiani. She was scarcely emerged from childhood; her budding charms kindled in my heart a passion that sixteen years of married life have only tended to strengthen. It is this poor unfortunate creature, whom neither her virtues nor her innocence nor her condition as foreigner was able to save from the harshness of a captivity as cruel as it was undeserved, who is my wife.

 

Having neither the time nor the inclination to write volumes, I will not enter into the details of the travels I have made in all the kingdoms of Europe, but will content myself to cite persons by whom I have been known. The greater part of them are still living. I can proudly invoke their testimony. Let them say if ever I have committed a single act unworthy of a man of honor: let them say if I have ever solicited a single favor of them; if ever I have begged the protection of the sovereigns who have been curious to know me; let them say finally if in all places and at all times I have done any other thing than cure the sick without pay and assist the poor.

 

The persons whom I have known more particularly are:

 

In Spain the Duke of Albe, his son, the Duke de Veseard, the Count de Prelata, the Duke de Medina Coeli, the Count de Riglas, kinsman of the Count d'Aranda, ambassador of His Catholic Majesty near the Court of France. In Portugal: The Count of San Vincenti, by whom I was presented at Court. My banker at Lisbon was named Anselmo la Cruce.

 

At London: The Nobility and the People.

 

In Holland: The Duke of Brunswick, to whom I have had the honor of being presented.

 

In Courland: The reigning Duke and Duchess.

 

All the Courts of Germany.

 

At St. Petersburg: The Prince Potemkin, M. Narisoin, General Galacin, the General of the Cossacks, the General Medicino and the Chevalier de Cerberon, charge d'affairs for France.

 

In Poland: The Countess Comceska, the Count Gevuski, the Princess who is now the Princess of Nassau, etc.

 

I will also say that it has happened to me at times to travel under different titles. I was called successively the Count Harat, the Count Fenix, the Marquis D'Anna. But the name under which I am most generally known in Europe is that of the Count de Cagliostro.

 

NOTES.

 

(1.) Under the French law of the old regime the king, and his ministers, could arbitrarily arrest and imprison anyone, without a regular information or accusation of any offense. The authority for such proceeding was called a lettre de cachet, and its execution was often a sort of legal kidnapping. It was a power naturally Subject to great abuse. Prise de corps, literally "take of body," may be taken as roughly equivalent to "prisoner" in the text It is almost verbally the same as habeas corpus, "thou shalt have the body," but the use of the terms is diametrically different. In one ease it was the authorities who took the body of the prisoner and held it at their pleasure, in the other it was the prisoner's friends who could demand it, unless he were properly indicted and convicted in a court of justice. The whole contrast of English and old French law is summed up in these two phrases.

 

(2.) Multi, is the title of a semi-religious official in Mohammedan countries. He corresponds to some degree to a Doctor of Canon Law, he is the repository of the law, which the Cadis or judges were bound to administer. The Mufti of the sacred city of Medinah is a very important person indeed.

 

(3.) The Sherif is the hereditary prince or ruler of Mecca. He is the head of a family or clan, the Sherifs, which claims descent from Mahomet through the line of Hasan, the son of Ali, the fourth of the Caliphs.

 

(4.) Trebizond is a city on the southeast shore of the Black Sea. It was originally a Greek colony. It is important as a centre for the converging trade routes from Central Asia and the far East.

 

(5.) The Cardinal of York was the brother of Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender, whose alleged influence on the development of the hauts grades and Chivalric Orders of Masonry has been so much discussed.

 

(6.) Clement XIII, who died of poison in 1169.

 

(To be continued)

 

----o----

 

Mason Locke Weems of Lodge No. 50, Dumfries

 

BY BRO. JAMES J. TYLER, Ohio

 

MASON LOCKE WEEMS is chiefly distinguished as the author of the first biography of Washington, a book that ran through twenty editions in the author's lifetime and which eventually reached over eighty.

 

His Life of Washington, says Dean, "grew by additions and embellishments, from a pamphlet of eighty pages to a volume of two hundred pages. " The original pamphlet was issued in 1800, about three months after the passing of Washington. The now famous cherry tree episode did not appear until the fifth edition of the work was put out, which was in 1806.

 

Until the year 1808, and at a time when men were still most reticent about their  connection with Masonry, the titlepage of each successive edition carried the legend: "of Lodge No. 50, Dumfries." After 1808 this was changed to: "formerly rector of Mount Vernon parish."

 

In addition to his Life of Washington, Weems was the author of the earliest biographies of Franklin, Penn and General Francis Marion. He also wrote many tracts about gambling, drunkenness, dueling and a variety of similar subjects. Before 1902, Ford said of him:

 

No man whose writings have passed through some two hundred editions, or of whose productions, some two hundred and fifty thousand copies have been sold deserves complete neglect. Such literary attempts merit a place in the archaeology of literature if nowhere else. No history of the American people or their literature can be complete without noticing the man and his work.

 

He was born in 1759 at Marshes Seat, Herring Bay, Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and was the youngest of the nineteen children of David Weems. Of his early childhood nothing is known. During the years 1770 to 1775 he attended, and graduated from, Kent County School at Chestertown, Maryland. The Rev. Wm. Smith, who was married to Weem's cousin, Rebecca Moore, began acting as rector at Chestertown in 1779 and took over the proprietorship of this school, which in 1782 he developed into Washington College.

 

From 1777 to 1779 Weems studied medicine and surgery at Edinburgh, Scotland, but there is no record of his having received a degree. There is also no current record of his activities during the Revolution, and in his later writings no references occur to his life during these dramatic years. During the years 1780-1784 he was again in England, this time to study for the ministry. He was admitted to the priesthood, September 12, 1784, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and returned home, honored as one of the first Americans ordained as an Episcopal minister without taking the oath of allegiance to the British crown.

 

He filled several charges, but his liberalism made him unpopular, and about 1790 he began his active career as a traveling book- agent. He established a connection with Mathew Carey, the famous Philadelphia publisher, and of this Kellock writes:

 

The Episcopal clergyman and the Irish Roman Catholic publisher struck up a solid business friendship from the start, and Weems went forth on the roads with a good Stock of volumes bearing Carey's imprint. Their business associations continued, with one or two intervals, for nearly a third of a century.

 

The next thirty-six years of his life he spent traveling the almost impassible roads in his old Jersey wagon, and, at Masonic gatherings,

 

. . . on courthouse steps, in wayside inn or cottage kitchen, he preached the gospel, entertained with a story, played his fiddle and sold books - occasionally a Bible, a prayer book, a hymn book, but generally books of his own writing.

 

Among his letters to Mathew Carey, published in Mason Locke Weems, His Works and Ways, there are two Masonic references:

 

Trenton, December 25, 1801. Hope to vend some tomorrow at Masonic meeting 16 miles from this.

 

Trenton, February 19, 1802. Tomorrow set off for Newtown to be ready to utter the Masonic Oration. God grant I may sell some Bibles, etc., etc. From Newtown I propose to dash strait away for Lancaster.

 

In July, 1795, Weems married Fanny Ewall, a daughter of Colonel Jesse Ewall of Dumfries, Virginia. After his marriage he made his home in that town and a few years later, probably after the death of Colonel Ewall, he moved to "Belle Air, " the Ewall mansion in the hill country five miles back of Dumfries. This three-story house of English brick is still standing.

 

Dumfries, a Potomac River town and port, was founded by Scotch merchants engaged in the tobacco trade, who named it after the home town of Robert Burns. It was the first town founded in Prince William County, its charter dating baek to 1749. Ten years later it became the county seat and before long boasted a public warehouse, busy shops, and even a theatre. Then came the Revolution, and most of the Scotch traders returned to the old country, and the tobacco trade was diverted to Alexandria, a more convenient and central port for the back country. The county seat was not removed until 1822, but long before that, Dumfries had but a shadow of its former glory. On the Board of Trustees or City Couneil, which was given in the instrument of incorporation, we find such men as Richard Henry Lee, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, and Colonel Henry Lee, the father of Light Horse Harry and the grandfather of Robert E. Lee.

 

When Weems was at home he occasionally rode over from Dumfries and held  services in Pohick Church in which, years before, George Washington had  worshipped and served as a vestryman of Truro Parish. After the Revolution this  parish had no regular rector. Washington at this time attended Christ Church at  Alexandria. Weems saw the value of identifying his name with Pohick Church,  and Hart states that:

 

Upon this slender connection he based the title which he later assumed of  "formerly rector of Mount Vernon parish." Bishop Meade in his "Churches,  Ministers and Families of Old Virginia," declares that "to suppose him to have  been a kind of private chaplain to such a man as Washington . . . is the greatest  of incongruities."

 

Wroth states, however, that Weems:

 

. . . Knew Washington personally, corresponded with him, and in company with  their common friend, Dr. Craik, stayed at least once with him at Mount Vernon,  and he was intimate with the Reverend Lee Massey who was Washington's  rector and associate for many years.

 

Reference is made by Sidney Hayden in his Washington and His Masonic  Contpeers, to a tract by Weems, published in 1799, which he states was the last  written correspondence with Washington in which Masonic allusions were made.  Weems' letter to Washington, asking permission to dedicate the pamphlet to him  and Washington's reply are given in full. Weems' letter closes as follows:

 

On the square of Justice and on the scale of Love, I remain honored general,  your sincere friend, and Masonic brother.   M L.Weems.

 

Washington's reply granting permission simply ends:

 

With respect, your obed't servant. G. Washington.

 

The tract when published was entitled:

 

The Philanthropist, or Political Peace-Maker between all honest men of both  parties. With the recommendation prefixed by George Washington in his own  handwriting, by M. L. Seems, Lodge No. 50, Dumfries.

 

A letter from Bro. Chas. H. Callahan, P. G. M., Grand Lodge of Virginia and  author of Washington, the Man and the Mason, states:

 

"In reference to Lodge No. 50, will say that this was organized in 1795 with  Colonel George Deneale as first Worshipful Master. Deneale afterwards moved  to Alexandria and became prominent in Masonic and public affairs. As Colonel of  Alexandria militia, he commanded the troops at Washington's funeral, was on  the committee to arrange for that ceremony and afterwards as Clerk of the Court  recorded Washington's will. At this time (1799) he was Junior Warden of No. 22  of this city (Alexandria) and succeeded Dr. Dick as Worshipful Master, serving  for thirteen years. Somewhere in my papers I have the names of all the officers  of Dumfries' Lodge which went out of existence and surrendered its charter in  1846. Strange to say, as a boy living in Dumfries, I personally knew the last  three stationed officers; they were Colonel Basil Brawner, prominent citizen of  Prince William County, in which Dumfries is located, although at that time not a  resident of the town, living about three miles outside; Messrs. William and  Robert Merehant, who were respectively Senior and Junior Warden. A mark  master's jewel in possession of a son of Mr. Robert Merchant shows that the  capitulary degrees were also conferred there, but as this was prior to the  organization of our Grand Chapter, they were undoubtedly conferred in the Blue  Lodge as was the case elsewhere.

 

"The meager returns of this old Lodge, which are on file in our Grand Lodge  Library, indicate the Colonial importance of Dumfries which today is only a  scattered village of perhaps one hundred and fifty inhabitants. The Lodge,  according to these records, was held, respectively, "over the bank, in Mr.  Williams' ordinary, which, by the way, is still standing, next in the printing office,  in the Academy building, and finally in the Masonic Temple.