THE BUILDER DECEMBER 1926

Political Anti-Masonry, 1827-1843

By BRO. ERIK MCKINLEY ERIKSSON, PH. D.

WHETHER viewed in its cultural, economic, social, religious or
political aspects, there is no period in American history more
fascinating than is the Jacksonian period. It was an era
characterized by change and controversy in every field. It was a
period of triumphant democracy in which the fight for free public
schools was first successfully waged. American literature reached
a high plane and some of the greatest American writers of all time
flourished during the epoch. Canals, roads and railroads were
rapidly developed, inventions multiplied, agriculture flourished,
trade and commerce rapidly expanded, and improvements on an
unprecedented scale were projected, only to be stopped by the panic
of 1837.

The period saw the beginning of the organized labor movement, the
launching of the real movement for the abolition of slavery, the
rise of the woman's rights movements, the development of an
organized movement against intoxicating liquors, and progress
towards abolition of imprisonment for debts. Improvement was
brought about in the care of the insane and advancement was made in
prison reform. The organized peace movement was definitely
projected during this era. Communistic experiments were made on a
large scale, though more after 1840 than before. It was a period of
religious readjustment and change. Especially in the newer sections
of the country the evangelical churches made great gains.
Unitarianism assumed an organized form and took its stand beside
Universalism in the fight between liberalism and orthodoxy in
religion. The year 1830 saw the organization in New York of the
Mormon Church. It was, in fact, a period of "isms"--and this should
not be overlooked in explaining why it was possible to organize,
during the period, such a fanatical party as was the Anti-Masonic.

Even surpassing all these things in interest was the political
history of the period. Space does not permit a discussion of the
heated controversies which raged over such matters as the civil
service, the Second Bank of the United states, internal
improvements, the removal of the Indians west of the Mississippi
River, foreign relations, the specie circular and the distribution
of the surplus. Rather, attention must be focused on the political
party development of the period, especially on the abortive attempt
to build a great national party on the basis of opposition to the
Masonic Institution.

Viewed from the standpoint of national history the Anti-Masonic
party would be of little importance were it not for the fact that
during its short life it contributed to our national political
system the national nominating convention and at least the "germ"
of the national platform. From the Masonic viewpoint, the
Anti-Masonic party is a subject that cannot be lightly dismissed
for it developed into the most highly organized and powerful foe
that Masonry has ever had in the United states. Promoted by
unscrupulous opportunists seeking political power and even aiming
at the presidency of the United states, it almost succeeded in
exterminating Freemasonry in some of the states. In view, then, of
its contributions to national political practices and its baneful
influence on the Masonic Institution, it should be of greatest
interest to trace the origin, development and decline of the
Anti-Masonic party.

POLITICAL ORIGIN OF ANTI-MASONRY

In seeking an explanation of the origin of the Anti-Masonic party
it is not enough, as Charles McCarthy, the leading historian of the
party, pointed out years ago, to say that it was started by the
Morgan affair. Had not the political, social and religious
conditions at the time been favorable for the formation of a new
party it is highly improbable that any political developments would
have followed the mysterious disappearance of William Morgan. That
incident was merely the match which served to ignite the
combustibles already prepared.

Assuredly, the political situation, both in the country as a whole,
and in New York, was ripe for the appearance of a new party. In
1816, the decadent Federalist party had for the last time
participated in a presidential election, and thereafter the old
Republican party was without a rival. The Federalist disintegration
proceeded rapidly, so that when the Republican President, James
Monroe, shortly after his inauguration, made a tour of the old
Federalist stronghold of New England, he was received with such
cordiality that the expression "Era of Good Feelings" was applied
to his administration.

But, while the surface of the political water appeared to be calm,
underneath there was a great and increasing turmoil. After Monroe's
second election, various individuals openly exhibited themselves as
candidates for the presidential succession. The number of
aspirants, at first about a score, dwindled until the election of
1824 saw four rivals in the field, John Quincy is Adams of
Massachusetts, Henry Clay of Kentucky, William H. Crawford of
Georgia and Andrew Jackson of Tennessee. The regular election
proved indecisive, though Jackson received a plurality of the
electoral votes. In accordance with Constitutional provision, the
election was then settled in the House of Representatives in favor
of Adams.

Clay, who had run fourth in the race and was therefore eliminated
from the House election, used his influence for Adams, and after
the latter assumed the presidency, received the coveted office of
Secretary of state. This led to the famous charge that a "corrupt
bargain" had been entered into by Adams and Clay. The charge,
though never satisfactorily substantiated, was believed by many,
including Jackson, who was changed from an indifferent contestant
to an eager aspirant for the presidency. In the fall of 1825 he was
nominated for that office by the Tennessee legislature and began an
aggressive campaign to defeat Adams in 1828. The bitter rivalry
thus engendered between Adams and Jackson divided the Republican
party into factions, which were destined to develop into new
political parties. Just what the emerging parties would be called
no one at that time could tell. The fact remains that both the
Adams and Jackson groups claimed the name "Republican" until after
the election of 1828.

CLINTON AND VAN BUREN

The political situation in New York was even more favorable to the
formation of new parties. There had been a long struggle in the
state over the building of the Erie Canal, and the animosities
developed by this struggle did not subside when the canal was
completed in 1825. De Witt Clinton had led the canal forces and
Martin Van Buren, the chief of the "Bucktails," had been the leader
in opposition to the building of the canal. After Adams and Jackson
became avowed rival candidates for the presidency in the election
of 1828, it was necessary for Clinton and Van Buren, just as it was
for other politicians throughout the country, to choose between
them. Van Buren, previously a Crawford supporter, early took a
stand in favor of Jackson. After considerable deliberation, Clinton
also announced himself as a Jackson supporter. This produced
consternation among his followers, many of whom preferred Adams to
Jackson.

Not least among those who were followers and admirers of Clinton
was Thurlow Weed, then an aspiring newspaper editor in Rochester.
He, and many other Clinton adherents, had supported Adams for the
presidency in 1824 and wished to do so again. To Weed and the other
Adams men who were seeking to counteract the influence of Clinton's
action, the Morgan affair must have appeared as a rainbow of hope.

To one familiar with Weed's long subsequent career as a shrewd
political manipulator there is danger of giving him credit for more
foresight than he actually possessed. Nevertheless, retracing the
development of the Anti-Masonic party from a local party in Western
New York to a national party contending for the presidency of the
United states, the guiding hand of Weed is clearly discernible at
all stages.

WEED AND THE MORGAN COMMITTEES

Through the activities of the "Morgan committees," including that
of Monroe County of which Weed was a leading member, and inspired
by Weed's newly established "Anti-Masonic Enquirer" and similar
newspapers which soon cropped out, there was developed in Western
New York, within a short period after Morgan's disappearance, a
frenzied outburst against Freemasonry. To bring about this result,
charges that Masons were interfering with and hindering the
investigations were coupled with appeals to the religious
prejudices of the people.

The Anti-Masonic writers on the subject have been wont to say that
the popular indignation of the people led to a "spontaneous" resort
to the ballot to bar Masons from political offices. But viewing the
evidence in hand it is apparent that the "spontaneous" outburst was
in reality the result of carefully conducted manuevers on the part
of Weed and his associates. Anti-Masonic tickets were placed in the
field in various town elections in Genesee and Monroe Counties in
the spring of 1827 with a result most encouraging to the
Anti-Masons. It is significant that Weed, in his Autobiography,
begins his chapter on political Anti-Masonry by relating how he and
others at the time counselled against political action and then in
the same paragraph says:

Rochester had already become the centre of Anti-Masonry. From that
point the movements, whether of a judicial or legislative
character, emanated.

As Weed was the chief of the Anti-Masons in Rochester, it is clear
that he was promoting political Anti-Masonry while professing to
discourage it!

Animated by the success of. their first venture into politics, the
Anti-Masonic leaders threw their full energies into the work of
perfecting a party organization, promoting conventions and securing
suitable candidates to run in the approaching elections. They also
continued their propaganda designed to win converts to their cause.
The influence of the alleged finding of Morgan's body on Oct. 7,
1827, must have been great, for it supported the claims that Morgan
had been drowned by the Masons. The decision that the body was
Monroe's and not Morgan's was not reached until Oct. 29. As the
election began on the following Monday, Nov. 5, it was too late, in
view of the poor communication facilities of the time, to re-act on
the voters. Therefore, the body was "a good enough Morgan until
after the election", whether or not Weed actually made the remark.
In disseminating their propaganda, the Anti-Masons did not omit to
point out that Governor Clinton, a high Mason, had gone over to the
political camp of Jackson, also a prominent Mason. (1) They also
spread false reports that Clinton had approved of the Morgan
abduction.

As a result, in the fall of 1827, Timothy Childs was elected to the
state assembly from Monroe county on an Anti-Masonic ticket, and
fourteen others claimed as Anti-Masons were also elected to the
same body, much to the gratification of Weed and company. The new
party was gaining momentum and numerous conventions were got up in
1828, for the purpose of further crystallizing sentiment. These
included a convention of seceding Masons at Le Roy, Feb. 19 and 20,
1828, followed by a second convention of seceding Masons also at Le
Roy, on July 4, 1828. This convention drew up a "Declaration of
Independence" from the Masonic Institution, in imitation of the
national Declaration, and the document was signed by one hundred
and three seceding Masons, varying from an Entered Apprentice to
the possessor of twenty-one degrees. Conspicuously heading the list
is the name of Solomon Southwick. The only other persons in the
list who attained any prominence as Anti-Masons were David Bernard,
author of Light On Masonry, John G. stearns, Edward Giddins, Samuel
D. Greene, and David C. Miller.

THE ANTI-MASONIC TICKET

Meanwhile an open Anti-Masonic convention had been held at Le Roy,
March 6 and 7, with twelve counties represented. A set of twenty
Anti-Masonic resolutions was drawn up and an address to the people
was issued. On Aug. 4, 5 and 6, 1828, the Anti-Masons held a
convention at Utica for the purpose of nominating a state ticket
for the fall election. Francis Granger was nominated for
governorship, but after several weeks declined the nomination, as
he preferred to run for the office of Lieutenant Governor on the
ticket of the Adams Republicans. Temporarily, Thurlow Weed lost
control, for the radical Anti-Masons met at Le Roy, on Sept. 7, and
nominated Southwick for the office of Governor. In the ensuing
election, which resulted in the selection of the Jacksonian
candidate, Martin Van Buren, Southwick ran a poor third. However,
the Anti-Masons succeeded in electing seventeen assemblymen and
four state senators, including William H. Maynard. In this election
the Anti-Masons cast their votes for Adams for President since his
statement had been spread abroad that he was not, never was, and
never should be a Mason.

"The election of 1828," said Weed, "imparted increased confidence,
vigor and strength to the Anti-Masonic party." Southwick, who had
for a short time occupied a place of leadership, was pushed aside
and thenceforth Thurlow Weed, aided by such lieutenants as William
E. Seward, Millard Fillmore, Francis Granger, John C. Spencer,
Myron Holley, Henry Dana Ward, Frederick Whittlesey, Albert H.
Tracy, William H. Maynard, and others, guided the destinies of the
Anti-Masonic party in New York. A state convention was convened at
Albany on Feb. 19, 1829, with delegates present from forty
counties. This convention, says McCarthy:

Marks a new starting point in the history of the party in New York.
. . It was all the more effective because the political nature of
it was concealed by an outward show of Anti-masonry with all its
verbiage and proscriptive declarations.

Though Southwick was allowed to open the convention with a long
address, there was no question as to the Weed faction controlling
the meeting. Weed, from the state Anti-Masonic Central Committee,
presented a long report on the development and progress of Anti-
Masonry. The most significant action taken by the convention was in
regard to a national convention. A report on the subject was
submitted by a committee, headed by Granger and including Seward in
its membership. After hearing the report and supporting speeches,
the convention resolved to call a national convention to meet at
Philadelphia on Sept. 11, 1830, (2) to be composed of delegates
from each state equal in number to the electoral vote of the state.
It was further stated:

The objects of which Convention, when assembled, shall be to adopt
such measures as to them, in their deliberate wisdom, shall appear
to be the most effectual to annihilate the Masonic Institution, and
all other secret societies which claim to be paramount to our Laws,
and are hostile to the genius and spirit of the Constitution.

In evaluating the significance of this resolution it must be
remembered that the national parties styled the Democratic party
and the National Republican party had not yet adopted those
designations. There was an Adams party and a Jackson party but
definite names were not adopted until after Jackson's inauguration
as President, March 4, 1829. (3) In view of this, it is quite
evident that Weed and his associates were seeking to make their
party a chief national party in opposition to the Jacksonians. From
1829 until its demise in 1833, the Anti-Masonic party in New York
was primarily an anti-Jackson party, and its continued attacks on
Masonry were but "camouflage" for the real political motives of the
opportunistic leaders.

Before adjourning, the Albany Convention memorialized the state
legislature for legislation against "extra judicial oaths." It also
decided that, while Morgan deserved a monument, the time was not
ripe for its erection because of the doubtful "probability of its
remaining undisturbed." It took action to raise a fund by
subscription, to be held in trust, the income from which was to be
used "for the future support of Mrs. Morgan, and the support and
education of her two children."  (4)

PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MASONS

After the convention, the Anti-Masons continued to use all the
devices at their command to keep up an excitement against the
Masons. They made liberal use of newspapers, pamphlets and
"lectures." The "Morgan trials" were continued with renewed vigor
and desperate attempts were made to secure convictions of accused
Masons. Meanwhile, by declaring in favor of further canal building
and other internal improvements, they attracted to their standard
many of the old Clintonians and Adams men.

THE "TOLERATION MOVEMENT

In some of the towns of Western New York an attempt was made to
stem the tide of Anti-Masonry by organizing a "Toleration and Equal
Rights Party." In the local spring elections of 1829, "toleration"
tickets were successful in a few towns. "The Craftsman" of April
14, 1829, which had previously exhorted the voters "to unite under
the banner of Toleration and Equal Rights, and with becoming regard
to their privileges, as freemen, uphold their institutions,"
claimed victories in seven of the sixteen towns of Monroe County,
six of seven in Genesee County, four in Livingston County, and in
all the towns of Cayuga and Seneca Counties. It is surprising that
nothing more was heard of this "party" after these elections.

In the fall elections of 1829, the Anti-Masons showed increased
strength though the Jacksonians easily controlled the state as a
whole. (1830 was the year the Anti-Masons exhibited their greatest
strength in New York.) On Feb. 25, 1830, a convention was held at
Albany and thirty-six delegates were chosen to attend the national
convention. On Aug. 11, 1830, another state Anti-Masonic convention
was held at Utica with forty-five counties represented. Francis
Granger was nominated for Governor and a bid for the workingmen's
support was made by nominating Samuel Stevens of New York city for
Lieutenant Governor. Fourteen resolutions were adopted and an
address to the people was issued. In the fall election, Granger was
defeated but he carried eighteen counties and received 120,361
votes as compared with 128,892 votes for Enos Throop, who was
elected. It is significant that ten counties which had been
Anti-Masonic in 1828 were carried by Throop, the
Democrat-Republican candidate, in 1830. The Anti-Masons were
admitted to have elected thirty three members of the Assembly, and
they elected state senators in three districts, including Seward in
the Eighth District.

In spite of the great show of strength in 1830, Weed was
disappointed. In 1831 the party lost ground and in 1832 again went
down to defeat, not only in New York but nationally as well. After
an even more disastrous defeat in the fall elections of 1833, Weed
and his colleagues were ready to give up. As Weed said in his
Autobiography:

The election of 1833 demonstrated unmistakably not only that
opposition to Masonry as a party in a political aspect had lost its
hold upon the public mind, but that its leading object [?], namely,
to awaken and perpetuate a public sentiment against secret
societies, had signally failed.

A meeting of leaders of the party was held late in 1833 which
"resulted in a virtual dissolution of the Anti-Masonic party" in
New York.

Meanwhile, Anti-Masonry had been making headway in other states. In
Pennsylvania conditions were also favorable for the introduction of
Anti-Masonry. Long before the Morgan affair, as early as 1821,
there had been manifested hostility on the part of some
Presbyterians towards Masonry, and in 1823 the Methodists. of the
state had shown an unfriendly attitude towards the Fraternity.
Other religious sects in the state were also fertile ground for the
seeds of Anti-Masonry brought in from New York as early as 1827.
Furthermore, as in New York, there was a quarrel of long standing
over internal improvements which favored the organization of a new
party.

Political Anti-Masonry made its first appearance in the fall of
1828, but did not make much headway until the following year. On
June 25, 1829, a convention of Anti-Masons from eleven counties met
at Harrisburg and nominated Joseph Ritner for Governor. In the fall
election the Anti-Masons polled a considerable vote and, while
Ritner was defeated, elected fifteen members of the House and one
member of the Senate of the state legislature. On Feb. 26, 1830,
practically all the counties of Pennsylvania were represented in an
Anti-Masonic convention at Harrisburg, called to choose delegates
to the national convention. In this convention, Thaddeus Stevens
began his career as the leading Anti-Mason of Pennsylvania.

In the fall elections, 1830, the Anti-Masons succeeded in electing
six Congressmen, four members of the state Senate and twenty-seven
members of the state House of Representatives. In May, 1831,
another state convention was held to choose delegates to the
Baltimore national convention, but was poorly attended. That fall
the Anti-Masons elected six state senators and twenty members of
the House. On Feb. 22, 1832, a fourth state convention met at
Harrisburg and for a second time nominated Ritner for Governor.
That fall he ran a very close second to George Wolf, the Democratic
candidate. For a time thereafter Anti-Masonry declined in
Pennsylvania, but was kept alive through the activity of Stevens
and his chief lieutenant, Ritner. Finally, in 1835, by a coalition
of Anti-Masons and Whigs, Ritner was elected Governor. During his
three year regime every possible effort was made to legislate
Masonry out of existence, but without success. With Ritner's defeat
in 1838, political Anti-Masonry practically disappeared in
Pennsylvania, though Stevens attempted to revive it as late as
1843.

THE RESULTS IN VERMONT

In no state were the Anti-Masons so completely successful as in
Vermont. Political Anti-Masonry really began there in 1829, when on
Aug. 5 a state convention was held at Montpelier. That fall the
Anti-Masons elected thirty-three out of the two hundred and
fourteen members of the state legislature. In 1830, the Anti-Masons
showed increased strength. By 1831 they were strong enough to
secure a plurality in the popular election for their gubernatorial
candidate, William A. Palmer, and then secure his election at the
hands of the legislature. They also elected one hundred and
fourteen members of the state legislature. In 1832, they again
elected Palmer as Governor and also elected three members of
Congress. In 1833 and 1834, Palmer was re-elected but thereafter
lost his popularity, and as a result of a deadlock in the
legislature in 1835, Silas H. Jennison, elected by the Anti-Masons
as Lieutenant Governor, became the Governor. In 1836, the
Anti-Masons joined with the Whigs and disappeared as a distinct
party in Vermont.

THE RESULT IN MASSACHUSETTS

The Anti-Masons made a determined but futile effort to control the
political situation in Massachusetts. Political Anti-Masonry began
in the state in 1828, but it was not until the notorious "Suffolk
Committee" was organized at a meeting of Anti-Masons at Boston,
Aug. 27, 1829, that headway was made. The first state Anti-Masonic
convention met in Faneuil Hall, at Boston, on Dec. 30 and 31, 1829,
and Jan. 1, 1830. Resolutions were adopted and a long address to
the people of the state, drawn up by a committee headed by Moses
Thacher, was issued. This convention also elected delegates to the
Philadelphia national convention. The members of the "Suffolk
Committee" were designated to serve as a state Anti-Masonic
committee. In 1830, the Anti-Masons elected three state senators
and between twenty and twenty-five members of the lower house of
the legislature.

On May 19 and 20, 1831, a second state Anti-Masonic convention was
held in Boston. Various reports were made and Anti-Masonic
resolutions were adopted. Later in the year, the Anti-Masons
nominated Samuel Lathrop for Governor but he was defeated in the
election. In 1832, the Anti-Masons put an electoral as well as a
state ticket in the field, the latter again headed by Lathrop, but
the National Republicans won the election. The convention of that
year adopted a reply to the "Declaration" of the Masons of Boston,
this reply having been drawn up by the state Anti-Masonic committee
and including thirty-eight "Allegations Against Freemasonry."
Letters were then addressed to the Grand Lodge and Grand Chapter of
the state challenging them to sue the Anti-Masonic committee for
libel, so that a trial could be held to determine whether the
Anti-Masons were justified in their charges against Masonry, or the
Masons were right in declaring the charges false. Nothing came of
these challenges.

In 1833, against his wishes, John Quincy Adams was nominated by the
Anti-Masonic convention for the governorship, but failed of
election. In 1834 the Anti-Masons succeeded in getting the
legislature to investigate Masonry but nothing came of the
investigation. That year the state convention nominated John Bailey
for Governor but he ran a poor third in the election. In 1835, most
of the Anti-Masons of Massachusetts joined the Whigs, and the
merger was completed in 1836.

RHODE ISLAND AND CONNECTICUT

Rhode Island was another of the New England states where political
Anti-Masonry exhibited considerable strength. Anti-Masonry appeared
in the state in 1829, and was given form by a convention held the
next year. In 1831, the Anti-Masons memorialized the state
legislature to investigate Freemasonry, which was done, though the
investigation was "fruitless." In 1832, the legislature passed an
act forbidding extra judicial oaths. A very unusual situation
occurred in Rhode Island in 1832 when a coalition was formed
between the Anti-Masons and the Democrats. As a result, William
Sprague, an Anti-Mason, was elected Speaker of the lower house of
the state legislature. Beginning with 1833, the Anti-Masons, for
five successive years, elected their candidate, John Brown Francis,
to the governorship. It was not until 1838 that political
Anti-Masonry in Rhode Island disappeared.

In Connecticut political Anti-Masonry began late in 1828. On Feb.
11, 1829, a state convention was held at Hartford. In 1832, the
Anti-Masons showed their greatest strength in Connecticut when, by
a coalition with the National Republicans, they elected eight state
senators, sixty-seven members of the state House of
Representatives, and one United States Senator. The strength of the
party soon dwindled, and in 1835 the Anti-Masons were practically
absorbed by the Whigs.

Political Anti-Masonry made little headway in states other than
those already mentioned. In Maine, a state convention was held at
Augusta, July 4, 1832. The party had a candidate for the Governor,
Thomas A. Hill, in the elections of 1832, 1833 and 1834, but his
strength was negligible. At least two conventions were held in New
Hampshire, one on June 1, 1831, and another on Feb. 6, 1833, but no
political successes were achieved by the Anti-Masons.

THE RESULTS ELSEWHERE

In other states political Anti-Masonry was nothing more than a
"local infection." It made some headway in New Jersey where at
least one convention was held --that at New Brunswick on Aug. 24,
1830. In Ohio, Anti-Masonry exhibited its chief strength in the
northeastern part. At least three conventions were held in this
state, the first convening at Canton on July 21, 1830, with twelve
counties represented, the second at Columbus on Jan. 11, 1831, and
the third also at Columbus, on June 12, 1832. Anti-Masons in
Indiana were a factor in only a few local elections. There is
record of a convention held in the state in March, 1830. At least
one Anti-Masonic convention was held in Kentucky, at Carthage, on
Jan. 22, 1829. In Michigan Territory the Anti-Masons held a
convention in June, 1829, and that year were strong enough to elect
John Biddle as Territorial Delegate to Congress. Local outbreaks of
political Anti-Masonry occurred in Marengo and Tuscaloosa Counties
in Alabama, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and in Boonsboro
district, Maryland. There is no other evidence available to show
that political Anti-Masonry made any headway in the South. The fact
that Delaware had one delegate present at each of the Anti-Masonic
national conventions is evidence that that state was also slightly
tainted with political Anti-Masonry.

THE COLLAPSE OF THE MOVEMENT

An account of political Anti-Masonry would not be complete without
a consideration of the ephemeral career of the national
Anti-Masonic party. As has been suggested, Weed and others early
conceived the project of making the Anti-Masonic party a leading
national party in opposition to the Jacksonians, and with this in
view secured the calling of a national convention to meet at
Philadelphia. At the time of the calling of the convention little
was definitely known as to the actual strength of the Anti-Masons
outside of New York. It must have been disappointing to the leaders
when there appeared at Philadelphia, on Sept. 11, 1830, delegates
from only ten of the twenty-four states and from one territory.
While a total of one hundred and eleven delegates attended, it
should be noted that thirty-three were from New York, twenty eight
from Pennsylvania and seventeen from Massachusetts. Connecticut
sent eight delegates, New Jersey seven, Ohio seven, Vermont six and
Rhode Island two, while Delaware, Maryland and the Territory of
Michigan each sent one delegate.

The convention organized with Francis Granger of New York as
President. During the five days the convention was in session the
time was spent mainly in formulating and listening to reports. On
the first day fourteen different committees were appointed, to
report on such matters as "the pretensions of freemasonry," "the
true nature of Masonic oaths and obligations," "the truth of the
disclosures" of Masonry, "the abduction and murder of William
Morgan," "the effects of Freemasonry on the Christian religion,"
"the nature and spirit of anti-masonry," and "measures . . . to
effectuate the extinction of Freemasonry." The various reports were
the subject of extended debate which on occasion grew heated. It is
apparent that some of the delegates were anxious to air their views
and took full advantage of their opportunity to do so.

Among the matters of interest which came before the convention was
the proposal of a New York delegate that a committee be appointed
"to inquire into the pecuniary circumstances and situation of the
family of Capt. William Morgan, and to report what measures, if
any, should be adopted for their support." After some discussion
the proposal was rejected. Thaddeus Stevens was most active in
opposing the resolution, and, as his expressions show how little
some of the leaders connected the Morgan affair with the Anti-
Masonic party, the record of the debates containing his objections
may be quoted, as follows:

Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, thought that this convention, as
such, had nothing to do with the family of Capt. Morgan. The
abduction and murder of that individual, did not constitute the
basis of anti-masonry. That was perhaps a providential circumstance
in its favour. The investigation and proceedings of the convention
in regard to free-masonry should be coolly and dispassionately
conducted. The resolution would be looked upon as intended to
inflame the feelings and passions, rather than to appeal to the
judgment; to excite the sympathies, rather than open the eyes, of
the people, on the subject of masonry.

It was apparent that the time was not ripe for putting a
presidential candidate in the field, but the matter was referred to
a committee. After the committee's report had been debated with
considerable heat, it was

Resolved, That it is recommended to the people of the United
states, opposed to secret societies, to meet in convention, on
Monday, the twenty-sixth day of September, 1831, at the city of
Baltimore, by delegates equal in number to their representatives in
both houses of congress, to make nominations of suitable candidates
for the offices of President and Vice-President, to be supported at
the next election; and for the transaction of such other business
as the cause of Anti-Masonry may require.

A long address to the people, prepared by Myron Holley, was adopted
and signed by all the delegates in attendance. It was chiefly a
denunciation of Masonry and an appeal to the people to use the
ballot against the Institution. This address is important since, if
it was not the first national party platform, it was at least the
"germ" of such a platform. If a platform is a declaration of a
party's principles and policies, this address fulfilled the
requirements of a platform.

SECOND NATIONAL CONVENTION

The party leaders hoped, by holding a second national convention in
1831, to have a more representative gathering, but in this they
were to be disappointed. There assembled at Baltimore, on the
appointed date, only one hundred and fourteen delegates from twelve
states, including thirty-seven from New York, twenty eight from
Pennsylvania, fourteen from Massachusetts, nine from Ohio, six from
New Jersey, five from Vermont, six from Connecticut, four from
Rhode Island, two from Maine, and one each from New Hampshire,
Delaware and Maryland.

After the convention had been organized with John C. Spencer of New
York as President, the rules and orders of the Philadelphia
convention were adopted, various committees were appointed, and the
work of the convention was got under way. Special reports by Henry
Dana Ward for the "National Committee of Correspondence," Benjamin
F. Hallett of Rhode Island "On the Construction of Masonic
Penalties," and John C. Spencer "On History of Judicial
Proceedings" in the "Morgan cases" regaled the convention while the
matter of candidates was being considered.

Before the convention various individuals had been mentioned as
possible Anti-Masonic presidential candidates. John C. Calhoun
would have received favorable attention had it not been for his
known connection with the movement in South Carolina to nullify the
Federal tariff laws. Richard Rush of Pennsylvania had been
mentioned and may have entertained hope of receiving the
nomination. John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts was supported by New
Englanders but had expressed himself as not wishing to be
nominated. Then, too, there were many who felt that his name would
not attract voters to the party. Henry Clay might easily have
received the nomination, but he was a Mason and refused to renounce
the Fraternity. (5) He had come dangerously close to it when he
wrote, Jan. 23, 1831:

I have been urged, entreated, importuned, to make some declaration
short of renunciation of Masonry, which would satisfy the Antis.
But I have hitherto declined all interference on that subject.
While I do not, and never did care about Masonry [?], I shall
abstain from making myself any party to that strife. I tell them
that Masonry and Anti-masonry has legitimately in my opinion
nothing to do with politics; that I never acted, in public or
private life, under any Masonic influence; that I have long since
ceased to be a member of any lodge; that I voted for Mr. Adams, no
Mason, against General Jackson, a Mason.

Thaddeus Stevens and perhaps other Anti-Masonic leaders went to the
Baltimore convention with the intention of securing the nomination
of John McLean of Ohio, a Justice of the United States Supreme
Court and ex-Postmaster General of the United states. He had
privately expressed a willingness to accept the nomination if it
were assured that he would be the sole candidate in opposition to
Jackson. But by the summer of 1831 it was very evident that the
National Republicans would name a candidate of their own, and the
indications were that Clay would be the candidate. In fact he had
already been put forward as a candidate by various National
Republican gatherings throughout the country. Therefore McLean
wrote, under date of Nashville, Sept. 7, 1831, declining "to
distract still more the public mind," by allowing himself to be
named as an additional candidate.

WIRT AS ANTI-MASONIC CANDIDATE

Distracted by this frustration of their hopes, a delegation of
Anti-Masons called on William Wirt, an ex-Attorney General of the
United States, then residing in Baltimore, and persuaded him to
accept the party's nomination for the presidency. Wirt, who early
in life had taken the Entered Apprentice Degree, and whose
conversion to Anti-Masonry coincided with the assembling of the
convention, reluctantly agreed to accept the nomination. He, and
probably some of the real Anti-Masonic leaders, hoped that the
National Republicans would concur in the nomination when their
national convention should assemble in December, 1831. Having
secured at least a nominal candidate for the presidency, the
Anti-Masons named Amos Ellmaker of Pennsylvania for the
vice-presidency, drew up Anti-Masonic resolutions, adopted a
platform in the form of an address to the people and adjourned to
await the developments of the campaign.

Were it not for the fact that the address contained the usual
denunciations of Masonry, it might have been a platform drawn up by
a convention of National Republicans--in fact it was clearly
designed to attract voters of that party. There could no longer be
any doubt that the Anti-Masonic party, in spite of its pretensions,
had become essentially an anti-Jackson party. The events of the
campaign were ample justification for such a conclusion.

After the National Republicans, in their national convention at
Baltimore, in December, 1831, formally nominated Clay, Wirt, aged
and sickly, became thoroughly disheartened and, after the party
leaders refused to allow him to withdraw, refused to lift a finger
to promote his own election. In private correspondence he expressed
the hope that Clay would win.

THE INSINCERITY OF THE LEADERS

The active Anti-Masonic leaders showed how insincere all their
pratings against Masonry since 1826 had been, when they entered
into coalitions with the National Republicans in various states.
The Jackson official organ, the Washington "Globe," frequently
called attention to these coalitions and denounced them in that
vehement language which made its editor, Francis Preston Blair, the
outstanding political editor of the period. It was the intention of
the National Republican and Anti-Masonic leaders, especially in
Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York, to manipulate the electoral vote
so as to give it to either Clay or Wirt, whichever appeared to have
the best prospect of being elected. Clay entered into the
arrangement wholeheartedly, as a letter written to Weed, dated
Washington, April 14, 1832, plainly indicates. He said, in part:

I received your favor of the 9th inst., as I did the previous ones,
communicating the progress of measures to produce cooperation
between the Anti-Masons and the National Republicans in the state
of New York. I most earnestly hope that such cooperation may be
cordially produced, to the satisfaction of both parties.

The cooperation referred to was brought about, for the two parties
united on the same state and electoral ticket. This gave the
Democrats an opportunity to ridicule their opponents as the
"Siamese Twin Party."

Every possible means was employed by the coalition to defeat
Jackson. The one hundred and sixty Anti-Masonic newspapers, headed
by Weed's "Albany Evening Journal," were aided by numerous almanacs
and tracts of various kinds in spreading the party propaganda.
Jackson's staunch adherence to the Masonic Fraternity was not
overlooked, nor did the Anti-Masons neglect to point out that four
members of his cabinet, Edward Livingston, the Secretary of state,
Lewis Cass, the Secretary of War, Levi Woodbury, the Secretary of
the Navy, and William T. Barry, the Postmaster General, were
prominent Masons. But all the efforts were without avail, for after
the smoke of the battle had cleared away in the fall of 1832 it was
found that Jackson had been easily re-elected, receiving two
hundred and nineteen electoral votes. Clay received fortynine
electoral votes, while the Anti-Masonic candidate, Wirt, received
only the seven electoral votes of Vermont. The Anti-Masons had
hoped to poll at least a half million votes but Clay and Wirt
together received only 530,189 votes while Jackson received
687,502.

The overwhelming defeat of the Anti-Masons in the election of 1832
was a blow from which they never recovered. The New York leaders,
who had been primarily responsible for the origin and development
of the party, were convinced that they could not ride to power
under the aegis of an Anti-Masonic party. After they dissolved the
party in New York it was only a matter of time until the whole
political Anti-Masonic movement collapsed. Though it showed
strength in some states, as has been pointed out, until 1838, and
even held a national convention at Philadelphia, Nov. 13, 1838--
with only four states, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio and
Pennsylvania represented--its doom was inevitable. The American
people could not be fooled forever and when they saw that the issue
of Anti-Masonry was being kept up chiefly to supply aspiring
political opportunists with a vehicle in which to attempt to ride
to power, they refused to lend enough support to keep the party
alive. Thus there passed off the stage the first of a large number
of minor parties which have afforded variety to American political
campaigns.

NOTES

(1) Throughout the period the Anti-Masons sought to create the
impression that Masons were bound to work for each other's
political advancement, but the history of the period is full of
refutations of the absurd charge. It is true that Clinton became a
Jackson man, but there were dozens of Masons who bitterly opposed
Jackson politically. For example, Henry Clay, P. G. M. of Kentucky,
and John Marshall, P.G.M. of Virginia, were most bitter opponents
of Jackson. Hezekiah Niles of Baltimore, P.G.H.P. of Maryland, was
editor of Niles' Register, one of the most powerful anti-Jackson
newspapers in the country. William Winston Seaton of Washington,
one of the editors of the National Intelligencer, the chief organ
of the National Republicans and later of the Whigs, did not let his
Masonry diminish the intensity of his attacks on Jackson.

(2) This date was the anniversary of the day on which Morgan had
been taken from Batavia in 1826. For a time the AntiMasons sought
to have the day set aside for special observance.

(3) In 1829 the Adams party began calling themselves "National
Republicans" while the Jacksonians still called themselves
"Republicans" or "Democratic Republicans." It was not until
January, 1832, that they officially used the term "Democratic"
Party--the term then being used in their call for a national
convention. In applying the temlls to parties before 1829, Weed and
others writing years afterwards, were in error. (See
Bibliographical Notes)

(4) It is doubtful if Mrs. Morgan received much, if any benefit
from this action as she married, late in 1830, a seceded Mason
named George W. Harris, and evidently removed westward. Rob Morris
cites evidence to show that Harris divorced her at Council Bluffs,
Iowa, in 1856.

(5) Clay had demitted in 1824 from Lexington Lodge, No. 1, of
Kentucky, but he did not renounce Masonry. He had previously served
as Grand Master of Kentucky and had been chiefly instrumental in
promoting, in 1822, the project for a General Supreme Grand Lodge
of the United States.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The most complete and authoritative though not exhaustive work on
the subject of political Anti-Masonry, the use of which is
indispensable in any study of the subject, is Charles McCarthy's
"The Antimasonic Party: A Study of Political Antimasonry in the
United States, 1827-1840 " in the American Historical Association
Annual Report for 1902, Vol. I, pp. 365-574. Though written by a
Catholic it exhibits a commendable spirit of fairness.

Brief accounts of political Anti-Masonry are [Erik McKinley
Eriksson's] "The Anti-Masonic Party," in Masonic Service
Association Bulletin No. 10, Erik McKinley Eriksson's "The Anti-
Masonic Party," in THE BUILDER, Vol. 7 (March, 1921), pp. 71-77;
Emery B. Gibbs' "The Anti-Masonic Movement," in THE BUILDER, Vol.
4 (December, 1918), pp. 341-348; and J. Hugo Tatsch's "An American
Masonic Crisis," in Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge, Vol.
XXXIV (1921), pp. 196-209.

A brief general treatment of Anti-Masonry in national politics is
contained in the first volume of Edward Stanwood's History of the
Presidency From 1788-1916' (Boston, 1916), 2v. New York politics
are vividly dealt with in De Alva Stanwood Alexander's Political
History of the State of New York (New York, 1906-1923), 4v., and in
Jabez D. Hammond's The History of Political Parties in the State of
New York . . . (Albany, 1842), 2v. It should be noted that the
account of Anti-Masonry in the second volume was written by
Frederick Whittlesey, an Anti-Mason.

Of great importance for the accounts of prominent AntiMasonic
leaders are Thurlow Weed's Autobiography and Memoirs and William H.
Seward's Autobiography. Biographies, memoirs and other works
relating to such leaders as Thaddeus Stevens, John Quincy Adams,
William Wirt and Millard Fillmore, not to mention a whole host of
lesser leaders, have also been consulted. William L. Stone's
Letters on Masonry and Anti-Masonry . . . (New York, 1832), gives
much interesting material. The "Introductory Remarks" in [Henry
Gassett's] Catalogue of Books on the Masonic Institution . . .
(Boston, 1852) supply the dates for some Anti-Masonic conventions
not mentioned by McCarthy.

In addition to newspapers hitherto cited, the following Washington
newspapers were carefully studied: the Washington "Globe," the
Jackson official organ, 1830-1837; the "National Intelligencer,"
the chief organ of the National Republicans and the "United States
Telegraph," the ex-official organ of Jackson's administration.

The present writer has prepared a study of these journals, a small
part of which has been published under the title "Official
Newspaper Organs and the Campaign of 1828," in The Tennessee
Historical Magazine, Vol. VIII (January, 1925), pp. 231-247. It was
from this study that the information concerning party cognomens was
derived. "Niles' Register," published throughout the period at
Baltimore, is a mine of useful information. Its bias is decidedly
anti-Jackson.

Typical of the Anti-Masonic almanacs examined were the following:
Edward Giddins' The Pennsylvania Anti-Masonic Almanac . . . 1830
(Lancaster, 1830); Giddins' Anti-Masonic Almanac . . . 1831 (Utica
1831); Giddins' Anti-Masonic Almanac . . . 1832 (Utica, 1832),
Avery Allyn's The Anti-Masonic Sun Almanac . . . 1832 . . .
(Philadelphia, 1832); and the New England Anti-Masonic Almanac for
the years 1831, 1832, 1833 and 1834 (Boston). The almanacs are of
interest chiefly because of the free use they made of cartoons and
caricatures, which were, generally speaking, rarely employed at
that period of history.

While it has been necessary to depend on works already cited for
much of the material on political Anti-Masonry, the following
pamphlets containing convention proceedings have been studied at
first hand: Masonic Anti-Masonic Proceedings [Le Roy, Feb. 19 and
March 6, 1828], N.P., N.D., 16 pp.; Proceedings of the Anti-Masonic
Convention for the State of New York Held at Utica, Aug. 11, 1830
. . . (Utica, 1830), 16 pp.; Proceedings of the Antimasonic State
Convention of Connecticut Held at Hartford Feb. 3 and 4, 1830
(Hartford, 1830), 32 pp.; Brief Report of the Debates in the
Anti-Masonic State Convention . . . Massachusetts . . . 1829 . . .
(Boston, 1830), 48 pp.; Abstract of the Proceedings of the
Anti-Masonic State Convention of Massachusetts . . . 1829 . . .
(Boston 1830), 32 pp., Abstract of the Proceedings of the
Antimasonic State Convention of Massachusetts . . . 1831 (Boston,
1831), 78 pp.; Anti-masonic Republican Convention of Massachusetts
. . . 1832 . . . (Boston, 1832), 55 pp.; Anti-Masonic Convention of
Massachusetts . . . 1833 . . . (Boston, 1833) 48 pp.; Antimasonic
Republican Convention for Massachusetts . . . 1834 . . . (Boston,
1834), 40 pp.; The Proceedings of the United States Anti-Masonic
Convention, Held at Philadelphia Sept. 11, 1830. Embracing the
Journal of Proceedings, the Reports, the Debates and the Address to
the People (Philadelphia 1830), 164 pp.; and The Proceedings of the
Second United States Anti-Masonic Convention, Held at Baltimore,
September, 1831; Journal and Reports . . . Resolutions, and the
Address to the People (Boston, 1832), 88 pp.

The following pamphlets are useful in giving an insight to various
political activities of the Anti-Masons: A Legislative
Investigation Into Masonry [Rhode Island] . . . (Boston, 1832), 85
pp.; Report of the Committee Appointed by the General Assembly of
the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, to
Investigate the Charges in Circulation Against Freemasonry and
Masons in Said State . . . (Providence 1832), 149 pp.; An
Investigation Into Free Masonry by a Joint Committee of the
Legislature of Massachusetts . . . 1834 (Boston, 1834), 76 pp.; The
Petition to the Legislature of the State of Connecticut, Against
Extra-Judicial Oaths [1833] . . . (Hartford, 1834), 8 pp.; Address
of the Anti-Masonic State Convention Held at Augusta, July 4, 1832
. . . N. P., N. D., 8 pp., John Clarke's Address to the People of
Pennsylvania Read to the Anti-Masonic Convention Held at
Harrisburg, Feb. 25, 1830 . . . (Lancaster, 1830), 34 pp.; Report
of a Committee to the New York Senate, Together With Extracts From
Other Authentic Documents. Illustrating the Character and
Principles of Free Masonry . . . (New Haven, 1829), 24 pp.; Report
of the Select Committee on That Part of the Governor's Message
Relating to the Abduction of William Morgan. Made to the [New York]
Assembly, Feb. 16, 1829 (Albany, 1829), 68 pp.; Report of the
Committee on the Abduction of William. Morgan Made to the [New
York] Senate, Feb. 14, 1829 (Albany, 1829), 27 pp.; Report of the
Special Counsel on the Subject of the Abduction of William Morgan
to the [New York] Senate (Albany, 1830), 35 pp., Appeal to the
"Original Antimasons" of New York by the Editor of the Boston Daily
Advocate [Benjamin F. Hallett] (Published as "Extra" "Boston Daily
Advocate," July, 1834), 32 pp., Report on Secret Societies and
Monopolies by a Joint Committee of the Legislature of
Massachusetts, 1836 (Boston, 1836), 48 pp.; and Resolutions Adopted
by the Antimasonic Members of the Legislature of Massachusetts and
Other citizens . . . Opposed to the Nomination of Martin Van Buren
. . . (Boston, 1836), 24 pp.
