THE BUILDER DECEMBER 1918
THE ANTI-MASONIC MOVEMENT

BY BRO. EMERY B. GIBBS, P. D. G. M., MASSACHUSETTS

THE institution of Masonry was introduced into the Colonies at an
early stage of their existence. The growth was slow at first, but
after the Revolution it spread more rapidly. From 1790 to 1820 the
growth was very marked. It had the sanction of many of the most
distinguished men of the country. Nothing had occurred up to 1826
to mar its progress. Men prominent in Masonry spoke publicly of the
many positions of trust and importance held by men belonging to the
Masonic Fraternity. Some were indiscreet enough to announce that
Masonry was exercising its influence in the pulpit, in the
legislatures, and in the courts. To this but little attention was
paid until the Morgan episode in 1826.

William Morgan was a native of Virginia, born in Culpepper county
in 1775 or 1776. Little is known of his early history. Among the
assertions regarding it is one story that he was a Captain in
General Jackson's army at the battle of New Orleans, and another
that he belonged to a band of pirates and was sentenced to be
hanged, but pardoned on condition that he enter the army. But
little credit should be given to either of these reports.

In October, 1819, at the age of forty-three or forty four, he
married Lucinda Pendleton of Richmond, Virginia, then in her
sixteenth year. In 1821 Morgan and his wife moved to Canada, where
he undertook the business of a brewer near York in the Upper
Province. The loss of his brewery by fire reduced him to poverty
and he then moved to Rochester, New York, where he worked and
occasionally received assistance from the Masonic Fraternity. From
Rochester he went to Batavia, in the county of Genesee, and worked
at his trade, which was that of a mason, until his disappearance in
1826.

During his residence at Batavia he was intemperate, frequently
neglecting his family. With but little education, it is said he had
a fair knowledge of writing and arithmetic, kept reasonably good
accounts, was a man of common sense, pleasing manner, and when not
under the influence of strong drink was a pleasant, social
companion among his fellows.

No one has been able to ascertain where he was made a Mason. He met
with the lodge at Batavia. In 1825 or 1826 a petition to the Grand
Chapter of the state was drawn up to obtain a charter for a chapter
of Royal Arch Masons in Batavia. This petition Morgan signed.
Before it was presented to the Grand Chapter, others who had signed
it and knew his habits and character were unwilling to have him
become a member. A new petition was prepared and signed and
presented without Morgan's name. On this petition a charter was
obtained. When Morgan learned that he was not a charter member and
knew that he could be admitted only by a unanimous vote, he was
surprised and offended at being excluded from the Chapter, and from
that time became an active and very ardent foe of Masonry.

A few years previously one David C. Miller had established himself
in Batavia and was publishing a local newspaper. Miller's
undertaking as an editor and printer was unprofitable. He was a man
of cunning and of a certain ability; reputation not very good, and
of objectionable habits. At some time prior to his living in
Batavia, he had been initiated as an Entered Apprentice at Albany,
New York. Objection being made to his further advancement on the
ground of his character, he never received the second and third
degrees.

Morgan and Miller, having a common grievance against the Masonic
Fraternity, planned together how they might create something of a
sensation and acquire a substantial, if not great fortune, out of
the venture to disclose the secrets of Freemasonry. Their threats
and suggestions were regarded at first as of no significance. The
Masons at Batavia paid little attention to the rumors until it was
evident that Morgan and Miller were bound to carry out their
threats and publish in Miller's paper a complete revelation of
so-called Masonic secrets. There was a strong feeling on the part
of a few who were quite as much opposed to Morgan and Miller
personally as they were zealous in the cause of Masonry that this
publication should be prevented. Soon the matter became the topic
of street conversation and one night an effort was made to sack
Miller's office and some forty or fifty persons assembled for the
purpose of breaking in and securing the manuscript. Nothing was
accomplished at this time, but two nights later an attempt was made
to set fire to the office. Whether this attempt to burn the place
was made by persons who were opposed to Morgan and Miller, or made
by Miller himself, was an open question and never satisfactorily
settled. Masons offered a reward of one hundred dollars for the
discovery of the incendiary. A man by the name of Howard, suspected
as an accomplice, fled, no one knows where, after a warrant had
been issued against him.

The details of Morgan's arrest for petty larceny, his acquittal,
his arrest again for debt, and his discharge after the debt had
been paid, his ride in a carriage to Rochester with several other
men, and from there to Fort Niagara, are all familiar. One writer
on this event, himself not a Mason, traces Morgan to Fort Niagara
and concludes by saying that there is no reliable evidence of what
happened to or became of Morgan after he was taken to Fort Niagara.

To the question, what became of Morgan? no definite answer has
been, and so far as we can learn, ever can be given.

The American Quarterly Review for March, 1830, published an article
on the Anti-Masonic excitement, by Henry Brown, an attorney-at-law
of Batavia, New York. This article was reviewed and commented on by
Masons and by those who were not Masons, as being a carefully
prepared and well-presented statement of what occurred.

Brown, in narrating the events which followed the disappearance of
Morgan and the efforts made to discover his body, particularly the
searching of the Niagara River and a part of Lake Ontario, all
without success, and when a good deal of the public excitement in
that locality had abated, states that a body was discovered on the
7th of October, 1827, in the town of Carlton about forty miles from
Fort Niagara. It was lying at the water's edge. An inquest was
held, witnesses who were personally acquainted with Morgan were
examined, and the jury pronounced it the body of some person to
them unknown who had perished by drowning. The body was in a
decomposed and offensive state at the time, and was quietly buried.

This inquest was published in the newspapers and suspicion was at
once excited that this was the body of Morgan. Several men from
Batavia and Rochester had the body disinterred, and then
discovered, or pretended that they discovered, points of
resemblance between this body and Morgan. They had the body watched
over night to prevent the Masons from carrying it away. Mrs. Morgan
was visited and went to Carleton and inspected the body.

"On arriving at Carleton on the 15th of October the body was
slightly and imperfectly examined. It was bloated and entirely
black, putrid on its surface and offensive (beyond anything
conceivable) to sight or smell. Its dress did not correspond with
anything which they had seen before, and the religious tracts in
the pocket staggered some of the most credulous. There was not in
fact a single circumstance in the dress, size, shape, color or
appearance of the body which pointed it out as Morgan."

The men active in fomenting the excitement were unwilling to lose
the advantage of so valuable an asset. A second inquest was held
over this body which, if it had been that of Morgan, must have been
thirteen months in the water.

Mrs. Morgan testified she believed it to be the body of her
husband, though the clothes were entirely different from those he
wore at the time of his disappearance, and there were found in the
pocket a number of religious tracts of a description not known in
the neighborhood of Batavia.

One witness recognized the shape of his head; another the outline
of his features; a third the color of his hair; a fourth of the
whiskers; a fifth the teeth, and a sixth the hair inside of the
ears. On these grounds the jury decided that this was the body of
William Morgan and that he came to his death by drowning.

The body was removed with great parade of solemnity to Batavia and
there interred in the presence of a vast crowd, and a funeral
oration pronounced by one Cochran, who, Brown says,

"Sometimes when sober and sometimes when otherwise, preached in the
vicinity and was then assistant editor to Col. Miller."

(Miller was associated with Morgan in the publication of the
so-called Masonic secrets.)

These events inflamed the indignation of the people to the highest
pitch and Freemasonry was detested more bitterly than ever. It was
on the eve of an election.

"The cry of vengeance was wafted on every breeze and mingled with
every echo of the lake where Morgan's ghost, it was said, performed
its nightly rounds."

About this time a notice appeared in the Canadian newspapers that
one Timothy Monro, of Clark, in the District of New Castle in Upper
Canada, left that place for Newark in September, 1827, in a small
boat, and was drowned in the Niagara river while attempting to
return. A description of the body found in Carleton, together with
the clothing and religious tracts found in the pocket, being
published in the newspaper soon after the first inquest and coming
to the knowledge of Monro's friends, induced the belief that the
body found in Carleton was his. Mrs. Sarah Monro, widow,
accompanied by her son and one John Cron, her friend, after hearing
of this body, went at once to examine it. In consequence of their
testimony, the body was a second time disinterred and a jury of
inquest a third time summoned.

After hearing all the evidence, this jury decided that it was the
body of Timothy Monro, who was drowned in Lake Ontario, September
26, 1827. Mr. Brown in his article gives the testimony of the
witnesses at length, which is entirely conclusive as to the
propriety of this last verdict, in which it was proved that the
body pronounced to be that of Morgan was at least five feet nine
inches long, whereas the height of Morgan when alive was less than
five feet six inches. It also appeared in evidence that the hair of
his body had been so disposed by art as to make it appear like that
of Morgan.

The Morgan excitement was rapidly waning and the political
situation of the Anti-Masonic party was becoming sadly in need of
some new stimulant, when it was furnished by the confession of one
Hill, who declared himself one of the murderers of William Morgan.
He was arrested and committed to jail in Buffalo, where he signed
a confession. He was then removed to Lockport for trial, but
refused to go before the Grand Jury to testify to the truth of his
confession. The Grand Jury, believing him insane, refused to find
a bill and he was discharged. No clew to his conduct has ever been
discovered. It may be an injustice to the politicians to suggest
that this man, carefully coached, played his part, knowing that no
serious harm would come to him, and so contributed to the
excitement and bitterness of feeling against the Masons. In any
event, his part was well played and the effect far-reaching.

More than forty trials took place of persons suspected of being
concerned in Morgan's disappearance. The greater number resulted in
acquittals. Several, however, were convicted and served substantial
sentences.

M.W. Brother Gallagher stated in an address that Maj. Benjamin
Perley Poore, for many years Washington correspondent of the Boston
Journal, while in Smyrna, Turkey, in 1839, knew that Morgan was
then alive and identified by men who had known him in New York.

I have referred to these different reports as to what became of
Morgan, but I leave it as I began, with uncertainty and inability
to determine his fate.

Prior to the Morgan incident there may have been some excuse for
accusing Masons of political activity and using the organizations
for political purposes.

In 1816, John Brooks, a Mason, and Samuel Dexter, not a Mason, were
opposing candidates for the office of Governor of Massachusetts. In
1798, Mr. Dexter had written a letter to Grand Master Bartlett
strongly condemning and ridiculing Freemasonry.

In 1816, Benjamin Russell was editor of the "Poston Centinel" and
also Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts and an ardent
supporter of General Brooks as against Mr. Dexter. In the "Boston
Centinel" of March 30, 1816, appeared the following paragraph:

"TO THE MASONIC FRATERNITY.

Brethren:--It need not be repeated that the internal regulations of
your benevolent order exclude all discussions of political dogmas.
But every Master Mason knows that his public obligation obligates
him to discharge the duties he owes to the state with diligence and
fidelity.

When two candidates, therefore, present themselves for his
suffrage, he is not bound to inquire to what party the one or the
other belongs; but whether he is "a good man and true," and
faithful to the Constitution which he may be called upon to
administer. And all other things being favorable, he is bound by
every Masonic obligation to give his vote for the one who is a Free
and Accepted Brother in preference to one who is not.

Brother John Brooks shall receive the vote of A MASTER MASON."

Square and Compass

In New York, in the year 1824, De Witt Clinton was candidate for
Governor against a candidate who was not a Mason. At that time Mr.
Clinton was Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of New York, General
Grand High Priest of the General Grand Royal Arch Chapter of the
United States, Grand Master of the Grand Encampment of Knights
Templar for the United States, Sovereign Grand Commander of the
Grand Consistory of the United States. He also held other Masonic
offices. All these Masonic titles, from the highest to the lowest
grade, were centered in Mr. Clinton at about the same time. A paper
called the "National Union" was published in New York solely to aid
his election as Governor. Samuel H. Jenks, of Nantucket was the
editor. Mr. Jenks was the Deputy Grand Master in Massachusetts in
1825. The following was published in that paper October 30, 1824:

"Brethren:--Your former Grand Master is now a candidate for the
support of the 'free and accepted.' De Witt Clinton, if there be
any virtue in the cardinal principles of your faith, will receive
your undivided suffrage for Governor. It is in periods of trial,
like the present, that the wisdom of Freemasonry has been
exercised, its strength tested, and its beauty displayed. Amidst
the dark ages of past time, the great lights of our Order, though
often obscured, have never been extinguished. Shall they now be
eclipsed by the 'introduction of strangers among the workmen?' Will
you suffer the political edifice to be 'daubed with untempered
mortar?' No, surely! The architect of your internal prosperity is
before you. Enter warmly into the cause of your Brother--pass
onward to the ballot boxes, with the tokens of your zeal and
fidelity--and by your united votes contribute to raise the State to
that exalted rank to which she is so justly entitled.

(Signed) THE WIDOW'S SON."

Mr. Clinton's election was accomplished by a very great majority.
This was in 1824. Mr. Clinton was Governor of New York in 1826,
when Morgan disappeared.

The political situation then suddenly changed. In the spring of
1827 Masons were proscribed simply because they were Masons in
Genesee and Monroe countries. In the Fall of 1827 the Anti-Masonic
party announced its object as the destruction of Freemasonry
through the instrumentality of the ballot box.

George A. S. Crooker was nominated for Senator the eighth district.
Although he was defeated, the Anti-Masonic party carried Genesee,
Monroe, Livingston and Niagara counties in the face of both the
Democratic, or Jacksonian party, and the National Republican or
Adams party.

In 1828 Solomon Southwick of Albany, was nominated for Governor of
New York. His total vote was 33,345, and, while defeated, in the
more radical counties he received a very large vote.

In the State election of 1829 the eighth district elected Albert H.
Tracy senator by a majority of 8000 votes, and the same year they
carried fifteen counties, with a total vote in the state of over
67,000.

In 1830, Francis Granger was nominated for Governor at a convention
held at Utica in which forty eight counties were represented by one
hundred and four delegates. He received a vote of 120,361, but was
defeated.

Granger was nominated again in 1832 and again defeated, although
his vote was 156,672.

To show the rapid growth of the Anti-Masonic party in New York, the
following votes are given:

1828   33,345
1829   68,613
1830  106,081
1831   98,847
1832  156,672

In 1833 the estimated strength of the Anti-Masonic party in the
United States was 340,800. Its most rapid growth was in the State
of New York.

In Maine the Anti-Masonic vote in 1831 was 869; 832, 2384; in 1833,
1670. That was the end of the party in Maine.

In Vermont the feeling was so intense that in 1832 she cast her
vote in favor of the Anti-Masonic candidate for President, and had
the distinction of being the only state in the Union to be carried
by the Anti-Masonic party.

In Pennsylvania the feeling was so intense that at a convention of
Anti-Masonic delegates held in Philadelphia, September 11, 1830,
the report of a committee was adopted which recited that "Morgan
was foully murdered," rehearsed the several obligations of
Freemasonry, and demanded the suppression of the institution. Among
the reasons given for this drastic action may be cited the
following:

"To this government Freemasonry is wholly opposed. It requires
unresisting submission to its own authority, in contempt of public
opinion, the claims of conscience, and the rights of private
judgment."

"The means of overthrowing Freemasonry cannot be found in any, or
in all, of our executive authorities. They cannot be found in our
judicial establishments."

"The only adequate corrective of Freemasonry--that prolific source
of the worst abuses--is to he found in the right of election, and
to this we must resort."

"~Freemasonry ought to be abolished. It should certainly be so
abolished as to prevent its restoration. No means of doing this can
be conceived so competent as those furnished by the ballot boxes."

In 1836 the Anti-Masonic party held its last national convention at
Philadelphia and its influence as a factor in politics practically
ended at this time.

In reading accounts of the campaign carried on during these
Anti-Masonic days, one is impressed with the bitterness, fierceness
and intensity of the Anti-Masonic spirit. One writer describes it
in the following language:

"That fearful excitement which spread over our land like a moral
pestilence, which confounded the innocent with the guilty, which
entered even the temple of God, which distracted and divided
churches, which scattered the closest ties of social life, which
set father against son and son against father, arraigned the wife
against her own husband, and in short wherever its baleful
influences were most felt, deprived men of all those comforts and
enjoyments which render life to us a blessing."

Resolutions were adopted in the different legislatures calling for
investigations, demanding the surrender of the charters of the
Grand Lodges, and looking towards every possible way of terminating
the Masonic institution.

In Rhode Island a committee of five was appointed by the
legislature, no one of them Masons. This committee held eighteen
sessions in the principal cities of Rhode Island, hearing all the
evidence offered, whether hearsay evidence or evidence in the
proper form as admitted in courts, and then made a very complete
report in which it declared that all the charges presented to it
against the Masonic order were baseless and slanderous.

In Massachusetts our Grand Lodge surrendered its act of
incorporation to the legislature and turned its property over to
trustees to be held by them, rather than engage in any controversy
on the subject with the legislature. It is interesting, however, to
know that a committee of the legislature appointed in 1834, after
long investigation and hearings, made an elaborate report, from
which the following is taken:

AN INVESTIGATION INTO FREEMASONRY BY A JOINT COMMITTEE OF THE
LEGISLATURE OF MASSACHUSETTS, MARCH, 1824.

The Joint Committee of the Central Court to whom were referred the
memorials of Otis Allyn and other citizens of the Commonwealth,
praying for a full investigation into the nature, language,
ceremonies, and form of rehearsing extra-judicial oaths in Masonic
bodies, and, if found to be such as the Memorialists described
them, that law may be passed, prohibiting the future administration
of Masonic, and such other extra-judicial oaths as tend to weaken
the sanction of civil oaths in Courts of Justice; and praying also
for a repeal of the charter granted by this Commonwealth to the
Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, have attended the duty assigned them,
and ask leave to

REPORT

The committee are fully impressed with the sacred character of the
right which the people of this Commonwealth, in their Bill of
Rights, have retained to themselves, of petitioning their
Legislature for the redress of grievances. The right has been
exercised in the present instance by more than eight thousand
citizens, in one hundred and twenty Memorials referred to the
Committee, complaining of the institution of Freemasonry as a
grievance.

The report then goes on to recite different reasons and motives for
these Memorials and the method of conducting their investigations;
that they had invited the officers of the Grand Lodge of
Massachusetts and all other Masons to attend; that neither the
Grand Master nor any other member of the Grand Lodge, nor any
adhering Mason appeared before them, and that the committee had
failed in its efforts to have anyone appear before it who should
fairly represent the Masonic Fraternity; that at the request of
counsel for the petitioners invitations were sent to the following
adhering Masons:

Rev. Paul Dean, Rev. Samuel Barrett, Rev. Asa Eaton, Rev. Sebastian
Streeter, Rev. William Cogswell, Benjamin Russell, Esq., Robert G.
Shaw, Esq., Samuel Howe, Esq., Hon. Charles Jackson, Hon. Josiah J.
Fiske.

Two of these respectfully declined attendance in writing; the
others neither replied nor attended. At the request of the
committee, the House gave them power to send for persons and
papers, but the Senate refused to concur in the action of the
House.

Upon such information as the committee could obtain from the
petitioners, among whom were many seceding Masons, they submitted
the following conclusions:

"First. That Freemasonry is a moral evil; inasmuch as it holds its
proceedings shrouded by cautious and almost impenetrable secrecy,
and at an hour of darkness, which withdraws its members
unseasonably, from that family circle, which ought to be the first
care and the first solace of every good citizen; as it offers
temptations in the form of 'refreshments,' to a departure from that
sobriety and temperance, which should mark the character of an
intelligent and moral community; as it familiarizes the mind,
theoretically at least, to the contemplation of scenes of violence
and blood; and especially as some of its rites and ceremonies are
offensively sacrilegious, profaning what the community generally
religiously respect; thus undermining those sentiments of piety,
which are acknowledged to be the very basis and safeguard of
morality.

"Second. That Freemasonry is a pecuniary evil; inasmuch as it
collects from the community, under the false pretenses of extensive
charity and peculiar science, large amounts of money, which are
afterwards chiefly expended in unprofitable entertainments,
parades, and trinkets, which, in the language of an eminent
departed statesman, 'a well-informed savage would blush to wear.'

"Third. That Freemasonry is a political evil; inasmuch as it is a
government claiming existence independent of civil governments, and
administering oaths, which, from their number and frequency, tend
to impair the binding force of civil oaths-- threaten penalties,
severe even to barbarity, and calculating to have an appalling and
controlling effect on weak and uninformed minds--and in their tenor
conflict with the civil obligations of the citizen, calling on him
either to violate the latter in obedience to his Masonic oaths, or
to violate his Masonic oaths in obedience to his civil
obligations."

The report continues to set forth the reason for its conclusion and
the following is taken from part of the report relating to the
second finding:

"The By-Laws of the Grand Lodge appropriate one fourth part of the
annual fees and one-third part of all initiation fees paid by
subordinate lodges, to the charity fund; that is, two dollars for
every lodge, and one dollar for every initiation in the State. Thus
one hundred one lodges would pay $808, and if nine hundred Masons
were made annually, as was the increase in 1826, they would pay
$2700 more, of which $1206 would go to support the 'dignity' of the
Grand Lodge, and $502 be added to the charity fund, the interest
alone of which can be applied to charity--so that by this process,
it would require $2700 to enable this Charitable Society, the Grand
Lodge, to distribute in charity $30.12 a year!"

Lodge dues $8. Initiate dues to Grand Lodge $3.

(1/4 of $808 equals $202. 900 initiates would pay $2700.
1-3 of $2700 equals $900. $202 plus $900 equals $1102 instead of
$502.

$1102 at 6 per cent interest would produce $66.12 instead of $30.12
as so solemnly declared by this legislative committee of
Anti-Masons.)

The period 1820 to 1840 was one of intense religious activity.

On July 4, 1827, in the Seventh Presbyterian Church of the city of
Philadelphia, Ezra Stiles Ely said in a sermon:

"I propose, fellow-citizens, a new sort of Union or if you please
a Christian party in politics, which I am exceedingly desirous all
good men in our country should join, not by subscribing to a
constitution, but by adopting and avowing to act on religious
principles in all civil matters."

At this time also the more orthodox members of the Congregational
church were alarmed at the different beliefs creeping into their
fold. For this purpose it was proposed by many to adopt synods like
those of the Presbyterian church in order to define their tenets
exactly. A large body of the church even desired the union of the
Congregational and Presbyterian churches.

The Anti-Masonic party having so many religious men in its ranks,
and being at this time in a crusade in which the churches were
distracted, naturally entered as another element in the religious
distress of the period. In New England this was especially true, as
the party there was composed of the older religious country people,
already in opposition to the liberal spirit of the cities.

The Anti-Masonic party received the name of the "Christian Party in
Politics."

Every effort was directed against Masonic preachers and laymen.
Churches in their councils condemned the order. Before the
disappearance of Morgan, the Presbyterian church at Pittsburgh in
January, 1821, condemned the institution as "unfit for professed
Christians." After the Morgan incident the Presbyterians required
their ministers to renounce Masonry and their laymen to sever all
connections with it and hold no fellowship with Masons. The
Congregationalists took practically the same attitude in New
England and Eastern New York. They attacked at one and the same
time the Unitarians, the Universalists, and the Masons. In New
England Anti-Masonry was looked upon as "nothing more than
Orthodoxy in disguise."

In one of the Vermont papers opposed to the AntiMasons appeared a
letter in which the writer made the following appeal:

"Universalists, awake from thy slumbers, and show to these Orthodox
(Anti-Masons) that we are yet a majority and that we calculate to
retain the majority." March 11, 1834.

As early as 1823 the General Methodist Conference prohibited its
clergy from joining the Masons. In Pennsylvania during the Masonic
excitement it was said by the Anti-Masons that "No religious sect
throughout the United States has done more for the Anti-Masonic
powers than the Methodists." It forbade its members to join lodges
or be present at any of their processions or festivals and passed
strict rules against ordaining any ministers who belonged to the
Order. The Methodist church was rent and torn by the struggle, and
many churches, fearing strife, did not allow the question to come
up, but passed non-partisan resolutions.

The Baptist church also was rent with dissensions over the
question, although not to so great an extent as the Presbyterians,
Congregationalists, and Methodists. At a convention of delegates
from Baptist churches held at LeRoy, New York, January 30, 1827, it
was

"Resolved, that all such members as belong to the Baptist church
and who also belong to the society of Freemasons, be requested to
renounce publicly all communications with that order, and if the
request is not complied with in a reasonable time, to excommunicate
all those who neglect or refuse to do so."

Many of the friends of temperance, which was a growing reform at
this time, were also enemies of Masons.

Another peculiarity of Anti-Masonry is that it found its chief
support in the country and not in city. It is interesting to note
that Anti-Masonry was essentially a New England movement. There
were exceptions, but in New England and New York and throughout the
path of New England emigration the party was strongest. Most of the
leaders in New York, like Weed, Granger, Holley, Ward and Maynard,
were of New England extraction. The party in Pennsylvania was led
by men of New England extraction and was called by the Democrats "a
Yankee concern from beginning to end."

The Anti-Masons accused the newspapers of being "muzzled" by the
Masons. Anti-Masonic papers were established. In 1832 there were
one hundred and forty one of these papers. New York had forty-five
weeklies and one daily, while Pennsylvania had fifty-five weekly
papers.

Considering all these conditions, the Morgan incident was but the
spark that lighted the fire. The fire was fanned and controlled by
some of the shrewdest political leaders this country has ever seen.
The greatest of all of these politicians were Thurlow Weed of New
York and Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, while in New England,
Hallett of Rhode Island was active, and Phelps and Thatcher of
Massachusetts may be mentioned among the most prominent, although
there were many very active in New England.

In 1826 there was a general practice, which had prevailed for
years, of giving credit for the degrees. The door of Masonry was
thrown open to a great many. It was, as we say, popular to belong
to the Masonic Fraternity. It is possible that during the period
immediately preceding the Morgan episode a good many had been
accepted into the Fraternity without being carefully investigated,
or if they were, the committees and lodges were too eager and
anxious to swell their numbers to exercise that careful scrutiny of
the applicant which has been found so essential if the lodges are
to maintain that high standard of character which the institution
warrants; consequently, when the storm burst and the Fraternity was
openly charged with violating the law of the land and the murder of
an innocent citizen, a good many of those who dropped out or became
seceding Masons improved the opportunity to destroy their financial
indebtedness and at the same time gain some notoriety in their
several communities.

The work of the lodges fell off very rapidly. In some states the
Grand Lodges suspended their meetings for years. The Grand Lodge of
Vermont had but seven lodges represented at its meeting in 1834. In
1836 the Grand Master, the Grand Secretary, and the Grand Treasurer
of Vermont were empowered to meet every two years and adjourn the
Grand Lodge biennially or oftener. This was done during the years
1837, 1838, 1840, 1842 and 1844, but in 1845 these Grand Officers
took counsel to resume labor. It also appears from their records
that various constituent lodges at that time resumed labor. This
would indicate that their communications had never legally ceased
and their charters had not been surrendered. Probably these lodges
followed the civil law as to associations and so maintained a
consecutive legal existence from a date prior to the Anti-Masonic
period.


In Maine the Grand Lodge failed to meet for several years and, had
a nominal meeting in other years. While from 1834 to 1843 the Grand
Lodge met annually, at one meeting they were without a
representative from a single lodge, and but twice during this
period of nine years did they have representatives from more than
four lodges. Nearly all the lodges in Maine during this period or
some part of it, suspended their meetings and became dormant, even
if they did not surrender their charters.

In New Jersey the Grand Lodge in 1824 and 1825 had representatives
from twenty-two to thirty-three lodges. After this period of
opposition the lodges in New Jersey were reduced to six.

In New York there were four hundred and eighty lodges in 1826 with
a membership of about twenty thousand. From 1827 to 1839 the Grand
Lodge maintained its annual meetings, but only fifty to ninety
different lodges were represented in that time. In 1835 there were
but seventy-five lodges in the State of New York; twenty-five of
these were in the city of New York, with a membership of about
three thousand. In 1839 there were seventy-five lodges in the
state, twenty-two were in New York City and Brooklyn and
fifty-three in the remainder of the state. Masonry was at its
lowest ebb in New York about 1840.

There are many remarkable instances of loyalty and heroism in
connection with these local lodges. One or two instances will
suffice. Olive Branch Lodge No. 39, at Le Roy, in Genesee County,
did not suspend its communications, and was recorded as the
"Preserver of Masonry" in Western New York; seven of its most
zealous and devoted members entered into this solemn agreement:

"To meet once in four weeks for the purpose of opening and closing
the lodge and keeping up the work."

This agreement was literally kept, and never once during that time,
although obliged to travel a distance of more than thirty miles,
did they fail to have their meetings.

Union Lodge No. 45, at Lima, Monroe county, continued to hold its
regular meetings, although it was fiercely assailed again and
again.

Batavia lodge, where the Morgan trouble began, lay dormant for
sixteen years, but was revived in 1842.

On June 17, 1825, occurred the laying of the cornerstone of Bunker
Hill Monument, by the officers of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts,
who were honored by the presence of Brother LaFayette, friend and
companion of George Washington.

Eighteen hundred and twenty-five was the last prosperous year
Massachusetts Masonry was to see fol two decades. That year the
number of lodges rose to one hundred and seven. In 1844 it had sunk
to fifty two and at one Communication of the Grand Lodge only eight
lodges were represented.

In 1833, the meeting of December 12th was adjourned to December
20th, and at that meeting the only business transacted, according
to the records, was the passing of the following vote:

"Voted: That R. W. Francis J. Oliver, R. W. Augustus Peabody, R. W.
Joseph Baker, R. W. John Soley, and R. W. Charles W. Moore, be a
committee to consider the expediency of surrendering the act of
incorporation of the Grand Lodge, and report at the next meeting."

The next meeting was held December 27, 1833, and the following
action was taken:

"Voted: That the Master and Wardens of this Grand Lodge be
authorized and directed to surrender to the Legislature the act of
incorporation granted to the Master, Wardens and Members of the
Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, June 16, 1817, and to present
therewith the foregoing memorial signed by them."

The memorial referred to is a dignified, carefully prepared
statement of the reasons for surrendering this act of incorporation
and a plain statement of their position on all questions involving
the principles of Masonry.

At this meeting it was reported that the sale of the Masonic Temple
as authorized, had been made to Robert Shaw.

In 1843, December 27, the Grand Lodge met and held a Lodge of
Instruction, at which the three degrees were fully worked and
exemplified by the Grand Lecturers with "facility and
skillfulness." More brethren from the country were in attendance at
this meeting than any previous occasion for ten years. In the same
year a new and revised edition of the Grand Constitutions was
adopted.

In 1845, December 27, two years later, a Grand Lodge of Instruction
was called at 9 a.m., at which the representatives of twenty-seven
lodges were present. The work of the three degrees was exemplified
by the Grand Lecturers and favorable comments on their efforts are
recorded.

On June 17, 1843, occurred the great celebration of the completion
of the Bunker Hill Monument, at which were present the chief
magistrates and dignitaries of the nation and some of the states.
In the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge occurs this comment:

"Those who had the direction of the great jubilee did not feel the
propriety of inviting our Grand Lodge to assist in the ceremonies."

King Solomon's Lodge, of Charlestown, was especially invited, and
it seems that the members of the Grand Lodge joined with the
members of King Solomon's Lodge in the procession and so
participated in the proceedings, but with great regret that they
were not permitted to participate officially in the proceedings, in
view of the illustrious Masons who participated in the battle that
this monument was to commemorate.

Twenty years after the Morgan episode, the editor of "Letters on
Freemasonry" by John Quincy Adams, stated in an introduction to
those letters as published in 1847:

"The excitement which arose in consequence of the disclosures then
made had the effect, at least for a time, if not permanently, to
check the further spread of that association. The legislative power
of some of the states was invoked, and at last actually interposed,
to prevent the administration of extra-judicial oaths, including of
course all such as were constantly taken in the Masonic Order. This
was the furthest point which the opposition ever reached. It did
not succeed in procuring the dissolution of the organization of the
order, or even the repeal of the charters under which it had
recognized existence in the social system. From the moment of the
adoption of a penal law deemed strong enough to meet the most
serious of the evils complained of, the apprehension of further
danger from Masonry began to subside. At this day (1847), the
subject has ceased to be talked of. The attention of men has been
gradually diverted to other things, until at last it may be said
that few persons are aware of the fact, provided it be not
especially forced upon their notice, that not only Freemasonry
continues to exist, but also that other associations partaking of
its secret nature, if not of its unjustifiable obligations, not
merely live, but greatly flourish in the midst of them."

A careful reading of many articles published and resolutions passed
at about the time of the Morgan episode indicates that a few
members of the lodge at Batavia thought they were serving a good
purpose by securing Morgan's manuscript before it was published and
separating Morgan from Miller, editor of the local paper. Quite a
number of Masons were knowing to the plans.

These plans included an agreement with Morgan that he should
destroy all the manuscript and printed sheets connected with his
proposed publication; he was to quit drinking, and from the money
to be paid clothe himself decently and provide for the immediate
wants of his family; refuse all further interviews with his
partners; promise that he would not disclose this arrangement to
anyone, and that within a short time he would go to a remote
locality in Canada, where he was to settle down, his family to be
supplied with money and transportation to join him, and a
substantial sum paid to Morgan for giving up the publication and
the expected income from these disclosures. Morgan was to be well
treated and his family provided for until they should join him in
Canada.

In view of these arrangements, which were well known to the Masons
in the locality of Batavia, it did not occur to the men who took
this ill-advised action that anything like the excitement which
followed would be occasioned. That the plan was entirely a local
arrangement, we believe is conclusively shown by action of the
Masonic Grand Bodies at that time.

The Grand Lodge of New York took no action in the matter until
1831, when it adopted resolutions reciting the facts and the
misrepresentations and appointing a committee to ascertain and
report at the next annual communication. In 1832 a supplemental
report was adopted in which they deplored the action,
characterizing it as "a violation alike of Masonic obligation and
the law of the land," and asked for further time to complete their
investigation.

The Grand Lodge of Vermont, October 7, 1829, issued an appeal in
which it held itself guiltless of the different charges brought
against the Fraternity in connection with the Morgan incident.

Other Grand Lodges took similar action. Perhaps the most effective
and complete statement issued by Masons was the declaration of the
Freemasons of Boston and vicinity, dated December 31, 1831, which
was of great service in restoring the public mind to a normal
state. This declaration is well worth consideration, and reveals
not only a fine appreciation of the situation, by our best men, but
also a splendid spirit of resolution to abide the results. It is as
follows:

"While the public mind remained in the high state of excitement to
which it had been carried by the partial and inflammatory
representations of certain offences committed by a few misguided
members of the MASONIC INSTITUTION in a sister state, it seemed to
the undersigned (residents of Boston and vicinity) to be expedient
to refrain from a public DECLARATION of their principles and
engagements as MASONS. But believing the time now to be fully come
when their fellow citizens will receive with candor, if not with
satisfaction, A SOLEMN AND UNEQUIVOCAL DENIAL OF THE ALLEGATIONS
which, during the last five years, in consequence of their
connection with the MASONIC FRATERNITY, have been reiterated
against them, they respectfully ask permission to invite attention
to the subjoined

DECLARATION:

Whereas, it has been frequently asserted and published to the world
that in the several degrees of FREEMASONRY, as they are enforced in
the United States, the candidate, in his initiation and subsequent
advancement, binds himself by oath to sustain his Masonic brethren
in acts which are at variance with the fundamental principles of
morality and incompatible with his duty as a good and faithful
citizen, in justice therefore to themselves, and with a view to
establish TRUTH and expose IMPOSITION, the undersigned, many of us
the recipients of every degree of Freemasonry known and
acknowledged in this country, do most SOLEMNLY DENY the existence
of any such obligations in the MASONIC INSTITUTION, so far as our
knowledge respectively extends. And we as SOLEMNLY AVER that no
person is admitted to the Institution without first being made
acquainted with the nature of the obligations which he will be
required to incur and assume.

FREEMASONRY secures its members in the freedom of thought and of
speech, and permits each and everyone to act according to the
dictates of his own conscience in matters of religion, and of his
personal preferences in matters of politics; it neither knows, nor
does it assume to inflict upon its erring members, however wide may
be their aberration from duty, any penalties or punishments other
than those of ADMONITION, SUSPENSION, and EXPULSION.

The obligations of the Institution require of its members a strict
obedience to the laws of God and man. So far from being bound by
any engagements inconsistent with the happiness and prosperity of
the nation, every citizen who becomes a Mason is doubly bound to be
true to his GOD, to his COUNTRY, and to his FELLOWMAN.

In the language of the Ancient Constitutions of the Order, which
are printed and open for public inspection, and which are used as
text books in all the lodges, he is required to keep and obey the
MORAL LAW; to be a quiet and peaceful citizen, true to his
government and just to his country.

MASONRY disdains the making of proselytes; she opens the portals of
her asylum to those who seek admission with the recommendation of
a character unspotted by immorality and vice. She simply requires
of the candidate his assent to one great, fundamental, religious
truth--THE EXISTENCE AND PROVIDENCE OF GOD; and a practical
acknowledgement of those infallible doctrines for the government of
life which are written by the finger of God on the heart of man.

ENTERTAINING such sentiments, as MASONS, as CITIZENS, as
CHRISTIANS, and as MORAL MEN, and deeply impressed with the
conviction that the MASONIC INSTITUTION has been, and may continue
to be, productive of great good to their fellowmen; and having
'received the laws of the society, and its accumulated funds, in
sacred trust for charitable uses,' the undersigned can neither
renounce nor abandon it.

We most cordially unite with our Brethren of Salem and vicinity in
the declaration and hope that, 'should the people of this country
become so infatuated as to deprive Masons of their civil rights, in
violation of their written constitutions, and the wholesome spirit
of just laws and free governments, a vast majority of the
Fraternity will still remain firm, confiding in God, and the
rectitude of their intentions for consolation, under the trials to
which they may be exposed."'

This declaration was written by Charles W. Moore, for many years
Grand Secretary of our Grand Lodge. It was originally intended only
for the Boston Encampment of Knights Templar. Later, at the earnest
request of prominent Masons, it was submitted to the Grand Master,
and subsequently signed by one thousand, four hundred and
sixty-nine Masons from fifty four towns and districts in
Massachusetts. Four hundred thirty-seven were of Boston.

More than six thousand Masons in New England subscribed to this
declaration, which was given to the public on December 31, 1831.

M. W. Brother Gallagher, in commenting upon this declaration in an
address given by him at Camden, Maine, on June 24, 1901, said:

"It was the first heavy blow given to Anti-Masonry and with the
political defeat in the Jackson campaign sounded the death knell of
its existence. That famous declaration embodies and states
concisely about all there is in the principles of the Masonic
Order. Printed and read in our lodges, it would serve to assist in
pursuing anew our journey in the paths of rectitude and Masonic
virtue."

THE APPROACHES TO THE HEART

Do you crave an inspiration straight from nature's very heart,
Beating true to the creation of which you're a conscious part?
Would you, somehow, in your longing, form a kinship to the earth
That might make its elementals of a sweeter, richer worth--
That might make all things in nature to your soul a means of grace,
Wooing with the charm forever of her omnipresent grace ? 
Then unto her soulful readings, blended with Masonic Art
Open wide all the approaches to the portals of the heart.
--Bro. L. B. Mitchell, Michigan.

Liberty's in every blow! 
Let us do or die.
--Burns.

But what is truth? 'Twas Pilate's question put 
To Truth itself, that deign'd him no reply.
--Cowper.

