"one-man power," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. We
beg to refer him to our review of Maine (ante) for so much evidence
as yet appears that however "properly," from his standpoint, our
grand master may be invested with the one-man power, such investi-
ture was not within the intention of the grand lodge.
Our brother speaks very generously of our report, but is compelled
to qualify his praise of its author by the reservation that his character-
istic urbanity and courtesy are wanting when he discusses Cerneauism,
etc. He congratulates us that Cerneauism, High Riters, Inner Orients,
Holy Empire, Oligarchies, and Star Chamber Inquisitions get men-
tioned by us less frequently than formerly, but says:
With apparently no "let up" in his sarcastic allusions and unfra-
ternal inferences in relation to its opponents, whether grand lodges
or individuals, 3'et, as stated last year, "Cerneauism per se, or its dis-
seminators or coadjutors, receives no condemnation at his hand," and
his so-called "High Riters" continue to be the bete noir of his imagin-
ation.
Perhaps if we should ever do this kind of work for a High Rite
body, we might discuss Cerneauism, but we really cannot, not even
to accommodate our truly esteemed brother, consent to do what we
have for j'ears been condemning grand lodges for doing. We don't
think the Cerneau faction of the High Riters have any more claim to
notice in a 'grand lodge paper than any other faction, and we have
therefore carefully refrained from discussing their conflicting claims.
MASONIC CORRESPONDENCE. 211
We are quite sure that Bro. Cunningham is somewhat too sus-
l^icious that there is some latent meaning in our utterances. He
quotes our comment upon the resolution by which a college of custo-
dians was established in the Grand Lodge of Kentucky as "sarcas-
tic." We think it could hardly be called that. It was simply calling"
attention to the great scope of legislation incidentally involved in a
resolution whose chief purpose was the division and reference of the
grand master's address, and as the far-reaching effect of the legisla-
tion was not overstated, we fail to see where the sarcasm comes in.
Because in our hurry we notice chiefly the points of difference
between our brother and ourself it is not to be supposed that we find
no common ground. His present review shows generous space ac-
corded to our views on matters wherein we are in accord.
On the other hand we find the following:
The recognition of the Grand Lodge "Alpina," Switzerland, the
Grand Orient of Italy, and other European bodies, by the Grand
Lodge of Ohio, receives the following unfraternal criticism, without
the least shadow of proof, other than his own imagination, in its
support:
"For this wild haste to recognize every hybrid body claiming to
exercise authority in Symbolic Masonry, so pressing that it cannot
wait to find out whether some of them desire to recognize Ohio before
referring their cases to the grand master with power to act, there
can be, it seems to us, but one explanation. Having in its own juris-
diction declared associations of Masons organized upon the most
glaring dissent from the original plan of Masonry to be lawful Ma-
sonic bodies, it feels the necessity of justifying that action by demon-
strating that there is no dissent so glaring, no departure so wide
elsewhere upon the planet as to escape its ostentatious patronage."
This compels us to go over some ground in detail which he con-
veniently summarizes in the expression "Other European Bodies,"
We were not so "unfraternal" but that we gave in each instance the
grounds on which recognition was recommended by him, and in the
case of the "grand Lodge 'Alpina'" we added no comment of our
own; but it may have been unfraternal to reproduce the reasons
given for an act of such gravity as the recognition of a body as a le-
gitimate Masonic power. They are briefly, but fully, that the deputy,
grand master of the Grand Lodge Alpina, R. W. Bro. LouiS Frey,
was a colonel "of a Missouri regiment of volunteers of Union sol-
diers," and later was "Minister Plenipotentiaryof the Swiss Confed-
eration at Washington;" that the committee had the constitution of
the Grand Lodge "Alpina, "but no opportunity had offered for a care-
ful translation of the same, and that "Grand Master Ducommun
gives his assurance of the co-operation of their board of administra-
tion in the desire for mutual representation, and it is stated that
"grand lodge representation exists with nearly all European grand
bodies,"
212 APPENDIX. — PART I.
Probably it had escaped the committee's attention, as it had
ours, that the Grand Lodge "Alpina" enjoys the nearly or quite unique
distinction of being in fraternal relations with the Grand Orient of
France.
Touching the recognition of the Grand Orient of Italy we pointed
out that the grand lodge in Italy was only a section of the grand
orient, and had no voice in issuing charters or in the selection of the
head of the concern. In this we are sure there was nothing unf ra-
ternal unless it was at variance with the facts, and on this point we
refer to our review of New York (ante).
But it was not the recognition of these bodies which had re-
quested it, which received the "unfraternal criticism" which we have
identified by producing his quotation of it, but "other European
bodies" which had not requested it, but which the committee unasked
hastened to authenticate as entitled to recognition by the Grand
Lodge of Ohio, ^'' if desired on their part, ^'' viz.: the grand lodges of Den-
mark, Hungary, and Sweden and the Grand Orient of the Nether-
lands.
Of the criticism thus characterized as unfraternal, that portion
of it which represents the haste as being so pressing that it could not
wait to find out whether these bodies desired to recognize Ohio, before
referring their cases to the grand master with power to act, it can-
not be said that it takes on the unfraternal quality from any lack of
basis in fact, for here is the complete sentence in which the italicized
words occur:
"Your committee therefore recommend that the subject matter
of the formal recognition and exchange of representatives, if de-
sired on their part, between the above named grand bodies and this
grand lodge be, and is hereby referred to the M.W. grand master
with power to act."
His further characterization of the "unfraternal criticism" re-
ferred to, is this:
The absurdity of the foregoing being in itself a sufficient refuta-
tion, it is unnecessar}' to give it any further consideration, neither is
•it deemed necessary to reply in detail to similar criticisms in the same
connection.
We would, however^ remind our esteemed brother that the official
Solomonic character, to which he so pointedly demurs in his allusion
to the Continental Grand Bodies in Europe, prevails even in some de-
gree in the Grand Lodge of England, as may be noted in its opening
ceremonial.
It will be noted that "the absurdity of the foregoing" is made
broad enough to blanket the af tercoming also. This is convenient, as
it relieves him of the necessity of referring to a point made by us
bearing directly upon the matter of undue haste in reference to the
MASONIC CORRESPONDENCE. 213
hybrid bodies, viz., that when the committee came to the Grand Lodge
of New Zealand, known to be composed of lawful Free and Accepted
Masons, who have never dissented from the original plan of Masonry,
and the legality of whose formation the committee confessed to be
beyond question, then there seemed to them "to be no occasion for
haste in the matter of official recognition." It saves him also the
necessity of meeting the points raised by us in the following — the
truth of which, it will be observed, he does not deny — and which is
something more than an allusion to the continental grand bodies in
Europe — a very definite reference to two of the bodies which the
grand mastec was authorized to recognize if desired upon their part:
In Sweden and Denmark where the Rite of Zinnendorff jirevails,
Masonry is a religio-political institution, excluding all but Christians,
in the government of which the symbolic lodges have no voice, the
ruling body being the 10th degree, with the king over all as the "Vicar
of Solomon" — Solomon being throughout but a type of Christ — who
appoints the grand master, and even creates grand lodges by decree,
as has just been done by King Oscar, of Sweden, in speaking into ex-
istence the "Grand Lodge of Norway." Ohio Masons could not gain
admission into the body which governs the Symbolic lodges in Sweden,
or in Denmark, unless they possessed also a mixture of chapter, com-
mandery, and Scottish Rite degrees and something else besides.
His indirect attempt to break the force of this by a reminder —
which gives no hint of the real gist of our remarks— that the official
Solomonic character is in some degree recognized in the opening cer.
emonial of the Grand Lodge of England, falls far short of the mark,
for one need have no degree beyond that of Master Mason to gain ad-
mission to that bod3^
Of another matter he says:
Concerning the action of Grand Master Goodale, in prohibiting
the installation of avowed so-called Cerneaus, either as a senior war-
den or as a secretary of a subordinate lodge in Ohio, the poor, perse-
cuted Cerneau, regardless of his disloyalty and rebellious disregard of
the enactments of the Grand Lodge of Ohio, it would seem has his
warmest sympathies, as in this connection he says:
"So far as appears from the record, this declaration was one of
the grand master's own prescribing — unauthorized by the grand lodge.
Probably it was such a case as this which suggested to the grand
master the desirability of adopting the Iowa plan of taking the trial
of alleged offenses against the ruling dynastj^ of the Holy Empire out
of the hands of a 'jury of the vicinage,' and lodging it in a commission
selected by the crown."
Concerning which it is sufficient to say that if he had quoted all
instead of a part of what we said, he would have shown that there
was no evidence that the senior warden was "an avowed so-called
Cerneau," but that in declining to make the declaration prescribed by
the grand master as a prerequisite to installation but unauthorized
by the grand lodge, he neglected on opportunity to avow himself one,
214 APPENDIX. — PART I.
but based his declaration upon the ground that the requirement was
subversive of the principles of Masonry, an innovation that he vras in
duty bound to resist; and if he was recognized as a member of the
lodge in good standing the point was indisputably well taken.
Our brother says we evade the demands for legitimate proof of
our assertions, hence he considers it only necessary to enter an abso-
lute disclaimer as to our remarks relative to Grand Master Goodale's
suggestion of trial by commission in certain cases, notably disloyalty
and liquor-selling. We observe, however, that where he thinks he has
us at a disadvantage he can become specific in his arguments. We
had said in perfect good faith that the statement that Masons in
Ohio who had been suspended for non-payment of dues remained in
good standing in the "higher bodies," indicated that they were simply
excluded from the privileges of their own lodge, and that the term
suspensi07i ought not to be used in connection with them; and contin-
uing, said that the question whether it was legal, and, if so, whether
it was imperative that "higher bodies" should be furnished with cer-
tificates of lodge action in cases of suspension or expulsion was a nat-
ural one, considering the action and attitude of the Grand Lodge of
Ohio, and that with the answer it illustrated the process by which
grand orientism was being evolved there. We then had the Ohio pro-
ceedings under review. In his report for 1892, Bro. Cunningham
quoted these remarks as a specimen of our unfairness, and in the re-
marks which we quote below intimated that we had manufactured
the alleged fact on which our comments were based out of whole cloth.
He said:
"Suspension in Ohio means just what the word implies. And a
brother suspended in his lodge, in Ohio, is suspended from all the rights
and privileges of a Mason: and as that suspension carries with it sus-
pension in all other legitimate Masonic bodies of which he is a member,
it is but a matter of common justice to those Masonic bodies, if rec-
ognized by the Grand Lodge of Ohio, should be notified of such
suspensions. The impression that he seeks to convey is, therefore,
not only unwarranted b}^ the action of the Grand Lodge of Ohio, but
the subject involved is not even open to any discussion, except upon a
forced construction not authorized by the text of the enactment."
Of this we said in 1893:
"We have not the Ohio proceedings before us which prompted
this criticism, but we feel so sure that we must have summarized in
the statement with which the quotation from our remarks opens,
something found in the proceedings — and that, too, without forced
construction— that we shall be greatly obliged to Bro. Cunningham
if he will reproduce the text. One thing we know, that we did not
consciously misstate a supposed fact. Of course we do not expect him
to be pleased with our deduction from the fact or with the signifi-
cance we gave it; but for making such a significance possible the
grand lodge is responsible, not we."
MASONIC CORRESPONDENCE. 215
Over this, in the report under review, Bro. CUNNINGHAM thus
arches his eyebrows:
Although this is rather an unusual way of reply, askin
the text quoted upon which he so confidently makes his statements;
and then, too, the self-complacency with which he states that if he
has made any mistake, that the Grand Lodge of Ohio "is responsible,
not we," is reall}' refreshing on account of its coolness, regardless of
the seeming assurance with which the utterance is made. However,
we are indeed pleased to have an opportunity of accommodating our
esteemed brother with the text to which he refers, viz.: On page 84 of
the proceedings of the M.W. Grand Lodge of Ohio for 1890, the com-
mittee on Masonic jurisprudence, in their rei^ort, recommend the
adoption of the following, viz.:
"VII. Your committee on Masonic jurisprudence, at the request
of the M.E. grand chapter, submits the following:
'^Resolved, That the secretary of each subordinate lodge be, and
he is, hereby required to send an official notice, under the seal of the
lodge, of the dimission, suspension, expulsion, or reinstatement of aiiy
of the members of his lodge, to the secretary of the chapter or chapters
of Royal Arch Masons within whose jurisdiction it may be situated."
[" TF7iic/i was, on motion, unanirmmsly adopted."']
As will be noted, the very presentation of the resolution in ques-
tion should have been in itself sufficient evidence that suspension and
expulsion in the lodge suspended and expelled in other bodies men-
tioned without, apparently, any point upon which any other inference
could be based, aside from the well-known constitutional enactments
of those grand bodies; hence, M.W. Bro. Bobbins will be obliged to in-
vent some other explanation of his statements upon that subject.
We felt sure on reading this that it could not be the text to which
we referred, because there was nothing in it to warrant our state-
jnent, and we knew that, as we had before stated, we had not con-
sciously misstated a supposed fact. So we looked back over our review
of the Ohio proceedings of 1890, as we ought to have done when our
statement was first questioned, and found that we had fortunately
copied the missing link from the rulings of Grand Master Goodale.
We cannot cite to the page of the Ohio proceedings of 1890, where it
occurs, because after review we returned the volume to the grand
secretary, as our law unfortunately requires, but it will be found on
page 18.3 of the Illinois report on correspondence for 18^1, as follows:
Question 1st: Can a man who is suspended for non-payment of dues
be placed in good standing twenty-four hours after death by payment
of dues, the man while living not being in good standing, and his body
only remaining on earth?
2d. There are quite a number of Masons i)i this city icho are in good stand-
ing in higher bodies, but who are suspended for non-pai/ment of dues in Blue
Lodge. 1 can not find where lodges have officially notified higher bodies
of suspension or expulsion, nor can I find in the Code anything author-
izing it done. Is it legal to furnish higher bodies with a certificate of
suspended or expelled members? If legal, is it imperative?
Answer 1st: No.
216 APPENDIX. — PART I.
2d. Bodies recognized by the Grand Lodge of Ohio as ''Masonic,"
and who make the degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry a prerequisite
to membership in their own body, and who are occui^ants of the terri-
torial jurisdiction occupied by the lodge suspending or expelling a
member ma}^ be officially notified under the seal of the lodge.
The italics are ours. We beg to call the attention of our brother
who had the report from which this is reproduced, under review when
he took us to task for our statements, to the fact that in the reply of
the grand master there is no hint that the brother who asked the
question had either misstated or misapprehended the alleged facts
upon which it was based. We should be very glad to believe that
Avhen M.W. Bro. CUNNINGHAM said we would "be obliged to invent
some other explanation of his [our] statements," he used the word
"invent" in its primary sense, viz., to discover.
Of our point that a hundred and seventy years of unvarying usage
had recognized the indefeasible right of the lodge to instruct its mas-
ter on any question to come before the grand lodge and that its ex-
plicit denial by the Grand Lodge of Ohio in 1887 was a denial of the
doctrine that no man or body of men can make innovations in the
body of Masonry, a violation of the constraints imposed by the land-
marks, a cutting loose from the limitations imposed by the funda-
mental law and a repudiation of the conditions upon which the grand
lodge accepted its existence, he says:
The space allotted to the review of the proceedings under consid-
eration has been so far exceeded as to preclude further mention of
Bro. Robbins' statements other than, in reply to his screed concern-
ing "instruction of masters and wardens as to their vote," to mention
that the constitution of the Grand Lodge of Ohio defines the member-
ship of the grand lodge, together with the powers and duties of its
members, and its regulations in relation thereto, have been in force,
without question, for more than three-fourths of a century — over half
the period mentioned — and its enactments do not permit the construc-
tion desired by Bro. Robbins.
Concerning which we only desire to inquire whether prior to the
outbreak of the "High Rite" war in that jurisdiction, any Ohio Ma-
son ever interpreted their venerable constitution to deny the right of
a lodge to instruct its representative?
One more point. In answer to his query we said:
"The Royal Arch and Templar degrees violate the plan defined by
those charges; the first because it creates additional distinctions as a
basis of fellowship, and the second manifestly for the same reason,
and the further reason that it supplants the purely theistic basis of
the Masonry so defined, by the purely Christian basis of Templarism."
In reply he quotes a strongly Christian prayer from the Regius
MS. and says that as all the known ancient MSS. prior to Anderson's
constitution of 1723 are especially Christian in character, our explana-
tion is of no force whatever. The fact that Anderson's constitutions
MASONIC CORRESPONDENCE. 217
of 1723 are not sectarian in character is what gives our explanation
all force. Anderson's constitutions are the "Charg-es of a Free-
mason," agreed upon as the fundamental and unchangeable law when
Masonry took its present form and as such accepted by Free and Ac-
cepted Masons throughout the world. It is the plan defined by these
charges that we said those degrees violated, and the fact that he is
driven back to the narrower basis which the first of them, "Concern-
ing God and Religion" expressly repudiates, shows that he feels the
force of our explanation.
In closing he saj's:
Since the foregoing was written, we have learned that M.W. Bro.
Robbins has become a Scottish Rite Mason, and is now an honored
member and, we believe, an officer of those bodies of the Northern Ma-
sonic Jurisdiction, at Quincy, Illinois. We beg to congratulate our
esteemed brother, and to extend to him a hearty welcome ujDon his
entrance into the domain of the "High Riters," believing that he will
find that the possession of additional grades to the true Mason but
serves to increase sentiments of loyalty and devotion to Ancient
Craft Masonry, to which all other degrees must be subservient.
We reciprocate his cordial greeting, and to the expression of his
belief as to the probable effect upon us of our new affiliation, we can
only say, "So mote it be."
OKLAHOMA, 1894.
3d Annual. Kingfisher. February 12.
This grand lodge does not indulge in the luxury of a diplomatic
establishment.
The grand master (Selwyn Douglas) formally reported the as-
sassination of Grand Lecturer Edward H. Townsend by three ruf-
fians who broke into his house and killed him in the presence of his
family, an event of which the lodges had been apprised through a cir-
cular issued by the grand master calling for help for the murdered
man's family.
One of the murderers had been captured, convicted, and sen-
tenced to ninety-nine years' imprisonment. The grand master says:
When the tidings of this brutal crime reached the ears of the
brethren. I received letters from many of the subordinate lodges in
the territory, urging me to otter a reward in the name of the grand
lodge for the apprehension of the assassins, and assuring me that an
assessment upon the subordinate lodges, according to membership
218 APPENDIX. — PART I.
sufficient to raise a thousand dollars or more, for that purpose, would
meet with a hearty response and prompt payment.
The temptation to comply with these requests was very strong,
and I hesitated for a time as to the proper course to be pursued.
Fortunately, his
and he saw that it would not do for Masonry to interfere in civil af-
fairs no matter how praiseworthy might be its intentions.
He called attention to the fact that the charters issued by the
grand lodge were in the name of the "Most Worshipful Grand Lodge
of Ancient York Masons of Oklahoma" while the constitutional title
is the "Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted
Masons of Oklohoma," and properly insisted that the charters should
reflect the name of the grand lodge. The "York" feature seems to
have been copied from the Indian Territory. Of course it is signifi-
cant of nothing except somebody's half knowledge, or of the imita-
tive faculty.
He submits four decisions, all on well settled points.
The grand lodge chartered four new lodges; decided that in that
jurisdiction none but masters and wardens and affiliated past masters
can confer degrees, differing widely from Illinois in this respect,
where any qualified affiliate may confer a degree if invited to do so
by proper authority; made the constitution to declare that any kind
of gambling, profane swearing, the intemperate use or sale of intoxi-
cating liquors as a beverage, unmasonic, barring non-Masons from the
degrees and subjecting Masons to discipline; abolished the office of
custodian of the work because having a grand lecturer they thought
he was equal to the custody as well as the dissemination of the work,
which is perhaps a superficial view, as one who is constantly teaching
is under more temptation to "improve" and embellish the work than
those who make the reference department; made lodge dues to accrue
quarterly, which is a good move where the secretary is a good collect-
ing officer, and don't aggravate matters where he is not; publish an
amended section of the constitution, which makes past masters of
other jurisdictions who affiliate with Oklahoma lodges .and become
members of the grand lodge equally eligible to elective office in the
grand lodge, with their own past and present masters, but retain the
absurd provision which requires the presence of the brother at the
communication at which the election occurs to make him eligible at