It would he most natural that any society of men which maintained an element of secrecy concerning its transactions and which recruited its membership through selective
methods should become an object of immediately seized upon the incident as jealous hatred among narrow and bigoted persons.

For a long time there had been a growing opposition to the society of Freemasons on the part of those who are ever seeking some cause to give them an opportunity to be seen and heard. The abduction of William Morgan seemed to he the identical thing that these persons were looking for, and they the one great opportunity for waging a relentless war against a fraternity about which they knew nothing and which in their fanatical zeal, they sought to destroy.

As a result of the Morgan episode, hatred and opposition to the fraternity spread throughout the country and became almost uncontrollable. In order to arouse the people, and lead them to believe that the Anti-Masonic movement was one of very wide scope, numerous Anti-Masonic papers were published. Four of them were issued from a printing office in Boston under the names of The Anti-Freemason, the AntiMasonic Christian Herald, the Free Press and the Anti-Masonic Baptist Herald. When it is stated that the four papers were published in the same form of type and used the same matter 'and that they were issued from the City of Boston, shows how cleverly the Anti-Masons planned their campaign. The excitement ran so high that Anti-Masonic spelling books and readers were introduced into the schools and almanacs into the family. Anti-Masonic book stores and taverns were opened and it is even stated as a fact that Anti-Masonic houses of illrepute were maintained. Dr. Nathaniel Ives, a resident of Wellingford, Vt., was a leader of the Anti-Masonic movement. The reasons which he gave were that his strong religious convictions would not permit him to associate with the wicked Masons. The fact that he had been expelled from the lodge of which he was a member in 1824 just two years prior to the disappearance of Morgan, for the alleged seducing of the wife of a neighbor is an evidence of the character of the opposition which was arrayed against the society.

At a public meeting in which the fraternity was being strongly denounced, a speaker waxed eloquent in the course of his remarks and declared his intention of living and dying in the Anti-Masonic cause because it was a holy one. A wag in the audience who must have been a Mason interrupted the speaker at this point by crying out, "Your Right, It is - full of holes."

One peculiar thing about the excitement was that the Anti-Masons charged the fraternity with having caused the agitation in order to gain advertising and at the time excitement was at its height, there was a law in Massachusetts prohibiting vain shows and exhibitions for money. A notorious spurious Mason by the name of Allyn was announced to give one of his exhibitions which he claimed to be for the good of his country but in reality was more for the benefit of himself as he received $125 for each performance. An officer of the court entered the room to arrest him for violation of the law and was unceremoniously kicked out by the Anti-Masonic crowd but no mention of the fact was ever made by the AntiMasonic press.

In 1828 an article of nearly three columns in length appeared in the National Observer, which was claimed to be a renunciation of Freemasonry by one Henry F. Yates of Montgomery County, N. Y. In his statement he declared that the Grand Lodge of New York in 1827 voted to pay Eli Bruce, one of the alleged abductors of Morgan, the sum of $250 to indemnify him in part for the loss he incurred by being removed from the office of sheriff of the county of Niagara by the Governor of the state. The facts were that the Grand Lodge met in June, 1827, while Bruce was not removed from office until October of that year, four months after the Grand Lodge had closed its session, clearly proving the falseness of the renunciation as it would be impossible to estimate a man's losses before they occur.

So intense did the Anti-Masonic feeling grow that it rocked political parties, sundered churches and religious organizations and was carried into the social life of many communities. Even little children at school took it up and boys were sometimes beaten and abused because they were children of Freemasons. Such were the conditions of society and the feelings of men from 1825 to 1830. Middle New York, was the storm center but the excitement extended eastward to Vermont and quite extensively through all the New England States. It reached as far west as Northeastern Ohio, and in some portions of that state, lodge halls were destroyed by mobs, jewels and records carried away, members ostracized, their business injured, and families slandered and abused. The Anti-Masonic craze was but a manifestation of the sane spirit which in Colonial days burned the witches at Salem and drove Roger Williams an exile from his home.

It was not long until the excitement invaded politics and a political party was organized by individuals who were seeking to place themselves in the limelight and who seized upon the opposition to Freemasonry as the opportunity of accomplishing their purposes. The newly formed party held several conventions and endeavored to enlist the support of prominent statesmen. Desiring a candidate for president they wrote Henry Clay, the great commoner, asking if he was a Mason, and what his views were concerning the institution. His reply was that when a young man, he had become a Freemason but had given the Fraternity no attention for so long a time that he did not think lie could gain admission to a lodge. Clay was one of the most eloquent men of his day. His whole life was devoted to the cause of freedom and his country. In early life he was a Mason, rising to the station of Past Grand Master, but politics, personal aspirations and the Anti-Masonic cause over-shadowed his love and respect for the fraternity and caused him at last to practically disown it. However, glorious Clay's attitude may be as a citizen of the republic, his record as a Freemason is one of shame and intense regret.

In 1831, the Anti-Masonic party nominated William Wirt and Amos Ellmaker as its candidates for President and Vice President of the United States. At the election each of these men received but seven votes, being the entire electoral vote of Vermont, the only state in the Union that voted for them. So overwhelming was the defeat that the party immediately disbanded and from 1833 was never heard of more. The Anti-Masonic party was purely a political move and however strong it may have become it simply used its vindictive spirit against Freemasonry as a means to an end regardless of the innocence or guilt of the Freemasons themselves. This is the only instance in the whole history of Freemasonry where opposition to the society assumed the form of a political agency.

When the Anti-Masonic convention met in Philadelphia, in 1830 it adopted the following as its platform: "The object of Anti-Masonry, in nominating and electing candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency, is to deprive Masonry of the support which it derives from the power and patronage of the executive branch of the United States Government. To effect this object, will require that candidates besides possessing the talents and virtues requisite for such exalted stations, be known as men decidedly opposed to secret societies."

In Pennsylvania the excitement reached a climax and resulted in the election of an Anti-Masonic Legislature. The first business of the newly elected law makers was to institute an inquiry into Freemasonry and to summon three of the best and most prominent men of the state to respond to certain questions and to tell all they knew about the hated society. These men were Geo. M. Dallas, afterwards Vice President of the United States, George Wolf, Ex-Governor of the State and Joseph R. Chandler, Past Grand Master. Just how it was learned that these men belonged to Freemasonry is not known, but knowledge of their connection with the fraternity was derived in some way and they were arraigned as prisoners at the "Bar of the house and threatened with imprisonment." But these men knew their rights and declined to reply to any questions propounded by the legislature, except such as their rights of citizenship demanded that they should answer. These three men presented a written protest against the proceedings of the legislature and dared that inquisitorial body to send them to prison. The document which they prepared is said to have no equal in Masonic literature.

The reckless manner of conducting business on the part of the Pennsylvania Anti-Masonic Legislature soon aroused the ire of the people who in due time took it upon themselves to relegate the spurious organization and to reestablish in the government of the state, citizens devoid of Anti-Masonic Sentiment.

One of the most Vindictive Anti-Masons of his clay was John Quincy Adams. When the Morgan excitement commenced he with others caught the contagion and in clue time joined the ranks of the Anti-Masons. He wrote a series of letters on Masonry and anti-Masonry in which the institution was condemned in terms of unrelenting hostility. He denounced it in the strongest manner saying everything that lie could to injure it and bring it into disrepute. But notwithstanding his opposition Freemasonry survived and while Adams sleeps in his grave, the Fraternity is pressing forward, growing daily in strength and vigor. Another evidence of the far-reaching influence of the Anti-Masonic movement and how politicians sometimes avoid doing the fair thing simply to preserve their political prestige is shown in the case of Daniel Webster, who at the dedication of Bunker Hill Monument on June 17, 1843, treated the Masonic Fraternity with apparent contempt. The Bunker Hill Monument was erected by an Association of Patriotic Citizens who desired to honor the memory of Joseph Warren.

Fifty years before in 1794 King Solomon's Lodge at Charleston, Mass., secured the donation of a piece of ground and erected a monument upon it to the memory of their Grand Master, Joseph Warren. The square and compasses with the Masonic emblems and other appropriate inscriptions were engraved upon the shaft. At the dedication of the monument John Foley Jr., then Master of the Lodge, delivered an appropriate address. In 1825 the Bunker Hill Monument Association was formed to erect on the ground a much more massive and imposing structure.

By mutual arrangement the ground and the old monument were transferred to the new association upon the condition that a miniature design of the original shaft should be placed within the pedestal of the new monument and there preserved. At the dedication of the monument in 1842 there were assembled the President of the United States, his cabinet, distinguished citizens and a vast concourse of people. King Solomon's Lodge was present in full regalia and was lead by the same John Foley Jr., who had officiated at the original dedication. The oration pronounced by Daniel Webster on this occasion is declared to be the most eloquent that ever fell from his lips, patriotism, heroism. Warren and battle were brought before that vast audience with all the power and fervency of the speaker, but never in his entire address did he speak one word concerning Freemasonry, notwithstanding that the model of the first monument built by Warren's Masonic Lodge was at his side. On the platform in Masonic regalia was the aged John Foley, while around him were the members of the Masonic Lodge of which Warren was a member, yet not one word or reference was made to Warren's connection with the fraternity or even to the society itself. It is hard to believe that Daniel Webster could have been ignorant of the Masonic events connected with the structure. Perhaps prejudices which lie imbibed in the earlier years of the Anti-Masonic excitement may have influenced him and in view of all the facts it would seem that the silence maintained was intentional, either because of his own feelings concerning the society or that he regarded it of such trivial character as not to be worthy of mention on an occasion so auspicious as the one under consideration.

But the prejudice created against Freemasonry by the Anti-Masonic movement has by no means been obliterated. There is still in existence a society of vain glorious men who are waging a feeble war against the society. In many communities Anti-Masons will be found who still refer to the Morgan incident and who never lose an opportunity to abuse the fraternity. No doubt much of this prejudice is hereditary and has been carried along from father to child. But as the years pass, Freemasonry is becoming more and more to be understood and the time is not far distant when the prejudices of the past will be forgotten and the institution be given its rightful place among the institutions of men.

Back to History and Evolution of Freemasonry [ Next ] [ Previous ]