textfiles/magazines/STB/stb-dc35

SHORT TALK BULLETIN - Vol.XIII   December, 1935   No.12

CLANDESTINE

by:  Unknown

Every Master Mason knows that he must not visit a clandestine Lodge, 
not talk Masonically with a clandestinely made Mason, but not all 
Master Masons can define clandestinism.
The dictionary (Standard) gives “surreptitious, underhand” as 
synonyms for the word, and while these express the Masonic meaning to 
some extent, they are not wholly clarifying.
Mackey (History of Freemasonry) states:
“The (Anderson) Constitutions declare, Section 8, that where a number 
of Freemasons shall take upon themselves to form a Lodge without a 
Grand Master’s Warrant, the regular Lodges are not to countenance 
them nor own them are fair brethren, and duly formed.  In other 
words, Lodge formed without a Warrant from the Grand Master (we now 
say Grand Lodge) is “clandestine,” and so a “clandestine Masons” is 
one made in a Lodge without a Warrant.”
Even this definition will not wholly serve; many old Lodges began and 
worked for a while without a Warrant yet were never Clandestine.  
“The Lodge at Fredricksburg” in which Washington was initiated, had 
no Warrant or Charter until long after the First President was made a 
Mason. 
Haywood states of the several terms used to indicate those whom 
Masons may not officially converse:
“A “cowan” is a man with unlawful Masonic knowledge; an “intruder” is 
one with neither knowledge not secrets, who makes himself otherwise 
obnoxious; a “clandestine” is one who has been initiated by unlawful 
means, an “irregular” is one who has been initiated by a Lodge 
working without authorization.”
An “irregular” Mason is sometimes, unfortunately, confused with a 
“clandestine” Mason; “Unfortunately,” because some men are 
“irregularly” made Masons even today - usually in all innocence.  
George Washington was initiated before he was twenty one years of 
age; according to modern ideas, this was an “irregular” making, but 
there was never a taint of clandestinism attached to “The Lodge at 
Fredricksburg.”  North Dakota permits the reception of a petition of 
a man under age, although he must be of age when he is initiated; 
that their law differs from other laws does not make the North Dakota 
minor, who receives his degrees after he is twenty-one, either 
irregular or clandestine.  In a Jurisdiction in which all the 
membership must be notified of the degree to be conferred and upon 
whom, the Worshipful Master may forget to list one candidate in  his 
monthly circular; if the unpublished candidate, regularly elected, is 
initiated, it is an “irregular” making, and the Grand Master may well 
order him “healed” by being reinitiated, but no power could make such 
a Mason clandestine.
When a Lodge makes a Mason of one not “freeborn,” not of a “mature 
and discrete age” one who is a bondman, in his dotage, a Mason is 
made irregularly, but not clandestinely.
When the Mother Grand Lodge separated into two, in 1751, each termed 
the other clandestine, and this polite name-calling continued even in 
this country, between Lodges begun here under authority of the two 
rival Grand Lodges in England.  The following is from “Washington’s 
Home and Fraternal Life” published by the United States Government:
According to the “Proceedings, Grand Lodge of  Pennsylvania, February 
3, 1783:”
“A petition being preferred to this Grand Lodge on the 2nd of 
September last, from several brethren of Alexandria, in Virginia, for 
a warrant to hold a Lodge there, which was ordered to lie over to the 
next communication, in consequence of Brother Adam, the proposed 
Master thereof, being found to possess his knowledge of Masonry in a 
clandestine manner, since which the said Brother Adam, having gone 
through the several steps of Ancient Masonry in Lodge No.2, under the 
Jurisdiction of this R.R. Grand Lodge, further prays that a warrant 
may now be granted for the purposes mentioned in said petition.
“Ordered, That the prayer of said petition be complied with, and that 
the Secretary present Brother Adam with a warrant to hold a Lodge of 
Ancient Masons in Alexandria, in Virginia to be numbered 39.
“Brother Robert Adam who was then duly recommended, and presented in 
form to the R.W. Grand Master in the chair, for installation as 
Master of Lodge No.39, to be held in the borough of Alexandria, 
Fairfax County, Virginia; and was accordingly installed as such.”
“The word ‘clandestine’ falls with unhappy significance upon modern  
Masonic ears, but it did not in those days mean quite the same thing 
as it does to Masons of this age,  Prior to the ‘Lodge of 
Reconciliation’ and the formation of  the United Grand Lodge of 
England in 1813, the two Grand Bodies of England, the ‘Moderns’ (who 
were the older) and the ‘Antients’ (who were the younger, schismatic 
body) each considered the other ‘clandestine.’  Brother Adam’s Mother 
Lodge is not 
known, but as he lived for a time in Annapolis, where a ‘Modern’ 
Lodge worked, it is probable it was here that he received the degrees 
which the 	Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania (‘Antinets’) considered 
‘clandestine.’  Transition of  Masons from Lodges of one obedience to 
those of the other was neither infrequent, so that ‘clandestine’ 
could not have had the connotation of irregularity and disgrace which 
it has with Freemasons of today.”
Today the Masonic world is entirely agreed on what constitutes a 
clandestine body, or a clandestine Mason; the one is a Lodge or Grand 
Lodge unrecognized by other Grand Lodges, working without right, 
authority or legitimate descent; the other is a man “made a Mason” on 
such a clandestine body.
More widespread than effective, more annoying than dangerous, only 
continental vigilance by Grand Lodges keeps clandestinism from 
becoming a real problem to legitimate Masonry.
Clandestinism raises its ugly head periodically in many Grand 
Jurisdictions, and in some States it is always more or less of a 
trouble.  Either now, or in the immediate past, some clandestine 
Freemasonry had affected Arizona, California, Colorado, Missouri, 
Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, 
Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and the 
District of Columbia; a list too long to minimize altogether by 
saying that clandestine Masonry is too weak to do much harm
Arizona and California suffer to some extent from clandestine Mexican 
bodies.  Colorado and adjacent States have had with them for some 
thirty years a curious organi-zation known as The American Federation 
of Human Rights; with headquarters at Larkspur, Colorado; which is 
the seat of “Co-Masonry,” an organization purporting to make Masons 
of men and women alike.  Missouri has a number of spurious Italian 
alleged Masonic organizations, and the “Masonic Chauffeurs’ and 
Waiters’ Club” with headquarters in Chicago.
In 1929 there was filed in the office of the Secretary of State of 
New Jersey a Certificate of Incorporation of “The Grand Lodge of 
Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of New Jersey,” under which 
certificate the incorporators claimed the right to:
“Practice and preserve Ancient Craft Masonry according to the Ancient 
Charges, Constitutions and Land Marks of Free Masonry; to create, 
organize and supervise subordinate Lodges of Ancient  Free and 
Accepted Masons, granting to them dispensations and charters, 
empowering them to confer the degrees of Entered Apprentice, 
Fellowcraft and Master Mason; and to do all things necessary to carry 
into effect the objects and purposes of this incorporation.”
The regular Grand Lodge instituted  suit in the Court of Chancery 
against this spurious Grand Lodge with the result that in 1932 there 
was entered a decree restraining and enjoining this “Grand Lodge of 
ancient Free and accepted Masons of New Jersey,” its officers, 
agents, members and employees,
1.	From using the name or designation “The Grand Lodge of Ancient 
Free and Accepted Masons of New Jersey.”
2.	From using any name or designation containing the words “Free 
and Accepted Masons,” or word “Mason,” or “Masons,” in 
conjunction with either or both of the words “Free and 
Accepted.”
3.	From practicing, or pretending to practice Ancient Craft 
Masonry, according to the ancient Charges, Constitutions and 
Land Marks of Free Masonry; from creating, organizing or 
supervising subordinate Lodges of Free and Accepted Masons in 
the State of New Jersey, or pretending to do so; from conferring 
or pretending to confer the three degrees of Free Masonry known 
as Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master Mason, or any of 
them.

In New York are now, or have been recently, as many as fifteen 
spurious Masonic Organizations.
North Carolina is not now troubled, but twenty years ago they won a 
case in court against the Cerneau bodies.
Ohio has the “National Grand Lodge of the Independent Order of Free 
Masons for the United States of America,” but has been successfully 
fighting it in the courts.
Pennsylvania has had troubles with spurious Ohio bodies and some of 
her own, but her vigilance is such that these do not get very far in 
deceiving the public.  For instance, in 1927 was heard the case of 
Phillips against Johnson.  A portion of the opinion in that case 
reads:
:This was a proceeding in mandamus instituted by the realtors to 
compel the Secretary of the Commonwealth to register certain emblems 
and insignia, such registration having been refused by the Secretary 
of the Commonwealth.  The Right Worshipful Grand Lodge of the Most 
Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of 
Pennsylvania and Masonic Jurisdiction Thereunto Belonging and the 
Pennsylvania Council of Deliberation were permitted to intervene as 
defendants, no objection being raised thereto by the plaintiffs.  On 
the trial of the case a verdict in favor of the defendants was 
returned by the Jury.  The plaintiffs moved for a new trial which was 
refused by the court.”
South Dakota once had an Italian spurious body, but it has disbanded.  
Texas has to contend with the clandestine Mexican bodies.  Utah has 
had some experiences, but her most famous contribution to the history 
of clandestine Masonry was the trial of the notorious McBain and 
Thompson.  That Masonic fraud was there exposed and the perpetrators 
sent to jail.  M.W. Sam H. Goodwin, Grand Secretary, writes of this:
“Grand Lodge has not entered the arena against clandestinism, but a 
great battle against clandestinism was brought to a successful 
conclusion in the Federal Court in Salt Lake City, and the chief 
promoters of the Thompson Masonic Fraud (three in number) heard a 
jury declare them guilty, on ten counts, of using the U.S.  Mails to 
defraud.
“Grand Lodge did not get into this, neither did any other Masonic 
organization.  But Masons furnished the funds which made the trial 
possible.  It was necessary to send investigators across the water to 
look up records in France, and to interview certain important 
witnesses in Scotland, and to secure their promise to come over for 
the trial.  Utah brethren furnished the money for this work, also for 
the expenses of the three men to come and return, as the U.S. does 
not pay to bring witnesses from outside the United States.
“The men engaged in this fraud were each sentenced to serve two years 
in Leavenworth and to pay fines of $5,000.00 each.  This destroyed 
the organization - so far as I am aware, no fragment of it is left.
“The Scottish Bite Bodies published a book of some 260 pages and an 
index, giving an accurate and most interesting account of Thompson’s 
methods, and of the trial of that case.”
A spurious Grand Lodge of Thompson extraction was, and perhaps still 
is, alive in Wyoming.
The District of Columbia has had to contend with various would-be 
incorporators who desire to attach themselves to legitimate 
Freemasonry, but has always been successful in heading off 
clandestines who desire legal status under papers of incorporation.
In many States Prince Hall or other varieties of so-called Negro 
Masonry is in existence, but this variety of clandestinism is seldom 
if ever harmful to regular Masonry.  As a general rule, the 
legitimate Grand Lodges of the southern States do not quarrel with 
the so-called Negro Lodges, although they are” clandestine.  Grand 
Secretary James M. Clift, of Virginia, puts the general attitude very 
clearly in writing about colored Masonry in the Old Dominion.  He 
says:
“The Negro (Prince Hall) Grand Lodges, organized just after the war 
between the States, can hardly be said to be clandestine, as it in no 
way interferes with Lodges in Virginia.  As a matter of fact, the 
then Grand Secretary of Virginia, Dr. John Dove, aided the leading 
colored members of this organization in establishing it in Virginia, 
believing it would be helpful to Negro citizenship.  His text book 
was used as their guide for some years.  No recognition could be 
given them, but so far it appears that Dr. Dove’s conclusions were 
correct.
Occasionally, however, clandestine Negro Masonry gets in trouble with 
regular Grand Lodges.  Colorado, in common with many other States, 
has for years had colored “Masonic Lodges” which usually give regular 
Masons no trouble.  A few years ago a colored man there organized 
“Masonic Lodges” and a “Grand Lodge of Masons,” which became a rival 
of the old colored “Grand Lodge.”  These organizations became 
involved in litigation in which one sought to restrain the other from 
use of a name which in essence was the same as the name of the 
regular Grand Lodge.  If a decision had been obtained, one of these 
Negro organizations would have had the legal right to use the name of 
the regular Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M.  of Colorado, and the use of the 
Masonic emblems.  The danger lay in the fact that if such a decision 
had been rendered, some degree-monger and organization of spurious 
“Masonic Lodges” might have obtained control of the successful 
colored “Grand Lodge” and converted it into a clandestine Grand Lodge 
for white men, and his organization would have been fortified with a 
decision of the court that it was entitled to the name of “Grand 
Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons” and the use of the Masonic 
emblems. 
The regular Grand Lodge of Colorado therefore intervened in the suit.  
After trial, the District Court issued a writ of injunction, 
permanently restraining and enjoining both Negro organizations and 
their subordinate Lodges from using the names “Mason,” “Freemason,” 
“Masonic” and “Free and Accepted” (together with various other 
names), and the name “The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Ancient Free 
and Accepted Masons of Colorado,” and the members from using, 
displaying and wearing emblems and insignia of Freemasonry.
The decision would be of value to Colorado in case it should become 
necessary for the Grand Lodge to enter into litigation with 
clandestine Masonic organizations.
In a majority of States legislation has been passed making it an 
offense against the law to use the emblems of a fraternal 
organization without a right, or to adopt and use the name of a pre-
existent fraternal, charitable, benevolent, humane or other non-
profit making organization.  Some of these laws are very elaborate, 
others are less specific, but in States where such legislation has 
been invoked by regular Masonry against usurpation by clandestine 
bodies, the courts have upheld, or are now in the process of 
upholding the regular and recognized Grand Lodges of the nation 
against those who would profit at their expense.
Clandestine Masonry of today is wholly profit-making, begun and 
carried on by individuals who have nothing but duplicity to sell to 
their victims.  Unfortunately, many honest men have been persuaded to 
pay fees for the “degrees” of such spurious organizations, in the 
innocent belief that they were becoming regular Masons.  Some 
pathetic cases form a part of the literature of clandestinism.  The 
charity of Masonry, however, is usually extended to the honest 
victims of misrepresentation, and such “Masons” mat apply, and. if 
they can pass the ballot in a regular Lodge, their misfor-tune in 
innocently entering a clandestine body seldom acts as an objection to 
their receiving the blessings of genuine Masonry.