The History of Freemasonry

by Albert Gallatin Mackey

Chapter 44 - The Grand Lodge of France

It has, I think, been conclusively shown in a preceding chapter that in the year 1732 there were but two lodges in the city of Paris, one of which had received a Warrant from the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England and the other had been formed, we may suppose, by a secession or, as we should now say, a demission of a portion of the members of the first lodge, grown, numerically, too large.

There is no authentic record that the Grand Master or the Grand Lodge of England ever granted a Deputation for the establishment of a Provincial Grand Master or a Provincial Grand Lodge in France. Indeed, it has been very plausibly urged that the granting of such a Deputation to the titular Earl of Derwentwater, a convicted traitor to the English Government, whose execution had only been averted in 1715 by his escape from prison, would have been a political impossibility.

Kloss, in his History of Freemasonry in France, says that " the unfortunate international political relations which existed between England, the mother-country, and France, the daughter, prevented that free intercourse and development which might have been looked for." (1)

And yet the French authorities claim that to him such a Deputation had been granted.

Thus, we are met, on the very incipience of our investigation of the history of the institution of a Grand Lodge in France, by contradictory statements from the English and French authorities.

There is no way of reconciling these contradictory statements. We must utterly reject the impossible or the improbable, and accept

(1) "Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich aus achten urkenden dargestellt," von Georg Kloss, I., 336.

only that which has the support of reliable authority and as to which there is no conflict between the writers on both sides of the channel.

But the adoption of this rule will not always save us from the pressure of critical difficulties. The authority of the English writers is generally of a merely negative character. With the exception of the statement of Anderson, that Viscount Montagu granted two Warrants for lodges - one at Paris and one at Valenciennes, in the year 1732 - there is, in the contemporary English records, an absolute silence in reference to all Masonic affairs in France.

The French writers are more communicative, but they have so often mistaken fable for fact, and tradition for history, that we seldom find satisfaction in receiving their statements. One of them admits that the absence of any historical monuments of the first lodge has cast some obscurity over the early operations of Freemasonry in Paris. (1)

In fact, the history of Speculative Freemasonry in France, until the year 1736, may be considered as almost hypothetical and traditionally. It is said that there was a Provincial Grand Lodge and a Provincial Grand Master, but the evidence on this subject is altogether wanting - at least such evidence as a faithful historian would require.

In the "Historical Instruction" sent in 1783 by the Grand Lodge of France to its constituent lodges, it is said that Lord Derwentwater was considered as the first Grand Master of the Order in France. (2)

Rebold is more circumstantial in his details than any other Frenchwriter. He says that "Lord Derwentwater, who in 1725 received from the Grand Lodge at London plenary powers to constitute lodges in France, was, in 1735, invested by the same Grand Lodge with the functions of Provincial Grand Master, and when he quitted France to return to England, where soon after he perished on the scaffold, a victim to his attachment to the Stuarts, he transferred the plenary powers which he possessed to his friend Lord Harnouester, whom he appointed as the representative, during his absence, of his office of Provincial Grand Master." (3)

(1) Ragon, " Acta Latomorum," 1., p. 22. (2) Thory, " Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 12. Findel. (3) "Histoire des Trois Grandes Loges," p. 44. Ragon, who is less imaginative or inventive than Rebold, though he, also, too often omits or is unable to give his authorities merely says that Derwentwater was chosen as their Grand Master by the brethren at the time of the introduction of Freemasonry into Paris.

" Acta Latomorum," p. 52. Lalande, in his article on Freemasonry in the "Encyclopedie," places the affair of Derwentwater's Grand Mastership in the true light, when he says that as the first Paris lodge had been opened by Lord Derwentwater, he was regarded as the Grand Master of the French Masons, and so continued until his return to England, without any formal recognition on the part of the brethren.

Considering the political condition of England, which had only a few years before been the scene of a rebellion in which the family of Charles Radcliffe, the titular Earl of Derwentwater, played an important part - considering that he himself was nothing more nor less than an escaped convict, liable at any moment when apprehended to undergo the sentence of death which had been adjudged against him by the law, and considering the existence of a party of Jacobites who still secretly wished for the downfall of the House of Hanover, and the restoration of the family of Stuart to the throne, it is really absurd to suppose that the Grand Lodge of England, which claimed at least to be loyal, could have selected such a person as its representative among the Freemasons of France.

We may, therefore, I think, unhesitatingly look upon this story of the premier Grand Mastership of the titular Earl of Derwentwater as a myth, with no other foundation than the mere fact, which will be admitted, that he was a chief instrument in establishing, without Warrant, the first lodge in Paris, and that by his family relations he possessed much influence among the English Freemasons in Paris, who were for the most part Jacobites or adherents of the House of Stuart.

Rebold, who has accepted every tradition of those days of myths as an historical fact, proceeds to tell us that the four lodges which were then in Paris determined to establish a Provincial Grand Lodge of England, to which, as the representative of the Grand Lodge at London, the lodges which might in future be constituted should directly address themselves. This resolution, he says, was put into execution after the departure of Lord Derwentwater, and this Grand Lodge was regularly and legally constituted in 1736 under the presidency of Lord Harnouester. (1)

The hypothesis, universally advanced by the French writers, that Charles Radcliffe, commonly called Lord Derwentwater, was Grand Master from 1725 to 1736, therefore is not tenable. There is no

(1) Ibid.

testimony, such as is worth accepting in an historical inquiry, to support it. That he was not so appointed by the Grand Lodge of England can not be denied. The existing political condition of the country would make such an appointment most improbable if not impossible, and, besides, there is no reference in the records of the Grand Lodge to an act, which would have been too important to have been passed over in silence.

The condition of French Freemasonry was such as to render it extremely difficult, indeed almost impossible, to attain any accurate or reliable account of its history.

French historians do not deny this. Thory, who had the best opportunities as an historical investigator, and who was more familiar than any of his contemporaries with Masonic documents, does not hesitate, when referring to a period even a little later, to give this opinion of the chaotic condition of French Masonry in the earlier part of the 18th century.

"Masonry was then in such a disordered condition that we have no register or official report of its assemblies. There did not exist any bodies organized in the nature of Grand Lodges, such as were known in England and Scotland. Each lodge in Paris or in the kingdom was the property of an individual who was called the Master of the lodge. He governed the body over which he presided according to his own will and pleasure. These Masters of lodges were independent of each other, and recognized no other authority than their owner. They granted to all who applied the power to hold lodges, and thus added new Masters to the old ones. In fact, it may be said that up to 1743 Masonry presented in France under the Grand Masterships of Derwentwater, Lord Harnouester, and the Duke d'Antin the spectacle of the most revolting anarchy." (1)

Such a description, whose accuracy, considering the impartial authority whence it is derived, can not be doubted, must render it utterly useless to look for anything like a constitutional or legal authority, in the English meaning of the term, for the administration

(1) "Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 13. Clavel confirms this testimony He says that "all the lodges which were afterwards established in Paris and the rest of France owed their constitution to the societies (the primitive lodges) of which we have just spoken. Most of them assumed the powers of Grand Lodges and granted Letters of Constitution to new lodges." - "Histoire Pittoresque de la Franc-Maconnerie," p. 108.

of the Masonic government during the time in which Derwentwater played an important part in its affairs.

Until 1732 there was no lodge in France which derived its authority to act from the warrant of a Grand Lodge. The one formed in 1725, by Derwentwater, Harnouester, Maskelyne, and Heguetty, and those which had been previously founded in other parts of France - at Dunkirk and at Mons - must have been instituted under the old principle of the Operative Freemasons, which ceased to be recognized in England, in the year 1717, that a sufficient number of brethren might assemble for Masonic work, without the authority of any superintending power. Warrants were not known or recognized in England until that year. They had not yet been extended into France. The first Warrant known in France was that which was granted by the Grand Lodge at London to the lodge in the Rue de Bussy at Paris, and numbered in the English list as No. 90.

But for years afterward lodges continued to be organized, as we have just seen, in France under the old Operative system of lodge independence.

During all this period there was no Grand or Provincial Grand Master in France. But Charles Radcliffe, who had, it seems, been the introducer of Speculative Freemasonry into Paris, must have been very popular with his English companions, who, like himself, were adherents of the exiled House of Stuart. After the death of his nephew he assumed the title of Earl of Derwentwater, and as such was recognized by the French king and the Pretender. He was a leader of the Jacobite party, and it is very generally supposed that it was in the interests of that party that he organized his lodge at Paris, the first prominent members of which belonged to the same political party.

It is not, therefore, astonishing that his connection with Freemasonry, as the founder of the first Parisian lodge, has led to the traditional error of supposing him to have been the first Grand Master of the French Freemasons. In his day there was no Grand Lodge nor Grand Master in that kingdom.

The astronomer Lalande, who wrote a very sensible history of Freemasonry for the French Encyclopedia, recognizes this fact, when he says that Lord Harnouester was the first regularly chosen Grand Master.

The tradition that when Derwentwater left France for England in 1733 (not as Thory erroneously states in 1735), he appointed Lord Harnouester as his Deputy and Representative during his absence, is therefore a mere fiction. He could not delegate a position and powers which he did not possess. But it is reason able to suppose that on the departure of Derwentwater, Lord Harnouester as of high rank, influence, and popularity among the English exiles who were Masons, assumed the position of a leader, which Derwentwater had previously occupied.

After a temporary absence in England, where, notwithstanding the sentence of death which had been adjudged against him in 1715, he was not arrested, the government exercising a merciful forbearance, he returned to the Continent, but we find no evidence of him having taken any further active interest in Masonic affairs.

The French writers all agree in saying that in 1736 Lord Harnouester was elected Grand Master. But we have no record of the circumstances attending his election. Rebold's statement that he was elected by the lodges then existing in Paris, may or may not be truth. There is not sufficient historical testimony of the fact to remove it out of the realm of tradition.

Thory simply says, " Lord Harnouester was elected Grand Master, after Lord Derwentwater, in 1736." (1) of Harnouester we know so little that we have not been able to identify him with any of the public personages of the period, or to find any record of him in the contemporary lists of the English peerage.

If, however, we accept, on the mere dictum of the French historians, the truth of the statement that Harnouester was the first Grand Master of Masons in France, we must also accept the statement, equally authentic or unauthentic, that his Grand Mastership was a brief one and unattended with any events that it has been deemed worthy to record.

Thory merely says that the Duke d'Antin succeeded Harnouester in 1738. (2)

Rebold indulges in more details, which, however, we must take on his sole authority. He says that "in 1737 Lord Harnouester, the second Provincial Grand Master of France, wishing to return to England, requested that his successor should be appointed, and

(1) "Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 14 (2) Ibid.

having expressed the desire that he should be a Frenchman, the Duke d'Antin, a zealous Mason, was chosen to succeed him in the month of June, 1738." (1)

The account given by French writers of the character of the Duke is a very favorable one. It is said that he was selected by the Freemasons for their presiding officer from among those of the nobility who had shown the most zeal for the Order.

Of his own attachment to it, he had shown a striking proof by disobeying the express command of the King, Louis XV., who had forbidden his courtiers to unite with the society, and especially in daring to accept the Grand Mastership, notwithstanding that the monarch had declared, when he was informed that the Masons were about to elect such an officer, that if the choice fell on a Frenchman who should consent to serve he would immediately send him, by a lettre de cachet, to the Bastille. But the threat was not carried into execution. (2)

We are now about to pass out of the realm of what, borrowing a term of science from the anthropologists, may be called the pre-historic age of French Freemasonry. Henceforth we shall have something authentic from contemporary authorities on which to lean. The myths and mere traditions which mark the story of the second decade of the 18th century will be succeeded by historical facts, though we must still be guarded in accepting all the speculations which the writers of France have been prone to blend with them so as in many instances to give us a mingled web of romance and history.

Before continuing the history of the Grand Lodge from the accession of the Duke d'Antin, it will not be uninteresting nor unprofitable to suspend the narrative and to take a view of the condition of Freemasonry in France, and especially in Paris, at the period of time embracing a few years before and a few years after his accession to the Masonic throne.

At so early a period as 1737, the institution, though apparently very popular among the noblesse and the bourgeoisie - the lords and the citizens - had become distasteful to the King, Louis XV., whom we have already seen threatening to imprison its Grand Master if he was a Frenchman.

(1) "Histoire des Trois Grandes Loges," p. 45. (2) Ibid., p. 49, note.

This fact is confirmed by a statement made in the Gentleman's Magazine for March, 1737. The statement is in a letter from Paris and is in the following words:

"The sudden increase of the Society of Free Masons in France had given such offense that the King forbid their meetings at any of their lodges."

This was the cause of an apologetic letter which was published in Paris and a part of it copied into the Gentleman's Magazine for the following month. (1)

Portions of this letter are worth copying, because of the principles which the French Masons, at least, professed at the time.

"The views the Free Masons propose to themselves," says this apology, "are the most pure and inoffensive and tend to promote such qualities in them as may form good citizens and zealous subjects; faithful to their prince, to their country and to their friends.

The duty it prescribes to those who bear it is to endeavor to erect temples for virtue and dungeons for vice. . . . Their principal design is to restore to the earth the reign of Astrea and to revive the time of Rhea."

From Kloss and from all the French writers we have the record of other instances of the persecution to which the Freemasons in Paris were subjected at this period by the municipal authorities, whose actions were undoubtedly in accord with the sentiments of the king. one of these is worth a relation.

On the 10th of September, 1787, the police surprised a lodge of Freemasons which was being held in the house of one Chapelot. He had for safety bricked up the door of his public and secretly opened another to the room of meeting. Notwithstanding these precautions, the police obtained an entrance and dispersed the assembly. Chapelot was condemned to pay a fine of a- thousand livres and was deprived of his license as a tavern-keeper for six months.

(1) This expression is found in some of the early French rituals as a definition of the object of Freemasonry. The English Masonic borrowed and made use of it. In a Pro Vogue spoken at Exeter, in 1771, are the following lines:

"The Lodge, the social virtues fondly love: There Wisdom's rules we trace and so improve: There we (in moral architecture skill'd) Dungeons for Vice - for Virtue temples build."

See Jones's Masonic Miscellanies, p. 164.

On April 27, 1738, Pope Clement XII. fulminated his celebrated bull in eminenti, in which all the faithful were forbidden to attend the meetings of the Masonic lodges, or in any way to consort with the Freemasons under the penalty of ipso facto excommunication, absolution from which, except at the point of death, was reserved to the Supreme Pontiff.

This condemnation by the Church gave an increased vigor and vigilance to the attacks of the police. On St. John the Evangelist's day, 1738, the Freemasons having assembled at the room of the lodge in the Rue des Deux-Ecus to celebrate the feast of the Order, were arrested and several of them imprisoned.

But notwithstanding these efforts to suppress the Order in France, it grew apace, and was not without an acknowledged standing outside of the Order, and of a recognition of its independence and regularity by the Grand Lodge at London.

This we learn from Anderson, who, in his second edition of the Book of Constitutions, published by authority of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1738, says:

"But the old lodge at York City and the lodges of Scotland, Ireland, France, and Italy, affecting independence, are under their own Grand Masters, though they have the same Constitutions, Charges, Regulations, etc., in substance, with their brethren of England and are equally zealous for the Augustan style, and the secrets of the ancient and honorable fraternity." (1)

Anderson was right in his statement that the usages of the Craft in the two countries were similar. The ritual of the French Freemasons, at that early period, has not been altogether lost. An interesting description of it was published in a contemporary journal of London, and as the volume which contains it is not generally accessible except in large public libraries, it is here copied in full. The reader will be pleased to compare the ceremonies of admission to the Society, as practiced in the year 1737, in Paris, with those of the London Masons at about the same period, which appear in a preceding part of this work.

In the Gentleman's Magazine, published at London, in March, 1737, is the following letter, which bears the date of "Paris, January 13:"

(1) Anderson's " Constitutions," second edition, 1738, p. 196.

"THE SECRET OF THE ORDER OF FREE MASONS AND THE CEREMONIES OBSERVED AT THE RECEPTION OF MEMBERS INTO IT.

"First of all, persons must be proposed in one of the Lodges by a Brother of the Society as a good Subject; and when the latter obtains his request, the Recipiendary is conducted by the Proposer, who becomes his Godfather, into one of the Chambers of the lodge where there is no light, and there they ask him whether he has a calling to be received: He answers, Yes. After which they ask him his Name, Sirname, and Quality, take from him all Metals or Jewels which he may have about him, as Buckles, Buttons, Rings, Boxes, etc., his Right knee is uncovered, he wears his left shoe as a slipper, then they blindfold him and keep him in that condition about an hour delivered up to his reflections; after this the Godfather goes and knocks three times at the Door of the Reception room, in which the venerable Grand Master of the Lodge (1) is, who answers by three knocks from within and orders the door to be opened; then the Godfather says that a Gentleman by name ....... presents himself in order to be received. (Note, That both on the outside and within this chamber several Brothers stand with their swords drawn in order to keep off profane people.) The Grand Master who has about his neck a blue ribband cut in a triangle says, Ask him whether he has the calling ? The Godfather puts him the question and the Recipiendary, having answered in the affirmative, the Grand Master orders him to be brought in: Then they introduce him and make him take three turns in the room round a sort of ring on the floor in which they draw with a pencil upon two Columns a sort of representation of the ruins of Solomon's Temple, on each side of that space, they also make with the pencil a great I and a great B. which they don't explain till after the Reception. In the middle there are three lighted wax candles laid in a Triangle upon which they throw gunpowder and rosin at the Novice's arrival, in order to frighten him by the effect of these matters The three turns being made, the Recipiendary is brought

(1) Kloss, in his Geschichte, infers from a contemporary document which he quotes that at this time the title of Grand Master was equivalent in France to that of Worshipful Master of a lodge. The use of the title in this account of the ritual leaves no doubt of the truth of that fact. To this undiscriminating use of the two titles are we to attribute much of the confusion and uncertainty that exists in reference to the leadership in French Freemasonry, at this early period of its history.

into the middle of the writing above mentioned in three pauses over against the Grand Master, who is at the upper end behind an armchair on which is the Book of St. John's Gospel and asks him: Do you feel a Calling? Upon his answering, Yes, the Grand Master says. Shew him the Light, he has been long enough deprived of it. In that instant they take off the cloth from before his eyes and all the Brothers standing in a circle, draw their swords; they cause the Recipiendary to advance on three pauses up to a stool which is at the foot of the arm-chair; The Brother Orator addresses him in these terms: You are going to embrace a respectable Order which is more serious than you imagine; there is nothing in it against the Law, against Religion, against the State, against the King, nor against Manners:

"The venerable Grand Master will tell you the rest. At the same time they make him kneel on the stool with his Right knee which is bare and hold his Left Foot in the air: Then the Grand Master says to him, 'You promise never to trace, write, or reveal the secrets of Free Masons or Free Masonry but to a Brother in the lodge or in the Grand Master's presence.' Then they uncover his Breast to see if he is not a Woman and put a pair of Compasses on his left pap, which he holds himself; he puts his Right Hand on the Gospel and pronounces his Oath in these terms: 'I consent that my Tongue may be pulled out, my heart torn to pieces, my Body burnt, and my Ashes scattered, that there may be no more mention made of me amongst mankind if, etc.,' after which he kisses the Book. Then the Grand Master makes him stand by him; they give the Free Mason's Apron which is a white skin, a pair of men's gloves for himself and a pair of women's gloves for the person of that sex, for whom he has the most esteem. They also explain to him the I and B traced on the floor which are the type of the Sign by which Brothers know one another. The I signifies Jahkin and the B. Boiaes. In the Signs which the Free Masons make amongst one another they represent these two words by putting the Right Hand to the Left side of the Chin, from whence they draw it back upon the same line to the Right Side; then they strike the skirt of their coat on the Right Side and also stretch out their hands to each other, laying the Right Thumb upon the great joint of his comrade's first finger which is accompanied with the word Jahkin, they strike their breasts with the Right Hand and take each other by the hand again by reciprocally touching with the Right Thumb the first and great joint of the middle finger which is accompanied with the word Boiaes. This ceremony being performed and explained, the Recipiendary is called Brother, after which they sit down and, with the Grand Master's leave, drink the new Brother's health. Every body has his bottle. When they have a mind to drink they say, Give some powder, viz: Fill your glass. The Grand Master says, Lay your hands to your firelocks; then they drink the Brother's health and the glass is carried in three different motions to the mouth; before they set it down on the table they lay it to their Left pap, then to the Right and then forwards and in three other pauses they lay the glass perpendicular upon the table, clap their hands three times and cry three times Vivat. They observe to have three wax candles disposed in a triangle on the table. If they perceive or suspect that some suspicious person has introduced himself amongst them, they declare it by saying it rains, which signifies that they must say nothing. As some people might have discovered the Signs which denote the terms Jahkin and Boiaes, a Free Mason may be known by taking him by the hand as above mentioned and pronouncing I, to which the other answers A, the first says K, the second replies H. the first ends with I, and the other with N. which makes Jahkin: It is the same in regard to Boiaes."

The administration of the Duke d'Antin was not, so far as respects the institution and the successful carrying out of reforms, a success. The anarchy and independence of the lodges which had hitherto prevailed did not altogether cease. The claim of a personal possession and an immovable tenure of office made by many Masters, especially tavern-keepers, who had organized lodges at their places of public entertainment, was not altogether abandoned. Warrants of Constitution were frequently issued by private lodges, which should have emanated from the Grand Lodge, had there really been such a body in existence, of which fact there is much doubt. Thory admits that there was in 1742, the year before d'Antin's death, no Grand Lodge organized like that of England, and an English writer having stated that in the year mentioned there were twenty-two lodges in Paris and more than two hundred in all France, he confesses his inability to verify the statement because French Freemasonry was at that time in such a disordered condition that there were no registers or official reports of lodge meetings. (1)

The persecutions of the Church, of the Court, and the police were unabated, and if the Masonic reign of the Duke d'Antin was eventful in nothing else, it certainly was in the continual contests of the enemies and the friends of Masonry, the one seeking to crush and the other to sustain it. That the latter often were placed in danger, and sometimes endured a sort of martyrdom when their meetings were detected, is well known. And for their zeal and their perseverance under all these difficulties and dangers in preserving the existence, however feeble, of the institution and in delivering to their successors for better growth and greater strength, the Freemasons owe them a debt of gratitude.

The ritual, too, of the order in France was, as we have seen, derived from that of the English system, though changes and innovations were already beginning to appear. The extract given above shows that the ceremony of the table lodge and the peculiar language accompanying it were the pure invention of French ingenuity, wholly unknown then and since to English-speaking Masons.

In 1743 the Duke d'Antin died and he was succeeded in the Grand Mastership by the Count of Clermont. There were other candidates, and the Prince of Conti and Marshal Saxe received some votes during the election. This shows that French Masonry, whatever were its faults of irregularity, had not fallen in the social scale.

The Count of Clermont was higher in rank than the Duke d'Antin. He belonged to the royal family of Orleans and was the uncle of the infamous Duke of Chartres, afterward Duke of Orleans (who succeeded him in the Grand Mastership), and was the father of Louis Philippe, subsequently the popular King of France.

But the French Masons were disappointed in the advantageous results which they anticipated would follow the choice of one so illustrious in rank as their leader. This will be seen hereafter.

His election, if we may believe the French authorities on the subject, was accomplished by forms that made it regular and legal, the Masters of the Parisian lodges having for that purpose united in a General Assembly on December 11, 1743.

(1) "Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 13.

Hence Thory (1) says that it is from this epoch that we are to regard the existence of the Grand Lodge of France as legal and authentic, because it was founded at Paris with the consent of the Masters of the lodges in the Provinces.

He says that it assumed the title of the "English Grand Lodge of France." Whether it did so at the time of its organization or at a subsequent period is uncertain, but it is proved that it bore that title in 1754, for Thory says that he had seen a print engraved in that year by Jean de la Cruz on which were the words - "Grange loge Anglaise de France."

But the assertion made by some writers that the use of the title was authorized by the Grand Lodge at London, with whom the Freemasons of Paris had, about that time, been in successful negotiation for recognition and patronage, is undoubtedly a fiction. There is not a particle of evidence in the contemporary records of the Grand Lodge of England that any such negotiations had taken place. It has, however, been seen heretofore that Anderson, in 1738, acknowledged that the independent authority of the Grand Master of the French Masons was recognized in England, and that the brethren in Scotland, Ireland, and France were placed upon the same footing of autonomy.

Very soon after his election as Grand Master the Count of Clermont ceased to pay much attention to the administration of the affairs of the Fraternity, whose interests were thus materially affected by his indifference.

One of the greatest difficulties with which the Grand Lodge had to contend in its efforts to secure harmony and to preserve discipline arose from the practice which it pursued of granting Charters to lodges, the Masters of which held their offices for life. They were called "Maitres inamovibles" - unremovable or perpetual Masters. A great many of these were already in existence, having been created under the irregular system of the preceding times, and the new Grand Lodge unfortunately increased the number.

Then "unremovable Masters" organized local administrations under the denomination of "Provincial Grand Lodges," which were governed by the presiding officers of the lodges which had created them.

(1) "Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient." p. 14.

Thory speaks of these early days of the English Grand Lodge of France as the period of illegal constitutions, of false titles, of antedated charters delivered by pretended Masters of lodges or fabricated by the lodges themselves, some of which claimed a fictitious origin which went back to the year 1500. (1)

Another evil to which French Freemasonry was subjected at the beginning of its legal and constitutional career was the inundation of high degrees and the establishment of Chapters and Councils which became the rivals of the Grand Lodge.

It is to the Chevalier Ramsay that the Order is indebted for the doubtful gift of these high degrees which began to overshadow primitive, symbolic Freemasonry, and for the invention of new theories as to the origin of the Institution, which wholly rejecting the Operative element, on which the true symbolism of Freemasonry so much depends, sought to trace its existence as a Speculative Organization to the era of the Crusades and to the work of the Christian Knights.

The Grand Lodge of France, like that of England, recognized and practiced only the three symbolic degrees. Its charters to the lodges which it instituted authorized them to confer only these three degrees. It claimed that the complete cycle of Speculative Freemasonry was embraced within these prescribed limits. They denied that there was or could be any mystical knowledge above and beyond that which was taught in the Master's initiation. And it emphatically refused to concede that there existed any higher authority than itself from which the power to impart this knowledge could be derived.

Now when Ramsay's Rite of six or seven degrees was rapidly developed into other Rites professing a still greater number - when both at Paris and in the Provinces, other bodies began to be established by the illegal acts of some of the lodges, which, with the lofty titles of Colleges, Chapters, Councils and Tribunals, assumed an authority equal to that of the Grand Lodge in respect to the primitive degrees and one superior to it in respect to the new systems - when these self-constituted or illegally constituted bodies, looked with contempt on the meager initiations and the scanty instructions of the simple system of the lodges, and claimed a more elevated,

(1) "Acta Latomorum," Tome i., p. 56.

more philosophic, more splendid system of their own - it is not surprising that hundreds should have been attracted by their false theories, their grandiloquent pretensions, and the glamour which they created by their high titles, their glittering jewels, and their splendid decorations, so that pure and simple Masonry was beginning to lose its attractions and the Grand Lodge its prestige.

Nor is it less surprising that, as Thory has said, the result of all these disorders was such a complication, that at that epoch and for a long time afterward a stranger and even a Frenchman could not positively determine which was the true constitutional authority of Freemasonry in the kingdom, in what body it was vested or by what it was justly exercised.

Harassed by these conflicts for authority, these incessant assumptions of jurisdiction, which were debasing its position, the Grand Lodge resolved to take a higher stand, which it was supposed, or hoped, would secure for it a stronger hold upon the obedience of the Fraternity.

In 1743 it had adopted, as has been shown, the title of "The English Grand Lodge of France." This title had been assumed, not with the authority of the Grand Lodge at London, nor because there was any official connection with the two organizations, for there is not the slightest evidence of any historical value to that effect, but rather as an indication, as we may suppose, that the Freemasonry of France had originally come from England.

But there must have prevailed an idea that the English Grand Lodge of France was in some way a dependence on the London body, which would of course impair its claim to absolute sovereignty.

Accordingly, the French Grand Lodge asserted its thorough independence in the year 1756 by omitting the word English from its title and assuming the name of "The National Grand Lodge of France."

Thory, and all the other French writers who followed him, has said that "it shook off the yoke of the Grand Lodge at London," a phrase that is altogether inaccurate, as no such "yoke" had ever existed.

The effect, however, of this apparent declaration of independence was not such as had been expected. Chapters of High Degrees persisted in their rivalry of jurisdiction, and irregular and illegal chapters were still issued by the perpetual or irremovable Masters of many of the lodges. French Freemasonry was yet in a sort of chaotic condition.

To add to these annoyances and to still further embarrass the efforts for the establishment of a constitutional authority, the Count of Clermont withdrew from all participation in the administration of affairs as Grand Master, and confided the discharge of his functions to a substitute or Deputy, in the selection of whom he was by no means judicious.

The first appointment of a Substitute was one Baure, a banker. This selection was a most unfortunate one for the Craft. Baure, instead of devoting himself to the affairs of the Order, neglected to assemble the Grand Lodge. This inactivity was very disastrous, inasmuch as it encouraged the continuance of old irregularities and the introduction of many new ones.

A contemporary writer mentions among these that certain tavern- keepers who had on former occasions prepared their houses for the meetings of lodges to which they had been admitted as serving brothers, wishing to revive the banquets from which they had derived so much profit, now assumed the functions of Masters and conferred the degrees on candidates regardless of their proper qualifications. Warrants became, like the initiations, objects of traffic, and lodges whose constitutions were purchased, opened their doors to the lowest classes, and celebrated their indecent orgies in disreputable eating houses. (1) Freemasonry under this Baure was falling into a deplorable condition.

At last, but by no means too soon, he was dismissed by the Grand Master, whose next selection was one Lacorne, a dancing master. His social position was inferior to that of his predecessor, and his character not as good. In vain the old and respectable members of the Fraternity protested against the appointment of Lacorne, who had by some services to the Grand Master secured his favor, and in reward he received the title of Particular Substitute, with a power to execute all the functions of his superior.

If the fault of Baure had been a supine inactivity, that of Lacorne was too much activity employed in a wrong direction. The

(1) La Chaussie, in a Memoire Justicatif, quoted by Thory, "Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 20.

Craft had exchanged King Log for King Stork. The history of the Grand Lodge for many succeeding years is a history of agitations, dissensions, and schisms fomented by Lacorne to suit his own private ends.

Lacorne hastened to hold a meeting of the Grand Lodge, which was followed by several others, in the course of which he succeeded in effecting a reorganization of the body, which had almost ceased to exist under the indifference of his predecessor. He admitted a great many Masons of all conditions and professions, and consulted his own caprice in the selection of officers. (1)

The first signs of a coming schism began now to make their appearance. The old members of the Fraternity, who had refused to recognize the new Substitute, refrained from any participation in these acts, more especially as, in the appointment of his officers, he had selected illiterate men.

The Grand Lodge was soon divided into two factions, the one the adherents, the other the opponents, of Lacorne. Both claimed to represent the constitutional authority, and each arrogated the titles and the functions of a Grand Lodge, so that two pretended Grand Lodges were in active existence at the same time.

These dissensions lasted for several years. Finally some zealous brethren, who foresaw the threatened destruction of the Order, or at least its reduction to a state of anarchy, offered their services to effect a reconciliation. The offer was accepted. Representations were made to the Count of Clermont, who was prevailed upon to divest Lacorne of the powers which he had so much abused, and to appoint as his successor M. Chaillon de Joinville.

Peace and harmony seemed to be about to be restored. The two contending parties came together. All the Masters in Paris hastened to assist in the reconciliation. The Grand Lodge was reestablished and a circular was issued on June 24, 1762, which announced the auspicious event to the Freemasons of France. (2)

But the promise of peace proved too soon to be fallacious. The two rival Grand Lodges, which had existed under the administration of Lacorne, were apparently dissolved and a United Grand Lodge was organized; but the elements which composed it were so different in character that it is not surprising that new and still more

(1) Thory, "Fondation de la Grand Orient," p. 21. (2) Ibid.

bitter factions arose in a short time to disturb its harmony and to seriously affect its usefulness.

The cause which led to the birth of these new factions was a very natural one, and is to be found in the uncongeniality of the two parties who had united in the reestablishment of the Grand Lodge, arising from the great difference in the character, habits of life, and social condition of the individuals.

The old Masters and Past Masters who had contributed to the support of the institution in the earlier years of the Grand Mastership of the Count de Clermont, were members of the nobility, the bar, and the better class of citizens. They mingled with reluctance with the new-comers and the partisans of Lacorne, who for the most part were workmen without education or men of bad reputations, wholly incapable, from their want of culture and refinements to conduct the labors of the Grand Lodge. (1)

The old Masters would willingly have expelled them, and in so doing they would undoubtedly have improved the moral and intellectual tone of the Grand Lodge; but the objectionable members had legal and Masonic rights, which made them in one sense the equals of their adversaries, and it was well considered by the latter that any violent coercive measures would expose the Order to the danger of new and perhaps fatal convulsions.

Accordingly, the old brethren resolved to temporize. The regulations of the Grand Lodge prescribed a triennial election of officers. The time having arrived, very few of the new members and the partisans of Lacorne were elected to any of the offices. These, feeling assured that this act had been preconcerted, declared the election to be illegal and protested against it.

They caused defamatory libels to be printed, and scattered them with profusion among the Fraternity. In these the Grand Lodge and its officers were bitterly abused.

Under these circumstances, the older brethren who formed the most numerous as well as the most respectable part of the Grand Lodge, could do no less than vindicate its authority by expelling the malcontents from it and from all their Masonic rights and privileges.

The expelled members encountered the decree of expulsion with

(1) Thory, " Fondation de la Grand Orient," p. 22.

renewed libels, insults, and personalities, to which the other side responded by publications of a similar character. The war of words became so vigorous and offensive even to public decency that the government thought it necessary to interfere and to issue, in 1767, an order prohibiting any further assemblies of the Grand Lodge.

It must have been previous to this suspension of its meetings by the government and when the Grand Lodge had hoped that its union of the discordant elements would effect a permanent and a happy reconciliation, that it announced its existence to the Grand Lodge of England and sought to establish a fraternal interchange of courtesies between the two bodies.

Northouck tells us that on January 27, 1768, the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England informed the brethren that he had received from the Grand Lodge of France letters expressing a desire of opening a regular correspondence with the Grand Lodge of England. These letters having been read, it was resolved "that a mutual correspondence be kept up, and that a Book of Constitutions, a list of lodges, and a form of a deputation, bound in an elegant manner, be presented to the Grand Lodge of France." (1)

This, it must be remarked, is the first official recognition, by the Grand Lodge of England, of the existence and legality of such a body in France. But the ready willingness of the English Masons to cement a union with their brethren of the neighboring Grand Lodge appears to have led to no active results.

At the very time that this friendly act of the English Grand Lodge was recorded the Grand Lodge of France had suspended its labors. The body was temporarily dissolved and its members dispersed.

The expelled members availed themselves of this favorable opportunity to renew their efforts to obtain a supremacy of the Order. They held clandestine meetings in the faubourg St. Antoine, and notwithstanding the vigilance of the magistrates, they resumed the ordinary labors of Freemasonry, and even went so far as to grant several charters to new lodges. They sent to the lodges in the country circulars in which they stated that the Grand Lodge having, in obedience to superior authority, ceased its labors, had delegated to

(1) Northouck, " Book of Constitutions," p. 291.

three Brethren, Peny, Duret, and L'Eveille, the exercise, during the continuance of the persecution, of all its rights and powers.

But they did not succeed in this bold effort at deception. The provincial lodges on examining the lists of expelled Masons which had long before been sent to them by the Grand Lodge, saw that among them were the names of those persons who had signed the circular as well as of those who were said to have been appointed as commissioners to exercise the functions of the Grand Lodge during its enforced abeyance. They therefore wrote to the Substitute of the Grand Master, M. Chaillon de Joinville, for an explanation, which was readily given He denounced the encyclical letter as a false document and declared its signers to be rebels. In consequence the provincial lodges declined the correspondence which had been offered to them and refused to take a part in the conspiracy against the Grand Lodge.

This illegal faction was led by Lacorne, who had been deposed from his office as Substitute of the Grand Master. The legal faction, for the Grand Lodge was thus divided, was headed by Chaillon de Joinville, the successor of Lacorne in the office of Substitute General.

This body also held its secret meetings and also issued Charters, which, however, to avoid the appearance of violating the suspensory decree of the Magistrates, were all dated anterior to the issuing of that decree.

The object of the Lacorne faction was to abolish the Grand Lodge and to replace it by a new power from which all the respectable members should be removed and all authority be vested in the hands of the conspirators. As a preliminary step, they sought, but without success, to obtain from the lieutenant of police a revocation of the edict of suspension.

At length the death of the Grand Master, the Count of Clermont, which event occurred in 1771, gave a renewal of their hopes of seizing the supreme power. France presented, at this time, the spectacle of two Grand Lodges, or rather of two discordant and rival factions, each pretending to represent a Grand Lodge and each exercising the functions of a Supreme authority.

One of these was the National Grand Lodge, which had existed under the Count of Clermont and which, though interdicted by the government in 1767, still continued, though it held no meetings openly to exercise its prerogatives through its acknowledged officers.

The other body was a fragment, consisting of the adherents of Lacorne, all of whom had been expelled by the legal Grand Lodge, but who in violation both of the law of Masonry and the Municipal decree of interdiction, persisted in holding clandestine meetings, granting constitutions to new lodges, and in short exercising, without the least semblance of legal authority, all the functions of a Grand Lodge.

It is very clear that on the death of the Count of Clermont the National Grand Lodge, the only body in which the supreme authority of Freemasonry was at the time vested, had but one course to adopt. It should have assembled in open session, and duly elected a successor.

Unfortunately for its own interests and for those of the institution over which it held so loose a control, it did no such thing.

Discouraged by the useless efforts it had made to obtain, from the government, a revocation of the decree of suspension, it supposed that the time was not propitious for an attempt to revive its dormant existence. Its hesitancy and its timidity were eventually the causes of its destruction.

On the contrary, the Lacorne faction, consisting, as has been said, wholly of expelled Masons, who had previously formed the disreputable part of the Grand Lodge, were more politic and more bold.

Proclaiming themselves as the nucleus of the old Grand Lodge, the labors of which had been suspended in 1767, they approached the Duke of Luxembourg, with the design of securing his influence in getting the Duke of Chartres to accept the Grand Mastership as the successor of the Count of Clermont.

Their application was successful. The Duke of Chartres consented to accept the position.

The expelled faction, elated with the success of their plan, convoked a general assembly of all the Masters in Paris, including even the members of the Grand Lodge which had formerly expelled them.

The acceptance of the Grand Mastership by one who was closely related to the sovereign, but whose infamous character had not yet been developed, had produced much enthusiasm among the Craft. The Grand Lodge was willing to be indulgent. The expelled members were restored to all their Masonic rights. On June 24, 1771, the nomination of the Duke of Chartres as Grand Master was confirmed and announced to all the lodges of Paris and the provinces The submission of the Grand Lodge to what it supposed to be the inevitable force of events, did not have the effect it had hoped of securing harmony in the Craft. The expelled members, though now restored, do not appear to have forgotten or forgiven the wrongs which they thought had been inflicted on them. The old members were still in their view their enemies. They resolved to maintain a factious rivalry, with the ulterior purpose of abolishing the old Grand Lodge and establishing a new body on its ruin" Carthage must be destroyed."

A new element of discord was now introduced, the tendency of which was favorable to the execution of these views - an element not new in French Masonry, but which had not before been introduced into the internal government of the Order. This element was found in the cultivation of the Hautes grades, or High Degrees.

It is well known that we are to attribute this innovation, wholly unknown to the ancient Operative or to the modern Speculative system, to the inventive genius of the Chevalier Ramsay. He was the first to devise these supplements to Craft Masonry and to endeavor to develop the instructions of the Third degree by the establishment of higher initiations, to which the initiation of the Master Mason was to be deemed subordinate. Ramsay's system of seven degrees was, however, simple in comparison with those subsequently introduced into France by his followers and disciples.

France was soon inundated by these "high degrees," combined in various series forming what were called "Rites," and thrusting themselves into rivalry and competition with the legal authorities which professed to know nothing about them.

The Grand Lodge of France, like its sister of England, had always remained true to the simplicity of the Speculative system, founded as it was on the traditions of the old Operative Craft, who had recognized only three classes of workmen. It had more than once authoritatively declared that Ancient Craft or Speculative Freemasonry consisted only of three degrees. This was a fundamental point in its organic law, and it had never as a body violated it.

Not so, however, was it with its leaders, many of whom had been attracted by the glimmer of imposing titles and brilliant decorations. Chaillon de Joinville, who was then the Substitute Grand Master under the Count of Clermont, had, as far back as 1761, proclaimed himself the "chief of the high degrees and a Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret." As such he had issued a commission authorizing Stephen Morin to disseminate these high degrees in America.

That fact is, itself, enough to show how far the influence of this advanced Masonry had already extended when it had been enabled to secure as its chief the actual head of the legitimate Grand Lodge. But we also find that, from an early date, there existed at Paris and in other places in France, Colleges, Councils, and Chapters which were engaged in the cultivation and in the conferring of these high degrees, but which were always without the official recognition of the Grand Lodge.

But this recognition they greatly desired, and when the dissidents began to conspire for the abolition of the Grand Lodge and the establishment of a new body, they readily lent their assistance, because they anticipated, as was really the case, that these high degrees would receive some sort of recognition from it.

And in this hope they were encouraged by the fact that on June 24, 1771, when the Duke of Chartres was elected and proclaimed as "Grand Master of the Grand Lodge," he was also proclaimed by the additional title of " Sovereign Grand Master of all Scottish Councils, Chapters, and Lodges of France." (1)

Thus, for the first time the symbolic Freemasonry of the primitive Speculative lodges and the Scottish Masonry of the High Degrees were reunited under one Grand Master by those who had formerly opposed the fusion of the two systems, and now accepted it without opposition but not without regret. The presence of the Duke of Luxembourg, who presided over the meeting in which the Grand Master was proclaimed, was an influence which closed the mouths of the discontented, who might under more auspicious circumstances have been less reticent, and less complaisant.

We can not doubt that the object of the dissidents or schismatics (which are the titles bestowed by Thory on the Lacorne or less reputable faction of the Grand Lodge) was to entirely change the

(1) See Thory, " Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient," p. 27.

features of the system of Freemasonry which had existed in France since the establishment of the first lodge and to substitute for it another less primitive and more complicated one. This they could only expect to do by the total dissolution of the old Grand Lodge and the organization of some other Masonic authority on its ruins.

Hence, Thory is led to say that at this meeting when the Duke of Chartres was elected, there was the first appearance of the symptoms which threatened the destruction of the Grand Lodge. The assembly was entirely influenced by the dissident brethren. The old controversy as to amendments of the statutes was revived, the necessity of correcting existing abuses was vehemently insisted on and the old members saw too late to successfully oppose them the aims of their rivals. Eight commissioners were appointed to report to the Grand Master some method for effecting the proposed reforms.

The history of the proceedings of these eight commissioners, in carrying out the reforms contemplated by the dissidents, has been given by a contemporary writer, (1) and it proves that they arrogated powers which the Grand Lodge had never intended to entrust to them, and exercised them with an energy that crushed by its own force all opposition.

Encouraged by the protection of the Duke of Luxembourg, who had been appointed by the Duke of Chartres as his Substitute, they held meetings at the Hotel de Chaulnes, where they exercised the functions of a General Assembly or Grand Lodge. They were joined by several Masters of the Parisian lodges and deputies from some of the lodges in the Provinces, their professed design being to abolish the old Grand Lodge. Some of the changes which were calculated to produce that effect were opposed by a few of the Masters and delegates. But their opposition was overruled and they were compelled to withdraw from the future meetings of the commissioners.

After much noisy discussion a plan was at length presented of a new constitution. This was adopted by the eight commissioners,

(1) Le Frere de la Chaussee, a man of letters, who took an active part in the Masonic discussions of the day, was a member of the old Grand Lodge and wrote a "Memoire justificatif," whence Thory has derived many of the facts on which he has based his "History of the Grand Orient."

without having submitted it to the Grand Lodge for its approval or even for its consideration.

On December 24, 1772, the old Grand Lodge of France was declared to have ceased to exist, and for it was substituted a National Grand Lodge, which was to constitute an integral part of a new power which should administer the affairs of the Order under the title of the GRAND ORIENT OF FRANCE.

The progress of this body, its controversies with the old Grand Lodge, whose members would not consent that it should be thus summarily abolished, and its final triumph and recognition as the head of Freemasonry in France, a position which it holds at the present day, must be the subject of another chapter.

Get More Information on Freemasonry

Masonic Secrets Revealed - The Secret Ceremonies And Oaths Of The Masons Exposed!
Masonic Secrets - The Secret Masonic Handshakes, Words, And Signs Of Craft Masonry.
Freemasonry and the Druids by W. Winwood Reade. Published 1861.
Secret Masonic Initiation Video - Secret video footage from Turkey.
Bristol Masonic Ritual - The Oldest and Most Unusual Craft Working in England
The Meaning of Masonry by W. L. Wilmhurst
Freemasonry - Its Hidden Meaning - by George H. Steinmetz
Masonic Books - Check out our selection of books on freemasonry.

Chapters in Part 2

Back to Masonic Secrets Revealed

Masonic Secrets recommends the following sites:

Sacred-Magick.Com: The Esoteric Library