Friday, May 24, 2013

Washington State and the Charge Against Clandestine Masonry Pt. 4

Image taken from the Washington listing of Bogus Grand Lodges (Phylaxis Society website)

In this portion, we will look into the decade of the 80s, and how the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington continued the fight against "clandestine masonry" in the State.

The year 1980 opens with MW Jimmy Simmons as Grand Master and Brother James T. Smith at the helm of the Committee on Non-Prince Hall Masons. Although the 1980 Proceedings doesn't list the Committee among the Appointed Committees[1], The Committee does report to the Grand Lodge[2], citing that the findings "in regards to the status of Non-Prince Hall Masons-meaning (black) still is of grave concerns to the Prince Hall family" in 1980.

According to the report, we find the origin of Union Lodge #43:

"This Grand Lodge gained a new Lodge as a result of its effort in Court. Namely Union Lodge #43, which still is operating and in good standing."[3]

Committee Chairman, James T. Smith noted that there was still the operation of the Sons of Haiti in Seattle as well, and gave a solution of following "the Creed of a Master Mason to combat Non-Prince Hall Masons."

In 1981, according to the Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons in 1982, The Sons of Haiti intensified their efforts in recruitment. They had begun sending letters out to members of the Prince Hall Jurisdiction with a return address of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge Masonic Hall[4]:

pg. 61, 1982 Proceedings

As you can see in the above excerpt, they were using the address of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington. Chairman James T. Smith also stated that they were bold enough to send a letter of recruitment to the, then, Sovereign Grand Commander of the N. M. J. United Supreme Council, A.A.S.R., Ill. Russell S. Gideon, an ardent soldier against bogus masonry, and past Chairman of the Commission on Clandestine Masonry. The difference being that they used their own address on his letter.

The Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons of 1982 went on to cite and give place to, an article written by the Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Oregon, Dr. Otto C. Hagmeier, who delved into the questions of Negro Masonry and the prejudices of White Lodges and Grand Lodges to objectively deal with the question of our legitimacy. James T. Smith touched on the history of Alpha Lodge No. 116, and how abolitionists secured the Charter for Alpha Lodge No. 116 based on their desire to admit Negroes to Lodges, who previously were rejected by White Lodges based on their color. Who also, after securing the charter, admitting and properly giving the reins to the Negroes, attempted to petition the Grand Lodge of New Jersey for a charter to form a lodge, but were refused and had to re-affiliate themselves with Alpha Lodge under the leadership of Negro Masons.

According to the 1982 report, many of the Lodges were suffering from dwindling membership:
pg. 63, 1982 Proceedings[5]

These strategies were also offered as a defensive effort to thwart clandestine masonry:

"1. Remember court decision 1959-1962[6].
 2. Remember George E. Bushnell, former Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Michigan appeared as a witness and testified in New York-Prince Hall[7].
 3. Educate those who show interest-don't argue-because it [won't] change point of view.
 4. Review Phylaxis Society Pamphlets.
 5. Most of all read, research, and remember what you learned."[8]

In addition to the Report submitted by the Committee, the Grand Lodge received a report that extended further the subject of Bogus masonry, from the pen of the Grand Historian, WB Clemon L. Modisett, who stated:

"In the matter of non-Prince Hall Masons. The record shows that the fight against these men, in this Jurisdiction, is as old as the Jurisdiction itself."[9]

This report from the Grand Historian is packed with information. Because many of the readers of the Quill and the Sword are actively involved in research of Bogus bodies, I will post excerpts of importance to those researchers, and Washington State Masons specifically.

Brother Modisett goes into a journey, much like my own, concerning the confrontation of Clandestine masonry in the State, beginning in 1906:

Excerpt from the 1906 Proceedings of MW Grand Lodge of Washington and Oregon[10]

Brother Modisett continues the Report with an incident in Portland, Oregon, where a bogus group attempted to invade the territory of the young Grand Lodge and Grand Master Payne had them jailed[11]:
pg. 75, 1982 Proceedings[12]

We are then informed of the silence concerning the activity of bogus bodies in Washington State in the 20s and 30s:
pg. 75, 1982 Proceedings

There was a portion of the report that I believe that all researchers and students on Bogus bodies would find of significance, the testimony of the "grand master" of the Universal Grand Lodge (Washington), Johnny T. Washington [please note how the line of questioning by the attorney for the MWPHGL of WA, would later come back to haunt him:
pg. 77, 1982 Proceedings[13]
pg. 78, 1982 Proceedings

Please direct you attention to Johnny T. Washington's answer to the question as to the legitimacy of the John A. Bell group, he stated:

"After we investigated the John A. Bell Lodge-The Prince Hall Lodge-I knew about them-after I found out that the John A. Bell Lodge didn't have Masonic affiliation and no Supreme Council, and the man who first set it up was suspended from our Supreme Lodge, and all the work that he did after that was declared to be not legitimate work, I didn't need to pay attention to them at all."

Johnny T. Washington was purporting that John A. Bell was suspended from Universal Grand Lodge, and considered clandestine by Universal Grand Lodge based on his work AFTER being suspended. This was both interesting and hypocritical, because in the same testimony, Johnny T. Washington claimed that Universal grand Lodge claimed lineage through John G. Jones, and there was AMPLE evidence to his being EXPELLED from Masonry by the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Illinois in 1903, yet they received their origin from HIM?! By his own testimony, he declared his own Grand Lodge clandestine ON THE RECORD!

Brother Modisett continues to point out the contentions of both groups against Prince Hall[14]:
pg. 78, 1982 Proceedings 

Can you believe it? John A. Bell would claim their lineage to the white Grand Lodge Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Yet, they would also cite five, COUNT THEM, Five WARRANTS OF CONSTITUTION. If either of the Grand Lodges of Cuba, San Domingo, Haiti or South Africa were REGULAR, deriving said Constitution from the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts or Pennsylvania, then why would they need five different ones? why not secure one? Ridiculous....

Universal Grand Lodge claimed their lineage through John G. Jones (expelled mason), whom they claim received a charter from Romania or France? this has long been refuted as there is sufficient evidence to prove that the "charter" was truly ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION from the State of Illinois, who has NO POWER to set up Grand Lodges.

Brother Modisett then provided a detailed listing of the argument in support of the judgement:

pg.79, 1982 Proceedings[15]

I can not report 1983, due to the lack of the proceeding, but will continue with 1984, with MW Charles Stubblefield as Grand Master, and no citing of Committee on Non-Prince Hall masons. This can be attributed to the some sort of languishing of the Grand Lodge to pursue the issue, as cited by the Grand Master in his Annual Address; which turns out to be the ONLY report on Non-Prince Hall Masons for 1984:

"They are still in this state and many other states. Our only problem is, and will be, our complacency. When we get that feeling that just because we are Prince Hall Masons and we are secure and need not tell the whole Prince Hall story, then the roof will cave in. So, my Brothers, live as Prince Hall Masons should and publicize our deeds of what we do for all to see, and you will draw them to you"[16] 

So, I pronounce the same in this day too all of the Prince Hall historians, researchers, and defenders of our Legacy against Clandestine activity, continue to progress and fight, there is NO TIME TO BE COMPLACENT.

The statement issued in 1984, by Grand Master, Charles Stubblefield, had an instant impact, because in 1985 the Committee on Non-Prince Hall Masons was back with a report, and the Official Acts of the Grand Master cited several meetings with Grand Lodge of Washington (white) attorneys to discuss the issue of clandestine masonry. Grand Master Stubblefield reported[17]:
 pg. 11, Grand Master's Address 1985

Chairman James T. Smith reported that the Sons of Haiti had become a "thorn in the side" of the Grand Lodge here in the State of Washington. During the year of 1984, the year of complacency, the Sons of Haiti had picked up their solicitation of Prince Hall member, sending such solicitation to even the Grand Master of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. Despite the burning of their building and the disunity in their ranks, they still managed to send letters of solicitations as well as offer to rent the Grand Lodge building for their affairs. They even published in The Facts newspaper, an advertisement to the following:
pg. 67, 1985 Proceedings
pg. 68, 1985 Proceedings

This particular history will be traced in another article, but I can tell you that the only Lodge (out of the three) that had a traceable history was the Evergreen State Lodge. They can be traced back to the Supreme Council of Louisiana,  although said Supreme Council of Louisiana isn't recognized as a legitimate Supreme Council for the main reason of conferring the Craft degrees (1st-3rd) are supposed to be under the Jurisdiction of the Blue House and a Grand Master/Grand Lodge.

Beginning in 1986, we find that Past Grand Master, MW Charles Stubblefield prophetic, in that we discover, in the 1986-89 Proceedings, no significant entry by the Committee on Non-Prince Hall masons. There was a report given in 1986, but orally. From 1987-99, we find NO REPORT, and NO COMMITTEE.

Our next posting will be for the decade of the 90s, as it will prove to bear some of the most impactful events in Prince Hall history for Washington State.

For any questions concerning any portion of this and other postings contact:



1. Proceedings of the 77th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1980, Appointed Committees, pgs. 19-21

2. Ibid. Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons, submitted by Bro. James T. Smith, pgs. 43-44

3. Ibid. Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons, pg. 44

4. Proceedings of the 79th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1982, Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons, submitted by Bro. James T. Smith, pg. 63

5. Ibid. Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons, submitted by Bro. James T. Smith, pg. 63

6. This case can be reviewed in the Proceedings of the 58th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1961, Official Report of the Commission on Clandestine Masonry, pgs. 72-80

7. [*80]  Among the witnesses called in behalf of plaintiffs was Judge George E. Bushnell, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Michigan. After his retirement from the bench, Judge Bushnell, a thirty-third degree Mason, became "Sovereign Grand Commander" of "The Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry ('White') of the Northern Jurisdiction." Judge Bushnell had been a Mason for over 50 years and has held various offices in the Scottish Rite bodies. His position in Masonry fully qualified him as an expert in Masonic affairs. 

8. Proceedings of the 79th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1982, Report on Non-Prince Hall Masons, submitted by Bro. James T. Smith, pgs. 63-64

9. Ibid. Report of the Grand Historian, submitted by WB Clemon L. Modisett, pg.74-80

10. Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Communication of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Washington and Oregon, A. F. & A.M., 1906, Resolutions on Irregular Masonry, pg. 21-22

11. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Communication of the M. W. United Grand Lodge, F. & A.M. of the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1912, Grand Master's Address, [no pg. number]

12. Proceedings of the 79th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1982, Report of the Grand Historian, submitted by WB Clemon L. Modisett, pg.75

13. Ibid. Report of the Grand Historian, submitted by WB Clemon L. Modisett, pg.77-78

14. Ibid., pg. 78

15. Ibid., pg. 79

16. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1984, Grand Master's Address, pg. 8

17. Proceedings of the 82nd Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1985, Grand Master's Address, pg. 11

18. Ibid., Report on Non Prince Hall Masons, submitted by Chrm. James T. Smith, pgs. 65-69

19. Ibid., Report on Non Prince Hall Masons, pg. 68

Friday, May 17, 2013

Confusion in the Craft: Necessity in Achieving Ritual Uniformity by Honorable John L. Hairston, J. C. Logan Lodge #53 MWPHGL of WA

Book of Instruction of the MWPHGL of Wa and its Jurisdiction

After attending an EA work at Egyptian Lodge #44 in Tacoma, Wa, I thought hard about an important point identified by a newly initiate EA, as he was given an opportunity to address the Craft. Without fear he stated that he recognized stark differences in the way the degree was worked, by two different Lodges in the SAME Jurisdiction, and it WAS CONFUSING. His statement was innocent, but placed a resounding issue before the Craft. Is this the results we are trying to achieve in the Jurisdiction? Our newly made masons confused as to which is the correct or real way to work?

It was my intent (and still is) to write a piece on the ritual development of the Book of Instruction for the Washington (Prince Hall) Jurisdiction, and saw the young Mason's point as an opportunity to introduce the idea of addressing Ritual Uniformity; its attempts, efforts and history to be achieved in the Prince Hall Jurisdiction of Washington State.

The concept of Ritual uniformity isn't new at all, it has been a constant pursuit in the Craft since its inception. Bro. C. F. W. Dyer, in his Prestorian Lecture for 1973[1] informs:

"There had no doubt been attempts at various times before the Union [1813: author added] to secure uniformity of working, but it seems unlikely that they were particularly successful. In the Grand Lodge under the Duke of Atholl, the Nine Worthies were appointed to secure general uniformity but their employment seemed to die out. In considering control under the premier Grand Lodge, the work of William Preston, after whom this Lecture is named, very quickly commends the attention. His Illustrations of Masonry indicates his intense interest in instruction in Craft Ritual procedures. In the 1790s, after his re-instatement in the Craft by the premier Grand Lodge, it is more than probable that the Ritual procedures which he taught, as well as the system of teaching them, were to some degree of his own devising, By the early 1800s his medium for instruction was a Lodge of Instruction associated with the Lodge of Antiquity and his method was through Lecture in question and answer form."

We find this same rally by the Committee on Jurisprudence, for Ritual procedure and uniformity, at the very onset of the constitution of the Grand Lodge of A. F. and A. M., for the State of Washington and Oregon in the First Annual Communication:

"Our Grand Master's suggestion that we adopt the use of the Ritual now in use by the Illinois Jurisdiction and others not approved. Until such time as we adopt a STANDARD [emphasis mine] work of our own, we should hesitate to use others. Uniformity is desired in the ritualistic ceremonies in this jurisdiction and your Committee views with alarm the adoption of any exposed work whatever. We recommend the adoption of a lecture system based upon the old English method and the Masonic Carpet. We further recommend that the use of Richardson's Monitor in any lodge room or among any of our brethren by strictly forbidden."[2]

MW PGM J. C. Logan made the recommendation based on the fact that all of the Lodges were in use of the Ritual and Work of Illinois[3]. According to the Proceedings of the Second Annual Communication, in 1905, the Committee of Jurisprudence chose the Ecci Oreinti as the standard work for the Jurisdiction:

"After investigation we find that the Ecci Orienti is the most generally accepted Ritual, and used almost entirely throughout the United States and all together in England. It is a work that a Mason need not keep under lock and key for the reason that the profane cannot read its contents."

I want to divert for a moment to educate the Craft of some misconceptions concerning the "Ecci Orienti" and its origins. For many Prince Hall masons, the Ecci Orienti is what is designated, "The Black Book", a small, pocket-sized, hard-covered booklet which contains the Opening and Closing, as well the Work for the Blue Lodge Craft degrees. Ask further concerning, and you will be told that it also called the "Nizzardini" based on the "alleged" author of the Ritual.

 The "Nizzardini" front page
And, they will believe that the Ecci Orienti spoken of in the Report of the Committee on Jurisprudence in 1905 is one and the same "Nizzardini" Ritual they used up to two (2) years ago. But, upon further research we find that the "Nizzardini" was copyrighted in 1951:
The Nizzardini Copyright date and Index

In fact, a search for Anthony Nizzardini on produced an obituary that gives his birth date as September 13, 1913, in New York City[5]. So, how could Anthony Nizzardini, who was born in 1913, be the author of a Ritual adopted by the MW Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington in 1905?

If we return to the Report of the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence (1905), they stated that the Ecci Orienti could not be read by the profane, this means it was a Cipher. The Nizzardini is not a cipher, but there is an Ecci Orienti that predates the "Nizzardini" by 81 years:
The Ecci Orienti of 1870

The Ecci Oreinti was authored by Moses Wolcott Redding and published through his Masonic Supply Company, much like Anthony Nizzardini did. The 1870 Ecci Orienti is a cipher. Both Redding and Nizzardini were living in New York as well as Masons. It is highly probable that the "Nizzardini" Ritual is a revision of the 1870 Ecci Orienti authored by Redding. And, it very much likely that the 1870 Ecci Orienti is the one spoken of in the 1905 Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence report.

Continuing the historical examination of Ritual uniformity, the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence submitted this report to the Grand Lodge at the Third Annual Communication in 1906[6]:
1906 Committee on Jurisprudence Report, pg. 35
1906 Committee on Jurisprudence Report, pg. 36

It is important to note that the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence was encouraging the use of NO BOOKS in open lodge; the open ritual in an open Lodge was called, "exposed work", and was adamantly discouraged. Secondly, we still find the Grand Lodge looking for an established "uniform system" of ritual. In 1919 Book of Laws, compiled by then Code Commissioner, PGM E. H. Holmes:

Book of Laws 1919, Washington

We find Article VII Section, declaring as Law:

"Section 1. The Work and lectures of this Grand Lodge adopted in the annual communication, July, 1909, shall be the STANDARD [emphasis mine] work of the jurisdiction, and EVERY LODGE SHALL ADOPT AND PRACTICE THE SAID WORK [my emphasis] and lectures, and NO OTHER. And any lodge violating the provisions of this section without express authority from the Grand Lodge, shall be subject to discipline"[7]

We readily identify the priority that the forefathers of the Grand Lodge placed on the Uniformity of Ritual Work throughout the Jurisdiction. Yet, here in 2013, we have an EA stating that there is an obvious variation of methods and performances of the Ritual in the Jurisdiction; how and when did this diversion from uniformity to dissonance begin?

After reviewing the 1961, 1973, 1977, 1991, and 2004 Codes, we found no direct allusion to Ritual and Work as we did in the 1906 and 1913 Codes. I then began to search the Proceedings after 1913, to see if any references could be made to Ritual and Work, and if there were any Code changes to the Work and Lectures section of the Code. According to the Proceedings in my possession, we find that the diversion from uniformity started early than 1942; In the Proceedings of the 39th Annual Communication we read in the Report of the Grand Lecturer:

1942 Grand Lecturer report by RW W. H. LaBelle, pg. 26

The Grand Lecturer proposed a uniformed and standard Ritual for the Jurisdiction, this was due to what he explained as the jurisdiction not having a "uniform work of their own"[8]. He attempted to craft a uniformed ritual, but due to mistakes, he would have to make corrections. This was done and sent to Past Grand Master C. W. Davis for review. The Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence referred the Report to the next Grand Session.

We pick back up in 1946, to find MW Grand Master Ernest J. Brown, referencing the January 21st-28th (1946) International Conference of Grand Masters, where talks commenced for the printing of a UNIVERSAL RITUAL for Prince Hall Jurisdictions[9]. the Committee on the Grand Master's Address referred the recommendation of the Universal Ritual to the Grand Lecturer, W. V. Scott, who reported that "much work is still needed to be done on this temporary manual of instruction."[10] It was cited that some semblance of Order and uniformity had been attained, and was considering a ciphered work, but felt that it would "disrupt" what had been attained in the way of uniformity. At this time we know from the listing of RW Grand Lecturer's Official Acts, that there were four proposed temporary manuals of instruction that had been handed over to Brother R. N. Bird.

By 1947, improvements had been made to the Manual of Instruction and placed in the hands of the several Worshipful Masters[11]. The 1947 Manual of Instruction contained only the Opening and Closing and no "ritualistic work". According to his Official Acts, 6 to 10 copies were sent to the Subordinate Lodges.

At the 1948 Annual Communication, the following Resolutions was adopted[12]:
1948 Resolutions adopted at the 45th Annual Communication, pg. 14

Thus, there would be a Standard Opening and Closing, and Ralph Lester's Look To the East would cover the Degree work. One would think that this uniformity would uniform the Jurisdiction and preserve the symmetry between the Lodges in Ritual work. Such standardization was to be short-lived, in 1949, the Committee on Resolutions would report the following:

"Be it unanimously resolved that Atlas Lodge No. 21 go on record to dispense with RW W. V. Scott's Temporary Manual of Instruction and Freemason's Guide, and return recognition to Lester's 'Look to the [East]'."[13]

And thus began the reemergence of the break from uniformity. This would continue until 1958, when we find for the first time, a Committee on Work and UNIFORMITY[14]. There was a referral to there Committee a  resolution on the Lester's Ritual (Page 2, Article f).

It be but one year later that the Committee on Work and Uniformity would disappear, and 1962 before the Grand Lecturer would recommend dispensing with Lester's "Look to the East", and adopting the "Nizzardini" (a revised version of the 1870 Ecci Orienti by M. W. Redding)[15]:
1962 Resolution on Ritual Work

Although the Jurisdiction would find a standard ritual, it would not hinder the breach upon uniformity and the steady increase of innovation. It wouldn't be until 2004 that a standardization of Work would again appear in the Jurisdiction with the approval of a Manual of Instruction adopted at the 104th Annual Communication, with this statement on the inside cover:

We now have in the works standard Ritual book of Instruction which includes all Craft degree work as well, and despite the Jurisdictions efforts to establish Ritual Uniformity, in 2013 we find ourselves in a circumstance where innovation has created Confusion in the Craft.

The necessity of Uniformity in Ritual finds significance in the fact that it preserves the Jurisdiction from innovations and complacency. It better enables harmony between Lodges especially during visitation and there is need for visitors to fill places and stations. It would allow us know when there is a "foreigner" among us, and whether his work is of this Jurisdiction. I believe in the right of a Grand Lodge to choose its work, but I am also of the position that all subordinate Lodges under that Grand Lodge should work in ONE ACCORD. The observation of the young EA is a clarion call for the Jurisdiction to return to the UNIFORMITY and Standard of the Code and clear up the variations in our work. Have we not recognize the prophetic revelation in that the VSL says, "out the mouth of Babes (EAs) speaks the Truth", we should also reflect on the fact that the disharmony in the work is a result of compromising and laziness in the work, as well as mirror image of the harmony in the Jurisdiction itself. Let us heed with attentive ears the wise counsel of our young and repair the breach. I mean, what does the Ritual Book instruct us to do when there is Confusion in the Craft?

1. In Search of Ritual Uniformity, A General Examination of the Regulation and Development of Craft Ritual Proceedings after 1813, Prestorian Lecture for 1973 (May 4,  1973) by Bro. C. F. W. Dyer. Section 2, Pre-Union and William Preston.

2. Proceedings of the First Annual Communication of the M.W. Grand Lodge of A. F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Oregon, 1904, Report of the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence, pg. 28

3. Proceedings of the First Annual Communication of the M.W. Grand Lodge of A. F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Oregon, 1904, Grand Master's Address, pg. 13

4. Proceedings of the Second Annual Communication of the M.W. Grand Lodge of A. F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Oregon, 1905, Report of the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence, pg. 52-53

5. Anthony Nizzardini obituary on the Pocono Record website:

6. Proceedings of the Third Annual Communication of the M.W. Grand Lodge of A. F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Oregon, 1906, Report of the Committee on Masonic Jurisprudence, pg. 35-36

7. Book of Laws: Containing the Constitution and By-Laws of the M.W. United Grand Lodge, Free and Accepted Masons, The State of Washington and Jurisdiction, from 1903 A.L. 5903 to 1919 A.L. 5919, Inclusive. Compiled by M. W, E. H. Holmes, Code Commissioner.

8. Proceedings of the Thirty-Ninth Annual Communication of the M.W. United Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1942, Report of the Grand Lecturer, pg. 25

9. Proceedings of the Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1946, Grand Master's Address, pg. 5

10. Ibid.  Grand Lecturer's Report, pg. 29-34

11. Proceedings of the Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1947, Grand Lecturer's Report, pg. 35

12. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1948, Resolutions, pg. 14

13. Proceedings of the 46th Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1949, Report of the Committee on Resolutions and Recommendations, pg. 38

14. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1958, Report of the Committeee on Work and Uniformity, pg. 46

15. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of  F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1962, Resolution on Ritual Work, pg. 74

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Washington State and the Charge Against Clandestine Masonry Pt. 3

With the martyrdom of many of our Black leaders at the close of the 60s, the the years of 1970-79 ushered in a transition in the approach to Clandestine Masonry by the Commission on Clandestine Masonry and the Jurisdiction of Washington.

1970 opens with MW PGM Frank Russell at the helm of a vibrant Prince Hall Organization (Wa), with a Clandestine Commission manned by the likes of Masonic greats:

Ill. Russell S. Gideon, PGM
MW Johnny Allen, PGM
WB Theodore Spearman
RW Sylvester J. Lake, PGM
RW James E. Chase
RW James A. Davis
WB James W. Young[1]

Professor Quintard Taylor,the Scott and Dorthy Bullitt Professor of American History at UW, explained the shift in these words:

"By the end of the 1960s, however, a significant number of Black Seattleites had turned away from that goal and sought instead to build a Community within the Central District free from the economic and psychological control of White Seattle. For them the term, "black power" signaled a radically different mood and future for race relations in the city and nation."[2]

This emerging perspective pushed a new strategy in the fight against Clandestine Masonry in Washington State. The sentiment of unity among the Black Community took precedence, but even that didn't extinguish the charge against illegitimate freemasonry; it only made adjustments to the tactics. MW Frank Russell address the issue of Clandestine Masonry in the 1970 Grand Master's Address as such[3]:
pg. 8 1970 Grand Master's Address
pg. 9 1970 Grand Master's Address

The Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Wa. had taken a new perspective on strategies needed to fight Clandestine Masonry-FIGHT ALL OF IT! We can also recognize and identify a maturity in the perspective of ourselves as Masons and a Grand Lodge. No longer was it believed that we needed to be accepted by the White Grand Lodge to validate us as Masons and a Grand Lodge. The records spoke and the question of Prince Hall legitimacy had firmly been established throughout the world; we did not have to fight to prove who we were-WE ARE WHO WE ARE!

This set the tone for the rest of the Session, the Committee on the Grand Master's Address reported, and it was motioned by MW Johnny Allen (Seconded by Brother David Shaw) that the Grand Master's Address be received with a rising ovation and placed in the Archive's of the Grand Lodge. Motion Carried.[4]

The Commission's report revealed that the Clandestine issue was of national importance, they reported:

"The desire of our Grand Master Frank Russell to affect something concrete in the way of eliminating this cancer from our midst encouraged him to participate in the Grand Master's Summit Conference held in Chicago early in the year of 1970"[5]

As we can also gather from the above statement is that the change in the perspective and approach of the Grand Lodge did not affect the zeal in which they pursued the demise of Clandestine masonry in the State. The Commission pointed out that finances in this matter was again placed on the table by the Grand Lodge of Washington (MS), but was met with resignation due to a more challenging issue, RECOGNITION:
pg. 69, 1970 Clandestine Commission report[6]

The Grand Lodge of Washington did indeed list this meeting as April 17th, 1970, "meeting with the Grand Master of the Prince Hall Lodge"[7]. Mr. Bovington, a member of the Grand Lodge of Washington, made this report to the Grand Lodge of Washington during the 113th Annual Grand Communication[8]
pg. 131, 1970 report on Clandestine Masonry

pg. 132, 1970 Report on Clandestine Masonry

The concern of Mr. Bovington that Prince Hall Masons "were losing their rights" was based on what he perceived to be the end of the litigation process and fight against Clandestine Masonry. But, what he didn't have the privilege of knowing was that Prince Hall had BROADENED their scope on WHO could be considered clandestine. The Clandestine Commission made a declaration, in the same year Mr. Bovington made his report (1970):

"For all intents and purposes it is quite apparent that we must take the initiative and develop OUR OWN plans WITHOUT expecting aid from the Washington State Grand Lodge...It appears that our sights were set on black persons rather than on whites"[9]

The Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington recognized the adjustment that needed to be made, to focus on clandestine Masonry as a whole issue and not just a BLACK issue. They also gathered the understanding that the Washington State Grand Lodge only seemed interested in fighting the Black clandestine groups as well, and made no effort to exert the same energy in fighting Clandestine Masonry when it bore a white face instead.

In 1971, we find a most striking change in the Commission-it's NAME.The Roster of 1970-1971 Committee Appointments (1971 Proceedings) finds the Commission on Clandestine Masonry now called, the Commission on Non Prince Hall Masons[10]. This was a recommendation of the Grand Master, M.W. Frank Russell, reflecting the sentiment of a fresh approach to dealing with other groups of color in the State[11]. the Commission's report was as follows:
pg. 49, 1971 Commission on Non Prince Hall Masons Report[12]

The "watch-and-wait" policy didn't last long, because in 1972, we find a full Commission report loaded with a significant encounter with the Sons of Hati, and the one, John R. Bullock, who was the "sovereign grand commander" of their Scottish Rite arm. This is of importance, because I ran into his name before on the Phylaxis Society website, on the Commission on Bogus Masonry and Practices section. Honorable Joseph A. Walkes, Jr. (Founder of the Phylaxis Society) also had crafted a paper on John R. Bullock:
Some time ago, I wrote a paper “John R. Bullock: Most Sovereign Grand Commander (So-called)” . I placed most of the illustrations on transparencies and presented it before the members of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington to warn them of the criminal fraud that was taking place within their jurisdiction. Most thought it was a shame, said they knew the people involved while shrugging it off, and did nothing. It would be many years before the Prince Hall Grand Lodge would do anything, until the outrageous conduct of that fraud became too much for the Prince Hall Freemasons to bear. Today that outfit has been absorbed by the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. [13]

The full paper was published in the 1997 edition of the Transactions of the Lux e Tenebris and indicates the nature of the threat of this bogus body of "masons". Honorable Joseph A. Walkes cited Isaac Evens Blair's book, The Thomson Fraud, which revealed that John R. Bullock had patterned the Sons of Hati Supreme Council and Grand lodge after the criminal organization headed by Matthew McBlain Thomson, founder of the American Masonic Federation[14], McBlain is pictured below:

Matthew McBlain in the Universal Freemason publication 

According to the Commission's report, the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington had received a request from the Sons of Hati for a conference to gauge the present perspective of the Grand Lodge on Non Prince Hall masons. No doubt, they had already been informed and knew of the fate of the John A. Bell and Universal Grand Lodge in 1963 and wanted to determine if they would receive a call from attorneys concerning their existence in Seattle. Present for the Sons of Hati were John R. Bullock, one A. L. Washington who was a former HEALED Prince Hall mason, who was now a Grand Master (Mr. Washington was accepted in Upton Lodge #11, then eventually dropped from membership); also there was Ricci Ricardo, George Waters, and Roy Freeman[15].

MW Russell Gideon reported:

pg 32, 1972 Commission on Non Prince Hall masons report[16]

The 1974 Proceedings provides information on the death of A. L. Washington, and the upheaval in the ranks of the Sons of Hati[17]:
pg. 22, Commission on Non Prince Hall Masons report

A. L. Washington was not replaced for a year, which speaks volumes to the chaos that reigned in the Sons of Hati camp. This continued into the year 1975, where the Commission reported:

"During the past year their internal bickerings have done much to weaken their numbers[MESSAGE]. Incidently, the bogus group located in the Washington Hall on 14th Ave., Seattle, were engaged in Bingo games. A few discreet enquiries encouraged the local authorities to investigate this activity resulting in their equipment being confiscated. At present an audit is being conducted to ascertain their ability to meet current obligations. The picture is very bleak. Our greatest strength is the support we give our Grand Lodge and it's program."[18]

The Grand Lodge then turned its attention to polishing its own image by stepping up Community involvement and placing the Grand Lodge in the face of our City, as reflected in the 1976 Proceedings:
pg. 24, 1976 Comm. on Non Prince Hall masons Report
pg. 25, 1976 Comm. on Non Prince Hall masons Report

This was actually a return to the legacy of Prince Hall Masonry in Washington State, and the long standing contributions we have made to the City of Seattle, and African American community life here in the State. Members like John C. Logan, J. E. Hawkins, J. E. Shepperson, Gideon S. Bailey, Conrad Rideout just to name a few. We, along with the African American church, were vital components to a vibrant and illustrious community.

The Commission disappeared in 1977, there is no mention of a Commission and no report brought to the floor; PSGC Russell Gideon had taken the helm of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction (AASR), there seemed to have been a void created. I did not find any mention of the Commission in either the 1978 or 79 Proceedings. I wonder what happened? I guess I have to go to the Elders and earn my wages.

This concludes the 70s, Pt. 4 will pick in 1980. Again any that have questions or would like to go into depth concerning what is in the articles posted here, please contact Honorable John L. Hairston at:

  1. Proceeding of the 67th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1970, Committee Appointments, pg. 4 
  2. Forging of a Black Community: Seattle's Central District from 1870 through the Civil Rights Era, Professor Quintard Taylor, 1994, pg. 221-222, Chapter 7: From "Freedom Now" to "Black Power" 1960-1970
  3. Proceeding of the 67th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1970, Grand Master's Address, pg. 8-9
  4. Ibid. July 15th 1970, pg. 84
  5. Ibid. Clandestine Committee Report, pg. 69
  6. Ibid.                       "
  7. Proceedings of the M.W. Grand Lodge of Washington, 113th Annual Grand Communication, 1970, Grand Master's Official Acts, pg. 38
  8. Ibid. Clandestine Masonry Report, pg. 131-132
  9. Proceeding of the 67th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1970, Clandestine Committee Report, pg. 69
  10. Proceeding of the 68th Annual Communication of the M. W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington and Jurisdiction, 1971, Roster of 1970-1971 Committee Appointments, pg. 1
  11. Ibid. Recommendations, pg. 7
  12. Ibid. Report on Non Prince Hall Masons, MW PGM Russell S. Gideon, pg.49
  13. This is an excerpt from a presentation written by Honorable Joseph A. Walkes, Jr, entitled, Black on Black Crime, the full paper can be read on the Phylaxis Society website:
  14. "Thomson and his associates—Thomas Perrot, Dominic Bergera and Robert Jamieson—were convicted at Salt Lake City Utah on May 5, 1922 on ten counts of using the mails to defraud. Each was sentenced to serve a term of two years in Fort Leavenworth Prison and pay a fine of $5,000, and costs, on each count—sentence to run concurrently." excerpt taken from the Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon website:
  15. Proceedings of the 69th Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington, 1972, Report of Non Prince Hall Masons, pg. 31-32
  16. Ibid. pg. 32
  17. Proceedings of the 71st Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington, 1974, Report of the Commission on Non Prince Hall Masons, pg. 21-22
  18. Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Communication of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. for the State of Washington, 1975, Report of the Commission on Non Prince Hall Masons, pg. 24-25

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Washington State and the Charge Against Clandestine Freemasonry Pt. 2

The Grand East for the State of Washington, Prince Hall

With the close of the 58th Annual Communication (1961), The Grand Lodge armed the Commission on Clandestine Masonry with a little over 43% of the adopted proposed budget for 1962 ($4, 500 of $10, 420)[1]. The Commission's cut would be almost 3 times the amount allotted for all the Grand Master's expenses for 1962. And, with M. W. Grand Master Johnny Allen in the Grand East, we find the Commission on Clandestine Masonry still on the forefront of the fight against Clandestine Masonry and Bogus practices.

M. W. Johnny Allen was most instrumental in defending the Jurisdiction against irregular, clandestine and bogus masonic practices. In the 56th Annual Communication, MW Johnny Allen made his Deputy Grand Master's Address, and stated this about, "Our Own Grand Lodge"[2]:

"My interest, of course, is what can be done to further develop and utilize our own rich resources[3], explore the potentials and complete this suit against Bogus Masonry."

And complete the suit they did. In 1961, the Grand Lodge won a resounding victory over the John A. Bell and Universal Grand Lodge factions, which only provided momentum for the coming years.

The 1962 Proceedings records clandestine movement in Bremerton, WA and the Prince Hall Lodges counter to heal over a clandestine lodge in the area:

"The Commission on Clandestine Masonry begs leave to make the following report:

During the month of August, 1961, the Past Masters of Bremerton informed us of the posibility of taking over the clandestine lodge in that city, or at least getting most of its members. Several meetings were held between the Past masters (P.H.) of Bremerton and the Commission. One meeting was held with the members of the bogus group."[4]

Even with said momentum, the Grand Lodge still faced legal difficulties with the upcoming Appeal. After the defeat in 1961, the John A. Bell and Universal Grand Lodge factions mounted another attempt to overturn the verdict. They filed for immediate appeal, which truly was a last ditch effort for the groups to salvage their losses. The Committee explained the difficulties in the Appeal process in the following report[5]:

pg. 63

pg. 64

I believe that it is equally important to emphasize what the Grand Lodge attorney, Mr. Maslan, was using in the form of documentation in the case, namely:
                       The Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Washington (MS) 1897

Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts 1897

Northern Jurisdiction, Scottish Rite proceedings for the years 1944-1946

I would also be interested to look into the Body of Law prepared by MW PGM Amos T. Hall of Oklahoma, these documents would be vital for any educational class or study group to build a solid and stable foundational knowledge of Prince Hall Masonry and its legitimacy.

The Committee report went into another interesting piece of information:

"Since our last Grand Lodge Session, another group of "degree peddlers" has set up shop in Seattle on 14th Avenue, near Yesler Way. Your Commission has not been asleep in this matter. Information in regards to them has been procurred and turned over to the attorney. Relative to this new group starting in the State, Evergreen Lodge #119, your group has given me certain information and I have been attempting to procure the other data."[6]

This particular group was of significant interest to me based on recent discussions with Bro. Michael Poll, owner and operator of Cornerstone Books Publishing, and Past Master of Etoile Polaire Lodge #1 in New Orleans, Louisiana. After a long discussions on the origins of certain Supreme Councils in the United States, I began to study the war between the Supreme Council of Charleston and Louisiana[7]. In all fairness, The Supreme Council of Charleston is considered the Mother of the Supreme Councils here in America, while the Supreme Council of Louisiana is not recognized nor considered regular by the the greater Masonic body. Read the material and judge for yourself.

Why would I go there? the group, Evergreen State Lodge #119 who was now on the radar of the Commission on Clandestine Masonry was actually a Lodge of predominately African Americans chartered by the Supreme Council of Louisiana!

pg. 64, 1962 Proceedings of the MWPHGL of WA[8]

The Commission wrote to the Secretary of State in Olympia looking to receive the documentation on the incorporation of the Evergreen State Lodge #119, only to find that there was no DOMESTIC articles of incorporation, but later found that they had registered as a foreign corporation, under the Supreme Council of the Thirty Third and Last Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of freemasonry of the State of Louisiana. Evergreen State Lodge filed with the Secretary of State on September 1, 1961, and according to records the Supreme Council of Louisiana that chartered them was incorporated in Louisiana in 1870. Very interesting indeed.

I didn't have the 1963 Proceedings (MWPHGL of WA) available, but the 1964-67 Proceedings show scant reports of the Commission on Clandestine Masonry. I have an opinion of why, according to what could be interpreted in the Proceedings of 1962, leading up to 1968. 

MW Johnny Allen was in the Grand East in 1962 and 1963, which is why the Commission was given the latitude to operate in the Jurisdiction. Even without the 1963 Proceedings, we can conclude that the Commission would only have the same liberty to pursue these bogus outfits. Yet, in 1964, under the administration of MW Sylvester J. Lake, we begin to see a shift in policy and priority. The Commission isn't listed as a Committee appointment for the 61st Annual Communication[9], and their report was not written, and contained only 4 lines in the proceedings on pg. 52. This is most likely due to the task of the Commission Chairman, George Jorden handling other duties as Grand Treasurer as well as the later expulsion. We find this action repeated until the year 1968, where we find a FULL special report, and a new Chairman in the person of none other than, Past Sovereign Grand Commander (NMJ), Russell S. Gideon[10].

I believe it also worthy of note, that the clandestine groups were now more bold in their operations, incorporated as Masonic entities, complete with public appearances with full regalia, and newspaper articles advertising their functions. The Proceedings of 1968 listed these groups operating in the Jurisdiction[11]:

 1968 listing of Black Clandestine groups in the State of Washington

To note, The Supreme Council out of Louisiana has chartered another Lodge, Alma Lodge #133, and both lodges were now located in Tacoma, WA. At this point it is time to recognize a connection between the Evergreen State Lodge #119 and the Sons of Hati Grand Lodge #1, and the later Supreme Council of the Sons of Hati. If you scroll back up to the document labeled, pg. 64, 1962 Proceedings of the MWPHGL of WA, you will read in that document the name, John R. Bullock as President of the Evergreen State Lodge #119. At this time he was claiming to be under the Supreme Council of Louisiana. Later in 1972, we will find this same Bullock in connection with the Sons of Hati:
pg. 31, 1972 Proceedings of the MWPHGL of WA[11]

pg. 32, Ibid.

John Bullock was listed as President of the Evergreen State Lodge #119 faction, who claimed lineage to the Supreme Council in Louisiana. I did contact Bro. Michael Poll (noted author and Scottish Rite researcher) and inquire if this was the same Supreme Council of Louisiana that his own Lodge, Etoile Polaire #1 was once under before the merger with the Supreme Council of Charleston. I did inform him that the incorporation date was 1870 in Louisiana, which he informed me "was the date of the Post Civil War incorporation."

This group seems to have obtained the Constitutional number of 33rds together to form the Supreme Council of the Sons of Hati, establishing a Grand Lodge (#1) in Pasco, and chartering lodges in the State. This group also seemed to have many different pieces to its clandestine amalgamation, as we go into the corporation papers with the Secretary of State of Washington State[12]:

Date of Incorporation 12/21/1962 
     2015 E YESLER WAY 
     City SEATTLE 
     State WA 
     Zip 98122

Date of Incorporation 08/10/1962

Date of Incorporation 09/23/1994 
Address 1943 S SPRAGUE 
     City TACOMA 
     State WA 
     ZIP 98405

Later, in the year 1999, the Sons of Hati would heal over to the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington, under the administration of MW PGM William C. Rheubottom[13]:

 Washington Masonic Community Monitor, 1999

Continuation of the Sons of Hati article

Although their Grand Master and many of the Grand Lodge officers of this group was healed over to the MWPHGL of Wa, we have to also state that the group did not go away. There is ample evidence that the group still operates in King County, and was in possession of the same building (Washington Hall) being operated and maintained by Evergreen State Lodge #119 in 1962, 14th and Yesler Way. They sold the building in 2008, and moved their headquarters to Renton, Wa as reported in the Seattle Times newspaper in 2008:

"No one disputes the 100-year-old Yesler Terrace building is rich in history. Not the Supreme Council of the Sons of Haiti, the black Masonic order that now owns it and has put it up for sale.
Not Historic Seattle, a nonprofit group devoted to preserving historic places, which would like to preserve it as a historic site. And not DKA Architecture, a possible buyer that is considering turning the building into housing units.
But whether the building ends up as condominiums or is preserved as a historic landmark depends solely on who offers the best price.
Charles Adams, a building manager and an officer with the Sons of Haiti, said the group, which purchased the building in 1973 for $50,000, hopes to sell it for $2 million to $2.5 million so it can buy a newer building in Renton for meetings and activities."[14]
Let's rewind all the back to 1968.
With a replacement of Chairman over the Commission of Clandestine Masonry, and a return to the priority of defending the Jurisdiction against intrusion by bogus outfits, we find a full "Special Report" presented to the Grand Lodge. In addition to the report concerning the activities of BLACK bogus groups, we have the first reference to a white group on the radar of the Commission[15]:

"Your Committee, during the course of our investigation, was aware of the activities of certain OTHER [emphasis mine] Masonic groups which, although they have not been recognized by the M. W. Grand Lodge of F. & A.M. of Washington[16], claim legitimate Masonic authority, and conduct themselves in accordance with masonic usage and standards. Your Committee has no evidence that such groups are clandestine, and they are not included within the recommendation of this report."
Interestingly enough, the 1968 Proceedings also reveals the offer of $10,000 from the white Grand Lodge of Washington, to the MWPHGL of Wa "to be used to obtain counsel and assist Prince Hall Masons in the Washington Jurisdiction in their attempt to eradicate clandestine [lodges]."[17] This offer was approved by the white Grand Lodge of Washington, based on the "recent bogus Scottish Rite activity". Yet, when I went to the Proceedings of both the 1967 and 1968 of the Grand Lodge of Washington (White), we could find no traces of an approval of said recommendation to extend the offer of $10,000 to the Prince Hall Grand Lodge to fight bogus masonry[18].
I truly believe that this created a shift in the method in which the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington battled with black clandestine groups as we will later see. The issue is why couldn't we find the "approval of recommendation"?
Could it have been that, at this time, the Grand Lodge of Washington did not recognize the Prince Hall Grand Lodge OFFICIALLY? We do know that from the 1967 Proceedings of the 110th Annual Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge of Washington (white), that on August 14th, 1966, a Grand delegation met with the "Heads of the Prince Hall Lodge, Seattle":

1967 Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Washington (white)

The Grand Lodge of Washington (white) had already attempted to recognize the Prince Hall masons in 1898, but was repudiated by almost all of the Masonic Grand Lodges in America. I have personally seen all of the correspondences of the Grand Lodges to the Grand Lodge of Washington archived in the Grand Lodge Library in Tacoma, WA. This mass severing of fraternal ties, caused the Grand Lodge of Washington to rescind their initial resolution, and deny recognition to the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. Official recognition did not come until 1990[19]. Could it be that the MISSING recommendation was due to the Grand Lodge of Washington not wanting those Grand Lodges they were in relation with to see that they were giving finances and assisting an unrecognized Prince Hall Grand Lodge?
Nevertheless, the Committee came with several prerogatives to continue the fight with clandestine groups:
1968 Proceedings of the MWPHGL of Wa
Please take note of prerogative #1, as this sentiment led to an important shift and development in 1971, we will get into in Part 3 of this series.

1969, we saw an intensified movement on both sides to create a joint attack on the issue of bogus masonry, Chairman Russell S. Gideon explained it this way[20]:

pg. 68

You can read the shift in sentiment. What the Committee was conveying was that Clandestine masonry isn't just a BLACK problem, BUT a MASONIC problem, and if we are to rid the Jurisdiction of the issue, then it would take the finances and efforts of both Grand Lodges. And, so the M.W. Grand Lodge of Washington sent their delegation to the table to map a joint strategy[21]:

Ibid. pg. 68

The strategy was three (3) fold[22]:

Ibid. pg. 68

The Grand Lodge of Washington would file suit against the the Secretary of State[23], which would create a stop to clandestine groups receiving authorization from the State to operate as Masonic entities. There was to be a significant move to exert a more aggressive community outreach, and feature articles in the Masonic Tribune that would shine a favorable light on the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington. How did the push fare at this point? You will have to wait for Part 3 of this series, which will feature 1970-79.

Written by Honorable John  L. Hairston, MPS-Life, Phylaxis Society, Northwest Chapter
J. C. Logan Lodge #53, F. & A.M.

If you have questions concerning this article or any other on the Quill and the Sword, please contact me at