WW 
 
CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
THE TWO SYSTEMS. 
 
 AUTOCRACY 
 
 OR 
 
 REPRESENTATIVE. 
 
The annual address to the Supreme Council of the United 
 States of America, their Territories and Dependencies, by the 
 Sovereign Grand Commander, in 1886, contained matter which 
 lead to the inquiry, " Wherein is it more representative " than 
 that of the Northern Jurisdiction ? 
 
 The positions occupied by the correspondents in their 
 respective Councils, precludes the necessity of comment, 
 further than to invite the attention of the thoughtful to the 
 facts presented. The respondent does not pretend to have 
 exhausted the subject-matter of reply, but the Supreme 
 Council of the United States of America, its Territories and 
 Dependencies, in its own interest, has requested a copy of 
 the correspondence, and presents it in advance of the Annual 
 Session in 1887. 
 
 "Read and Reflect." 
 
Cincinnati, Decembef 29, 1886. 
 
 John Haigh, Esq., Somerville, Mass., 
 Dear Sir : — 
 
 Some kind friend, undoubtedly a member of the " Supreme 
 Council of the United States of America, its Territories and 
 Dependencies " ! has sent me a copy of your address deliv- 
 ered before the " Supreme Council of the United States of 
 America, its Territories and Dependencies." 
 
 I notice the following in it : " We have much to boast of in 
 the increase of new bodies and initiates and feel greatly 
 encouraged in the continuance of the only true system (Repre- 
 sentative) of Scottish Rite Masonry that can have permanent 
 prosperity in this Republican country." 
 
 May I be permitted to ask you to have the courtesy to 
 inform me wherein it is that your organization, " The Supreme 
 Council of the United States of America, its Territories and 
 Dependencies," is more Republican in its character, more of 
 a Representative body than the Northern Supreme Council .■• 
 I have been trying for a long time to get some member to 
 enlighten me on this point ; all use this republican rhetoric 
 without stint, but I have been unable yet to find one who 
 would venture to undertake the difficult task ; several have 
 promised me they would do so, but they have not ; won't you 
 favor me with the information. 
 
 Very respectfully yours, 
 
 E. T. Carson. 
 
SoMERViLLE, Mass., January 29th, 1887. 
 E. T. Carson, Esq., 
 Dear Sir and III:. Bro:. : — 
 
 I fully intended to answer your letter at once. But I have 
 had unexpected business engagements that took my time and 
 thought. We had a disastrous boiler explosion at our mill, and 
 it will take some time yet before we are in running order, 
 I will answer yours as soon as I can have a little time. 
 Truly and fraternally yours, 
 
 John Haigh. 
 
 Cincinnati, O., April 2, 1887. 
 Jno. Haigh, Esq., Somerville, Mass., 
 Dear Sir and Fellow-Citizen . — 
 
 I have your letter of the 29th January, and have been wait- 
 ing patiently to hear from you to explain that matter which 
 you promised ; about the Democratic force in your organic 
 law, which ours does not contain. I know it is a hard nut to 
 crack, and if you are able to crack it, I shall award you the 
 first premium. 
 
 Truly yours, 
 
 E. T. Carson. 
 
 Somerville, Mass., April 26th, 1887. 
 Enoch T. Carson, Esq., 33°, Deputy for Ohio, Ancient Accepted 
 Scottish Rite for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the 
 United States of America. 
 Dear Sir and III. •. Bro.'. : — 
 
 I have heretofore informed you that by reason of important 
 business interests, made more exacting by the necessity of 
 rebuilding a portion of iny Bleachery and Dye Works, conse- 
 quent upon a boiler explosion, my reply to your letter of 
 December 29th, 1886, had of necessity to be delayed. Your 
 subsequent note of April 2d, 1887, reminding me of this. 
 
indicates an anxiety on your part for a reply, which I had 
 never intended, to avoid. You inquire "Wherein it is that 
 your organization, ' The Supreme Council of the United States 
 of America, their Territories and Dependencies,' is more 
 Republican in its character, more of a Representative body, 
 than that of the Northern Supreme Council ? " 
 
 At the outset let me ask what is meant by "representa- 
 tive," and this being fixed, a better, understanding may be 
 arrived at. Webster defines " representative," an adjective, 
 as " Bearing the character or power of another, as a council 
 representative of the people." As a noun, " One who repre- 
 sents or stands in the place of another. An agent, deputy, 
 or substitute, invested with his or their authority." If we 
 carry these definitions further and look for their illustrations 
 in the affairs of a State or the Nation, it will appear as a 
 practical fact, that the people elect their rulers, whether 
 Governors or President, and the popular vote, determines who 
 shall be invested with the powers and dignity of either office. 
 To disclose wherein the Supreme Council of the United 
 States of America, their Territories and Dependencies, is 
 more " of a representative body," than that of the Northern 
 Jurisdiction, I think can be done better in the language 
 employed by the latter and its official representatives, than 
 by using my own, or resorting to any declarations of, or in 
 behalf of, the former. In this way I cannot be charged with 
 unfairness if I show that the Supreme Council of the North- 
 ern Jurisdiction is not in any manner, a representative body, 
 as defined by Webster and understood by the people of the 
 United States of America, and finally, that the Supreme 
 Council of the United States of America, their Territories 
 and Dependencies is. 
 
 There is some vigorous reading in the printed proceedings 
 of the Council of Deliberation of Ohio, for 1882, (page 15), 
 wherein it appears that in 1880, the Illustrious Deputy for 
 Ohio, offered an amendment to Article 79 of the Constitutions, 
 Supreme Council, N.\ J.'., to the effect of making Sov.-. Gr.'. 
 Ins. '.Gen.-, of the 33d degree amenable to discipline forunma- 
 
6 
 
 sonic conduct by the subordinate bodies of the Rite in which 
 they hold membership. This was reported upon as follows, in 
 the Supreme Council, N. •. J. •. : Your " Committee believe that 
 this would not only be unwise, but in direct violation of the 
 fundamental principles of the Rite." Following this, com- 
 menting thereon,, the Deputy for Ohio reported to his Council 
 of Deliberation (see Proceedings, 1882, page 15): "As the 
 law now stands, a Sov. '. Gr.'. Ins.\ Gen.", of the 33d degree is 
 quite beyond the reach of discipline by any subordinate body 
 of which he may be a member. He can violate the civil, 
 moral or masonic law with perfect impunity, so far as his 
 Lodge of Perfection, Council, Chapter or Consistory is con- 
 cerned." See also your own foot-note on page 15, and your 
 quotation of Article 20 of the Secret Constitutions, with com- 
 ment by yourself thereon : " No person in the world has the 
 right to institute any proceedings against a Sov. •. Gr. •. Ins. ". 
 Gen.". Grand Commander of the 33d degree; nor even cause 
 him to submit to any penance, etc." In further expression 
 of the thought which then animated you, it was a proper 
 inquiry (see page 17), " By what magic wand or power have 
 they been touched that they should be raised so far above 
 their brethren the Princes of the Royal Secret, 3 2d degree, 
 that they should be set apart as a Sacred Order of royalty or 
 nobility, in the order exempt from the laws and responsibili- 
 ties which in Masonry should govern and protect all alike, be 
 they Secret Master or Sov.". Gr.". Ins.". Gen.". .■• " Have I not 
 shown by your own evidences, officially given, that in the 
 particulars spoken of by yourself, the Supreme Council, N.'. 
 J."., utterly ignores representation and pronounces pointedly 
 against it.' As being more representative than, this, permit 
 me to say, that under the laws of the Supreme Council of the 
 United States, their Territories and Dependericies, if a Sov. ". 
 Gr.". Ins.". Gen."., 33d degree, should so far derogate from the 
 character of a Mason as to commit a Masonic offence he can 
 be put upon trial in a Lodge of Perfection of which he may 
 be a member, or in the Consistory if one exists in the State. 
 Here I might safely conclude my reply, Brother Carson, 
 
and rest upon this showing, but lest I may be considered to 
 have exhausted the evidence, permit me to ask you to con- 
 sider that presented by Michigan. By referring to the printed 
 Proceedings of the Supreme Council, N.*. J.'. 1880, page 56, 
 57, it will be seen that the Council of Deliberation of Michi- 
 gan realized that it had no representative voice, in the proper 
 sense, in that Supreme Council, and sought to remedy the 
 defect, as the resolutions adopted, May nth, 1880, and here 
 quoted, pointedly show : 
 
 ''Resolved, That it is of the utmost importance to the 
 interest of the Rite in this State that in future the Council of 
 Deliberation, recommend to the Supreme Council, the names 
 of the 111.'. Brothers that they may select to receive the Hon.'. 
 Degree of 33 or Soverign Grand Inspector General. 
 
 "Resolved, That the 111.'. Deputy and active members of 
 this jurisdiction be requested to present this subject at the 
 next session of the Supreme Council, and ask that such 
 changes be effected in the constitution of said Body, as will 
 enable State Councils of Deliberation to carry out the spiri* 
 of the above resolutions." 
 
 Evidently the Council of Deliberation of Michigan had not 
 been permitted to nominate or elect one or more, nor any, 
 from among their fellows, to receive the 33d degree, nor is 
 there the faintest suspicion that its opinion had any weight in 
 preferring the brother from Michigan, who received the grade 
 at this session of the Supreme Council. In support of this, 
 it is only necessary to cite the fact that the mover of the 
 resolutions quoted, was an Hon.'. Sov. '. Gr.' Ins.'. Gen.', of 
 the 33d degree in the Northern Jurisdiction and amply quali- 
 fied by ability, knowledge and experience to state the case 
 correctly (see printed Proceedings, Supreme Council, N.'. J.'., 
 1880, page 26). 
 
 To the ordinary masonic mind, these resolutions would 
 appear reasonable, and more so, from the fact that Councils 
 of Deliberation, include in their composition " the first three 
 officers of Consistories and Chapters of Rose Croix, and the 
 first four officers of Councils of Princes of Jerusalem and 
 
Lodges of Perfection in each State " ; who might quite as rea- 
 sonably be expected to know something of the interests and 
 needs of the Rite in their particular State. Certain it is, how- 
 ever, they had no rights which the Supreme Council felt 
 bound in honor or conscience to respect, unless this lies in 
 the fact that it was " Ordered that the Deputy of Michigan 
 have permission to withdraw the paper" (printed Proceedings, 
 1880, page 104). 
 
 It is true the Supreme Council in 1881 (printed Proceed- 
 ings, page 54), agreed that " It is now within the province of 
 Councils of Deliberation to recommend Brethren for election 
 as Honorary Members of the Thirty-Third Degree," etc., but 
 that this is hollow fruit, needs not to be proven, beyond citing 
 the experience of Councils of Deliberation. To this, however, 
 I will refer hereafter. 
 
 Possibly it was a wise bit of moralizing by the Committee 
 on the Condition of the Rite, to say in the concluding por- 
 tion of their report, in 1883 : "It is often the case, if not 
 invariably sp, that those who are animated by such a spirit 
 over-estimate their qualifications." , To the truthfulness of 
 this, it is not likely that the brethren of Michigan could 
 assent as applied to them, nor could they be any better satis- 
 fied with their non-representation in the Supreme Council. 
 The order to withdraw their resolutions in 1880, had not 
 resulted in quieting their perceptions, and it was in discussing 
 the resolutions, renewed by Michigan Council of Deliberation," 
 that the Committee went outside of their duty, to frame the 
 remark above quoted. By referring to the printed Proceedings 
 Supreme Council, N.\ ].:, 1883, (pages 66-72), you will see 
 that on May 8th, 1882, the Michigan Council of Deliberation 
 adopted a series of resolutions, all in harmony with their 
 former action, as will be seen in the following preamble : 
 
 " Whereas, It is the opinion of this Council of Deliberation, 
 now assembled, after a full, fair and impartial consideration of 
 the subject, that the manner heretofore pursued in this juris- 
 diction of naming members for the Honorary Degree of 
 Thirty-Third by the active members of the State, does not 
 
9 
 
 reflect the wishes of those most deeply interested ; neither is 
 it a credit to the Rite ; therefore, 
 
 "Resolved, That this Council of Deliberatioij does most 
 earnestly protest to the Supreme Council agai'hst the con- 
 ferring of the Degree of Thirty-Third Mason upon any person 
 who has not been regularly elected to that high honor by the 
 Council of Deliberation, and whose election shall be regularly 
 certified to the Grand Secretary General at least thirty days 
 before the meeting of the Supreme Council." 
 
 The five resolutions which follow this I need not quote, but 
 will remind you of them, that you may read. 
 
 These repeated assertions by the bodies of the Rite, per- 
 mitted to have certain officers in the Council of Deliberation, 
 stand as solemn declarations that the Supreme Council of 
 the Northern Jurisdiction, is not a representative Body, and 
 its own action seen in reports of its Committees on the Michi- 
 gan resolutions and kindred subjects, are equally conclusive 
 in maintaining this declaration. 
 
 Can you. Brother Carson, bold as you are in pushing your 
 -opinions, question this conclusion successfully .' and if so, will 
 that weigh against the adopted language of your Supreme 
 Council, to wit : " A representative system of government 
 would be an anomaly in Masonry in any of its branches. The 
 principles of an autocratic system of government are among the 
 peculiar characteristics of Masonry, etc. There is no legisla- 
 tive form of government under an elective franchise that could 
 be made effective in carrying forward the design and purpose 
 of the Order." (See printed Proceedings, 1883, pages 69, 70.) 
 
 Need I tell you that under the Supreme Council of the 
 United States of America, their Territories and Dependencies, 
 such self-confessed and self-asserted autocratic power would 
 not be received with a vote of approval, for that Body not only 
 permits nominations to be made by the Grand Consistory, if 
 one exists in the State, and if not, by the Lodge of Perfection 
 to the 33d degree, but confers the grade on brethren thus 
 approved and selected by their fellows. 
 
 Let me now return to the recommendations by a Council of 
 
10 
 
 Deliberation, for the 33d degree, as affecting the action of 
 your Supreme Council. No doubt you are aware of the f^ct, 
 that under the Supreme Council of the United States of 
 America, their Territories and Dependencies, the Grand Con- 
 sistory is composed of members after the manner described in 
 forming a Council of Deliberation, but with this difference : 
 When a brother is elected in Grand Consistory to receive the 
 33d degree, the act is regarded as final and the degree is con- 
 ferred accordingly. When so recommended by a Council of 
 Deliberation, in the Northern Jurisdiction, the election is 
 ignored and the action of that body is but vanity. 
 
 Is this statement too strong, think you .' Let us see. Look 
 over the entire proceeding in relation to the Michigan Council 
 of ' Deliberation, that the doubt, if any, may be removed. In- 
 quire, if not already informed, of certain facts in the history 
 of Massachusetts Council of Deliberation. This Council in 
 the exercise of its reputed right, formerly made nominations 
 for the 33d degree for this purpose, as its printed Proceed- 
 ings will show, a committee of five usually was appointed to 
 recommend the proper quota of brethren for the honor. After 
 this custom had been followed some years, and, one at least, 
 manifestly unfit person had received the grade, by favor of 
 the III". Deputy, the recommendations by committees being 
 ignored utterly, the Deputy for the S^ate, presiding in Coun- 
 cil, named 111.'. Bro.'. William F. Salmon, 33°, with others, 
 to present names of brethren, for approval or recommenda- 
 tion to receive the 33d degree. 111.'. Bro. ". Salmon pointedly 
 declined to serve on such committee, and gave as his reason 
 that it was a waste of time, a mere mockery — for any 
 recommendations heretofore made had been ignored — and 
 the 33d degree conferred on some one favored by the Deputy 
 or other active member of the Supreme Council, without any 
 regard to the wishes of the Jurisdiction or that part of it 
 more immediately affected. This episode I personally wit- 
 nessed, and no doubt, Ill.\ Bro.". S. C. Lawrence, 33°, III". 
 Bro.'. Charles A. Welch, 33", as well as many others will 
 remember it. 
 
11 
 
 But further than this, within a very few years, Erastus H. 
 Doolittle and George S. Carpenter, one presiding over the 
 Chapter of Rose Croix, the other of the Council of Princes of 
 Jerusalem, in Boston, N.-. J.-., deliberately united with Edward 
 de la Granja, to establish a Supreme Council in Boston, (you 
 know the facts), and with others was admitted by him to the 
 33d degree. When Doolittle was put upon trial in Massachu- 
 setts Cionsistory for this defection — ^ both recanted, and 
 deserted the De La Granja Council, returned to the fold they 
 first deserted — and in a comparatively short time both re- 
 ceived the 33d degree in the Supreme Council, Northern 
 Jurisdiction. In recounting these facts, I am criticising your 
 Supreme Council only, for it is an open secret, if not of pub- 
 lic information, that the Council of Deliberation did not 
 recommend, nor could the nearly unanimous voice of some- 
 thing like fifty 33d dfegree honorary members in Massachu- 
 setts, besides the voice of many brethren, prevail against the 
 one or two Actives, who desired that the grade should be con- 
 ferred. 
 
 Need I tell you that the Supreme Council of the United 
 States of America, their Territories and Dependencies would 
 not have acted thus ; tjie opposition would have been respected, 
 the voices of those already Sov.". Gr.'. Ins.\ Gens.*, would 
 have been regarded, as representing the more general vvill, 
 and this representative force would have stayed proceedings. 
 
 But let me return to Ohio, (see page 61-65, printed Pro- 
 ceedings, 1883, N.\ J.".), touching resolutions of Enoch Lodge 
 of Perfection, reported upon in Supreme Council : 
 
 " Whereas, From the report of the 111. '. Deputy Carson to 
 the Council of Deliberation, we learn that a Law-making 
 Body, to which 3 2d degree members were eligible, was in 
 .existence up to May, 1867 "; that said body has never legally 
 disbanded, that its last presiding officer is alive and in " good 
 standing in the Rite to-day, and, Whereas," (I quote this as 
 corroborative of what I have already said in reference to 
 Ohio, and that the opinion of your Supreme Council on repre- 
 ;sentation may b6 presented to the effect), "that the Masonic 
 
12 
 
 system of government fails to provide, for an elective repre- 
 sentation," and has done so, for "untold centuries," that 
 "there are thousands and hundreds of thousands" of Masons 
 who "would regret the first step towards modification," etc., 
 "particularly that feature, which gives to it its aristocratic, 
 monarchical peculiarity." " This is one of its life-springs which 
 assures its perpetuity, and they are but few who feel them- 
 selves chafed by its exercise. Should a representative system 
 of government ever fasten its poisonous fangs upon the vitals 
 of the Ancient Accepted Rite, the death-knell of the Order 
 will reverberate through every chamber of the Temple." 
 Plainly, then, the Supreme Council, Northern Jurisdiction, 
 not only asserts that it is not a representative body ; but that 
 it is an autocratic one, and re-enforces this by applauding its 
 "aristocratic" and "monarchical peculiarity." 
 
 This was again urged by the Committee on the Condition 
 of the Rite, (see printed Proceeding, 1884, pages 53-59, N.'. 
 J.'.), and adopted. The report finds that, "Upon the institu- 
 tion of the Rite, so far as may be gathered from its annals, 
 when the various Orders, consisting of twenty-five Degrees 
 were grouped, and for years subsequent, its governing forces 
 were- centered in and exercised by a distinguished potentate, 
 whose superior wisdom and abilities gave thought and direction 
 to the government and conduct of the Rite, and whose dictum 
 was implicitly complied with. The potentate referred to, was 
 Frederick the Great, whose historical relations to the Rite 
 are also stated ; but upon the narration I need not comment, 
 I do however remind you of this statement then accepted : 
 "An equalizing principle of representation, such as is here 
 contemplated, is really at variance with the organic systems 
 of Masonry generally, and particularly obnoxious in this Rite, 
 which germinated in autocracy, and is a principle of instinc- 
 tive characteristics." 
 
 The thought as well as the expression seems to be a favor- 
 ite one with the Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdic- 
 tion, that it is an "autocracy," or in other words, independent 
 or self-derived power ; a " self-created Supremacy." Not a 
 
13 
 
 glimmer of representation in this, Brother Carson, and we may 
 look in vain for it, under the control of Thirty-Third Degree 
 Mason's, who so flippantly speak of their brethren and equals 
 of Michigan, as "over-estimating their qualifications." No 
 wonder that you once forgot the Autocracy and gave expres- 
 sion to the honest impulses of your heart, when you inquired 
 concerning your Supreme Council, "By what magic wand or 
 power have they been touched that they should be raised so 
 far above their brethren,' the Princes of the Royal Secret 32d 
 Degree, that they should be set apart as a sacred order of 
 royalty or nobility in the Order, exempt from the laws and 
 responsibilities which in Masonry should govern and protect 
 all alike, be they Secret Master or Sov,;. Gr.'.Ins.". Gener'al ?" 
 , And just here you will find that the "hundreds of thou- 
 sands " so sweepingly included in the report on Enoch Lodge 
 of Perfection, will repudiate this assumption of authority by 
 an " Autocracy," which is already too keenly felt and whose 
 •grasping power has come to be so apparent in the Blue or 
 Grand Lodge system. An examination of the returns of your 
 Supreme Council, 1886, shows that it had about ten thousand 
 members of the 32d degree. It cannot be claimed, therefore, 
 that 111.'. Bro.'. Evans and his committee, and your Council 
 meant to assert that these were the " hundreds of thousands " 
 who " would regret the first step towards modification " of 
 " autocratic and aristocratic " power. There was no cause for 
 such fright that one should be magnified into a thousand ; the 
 otlier alternative must be that the autocratic eye was upon 
 the " hundreds of thousands " of brethren in obedience to the 
 Statie Grand Lodges who stand shivering in suspense and 
 fear lest the "autocratic" patronage — indeed it is only logi- 
 cal to say "dictum" — of the descendants of Frederick the 
 Great should be withdrawn, and so consign them to the per- 
 dition of choosing their rulers, and of selecting by ballot, 
 whom they would prefer to be honored among them. 
 
 In this direction I may cite your let-ter to me, and to which 
 this reply is made. Observe, if you please, that you omitted 
 in all cases, the appellation of "Brother." Was not this in 
 
14 
 
 obedience to the plan of the "Autocracy," the "self-ap- 
 pointed " power ? that admits of " no modification." Is it not 
 the mailed hand, crowding into the Grand Lodge system ? the 
 system wherein we are assured at the outset no interference 
 is to be made or intended to be with duty to God, country, 
 neighbor, or self ; nevertheless, I who have been taught, and 
 have taught this as Master of two different Lod^s, as High 
 Priest, Thrice 111. ". Master, and Commander of a Commandery, 
 all included in the "hundreds of thousands," and wherein I 
 am also a permanent member in Grand Chapter, Grand Coun- 
 cil, and Grand Commandery, am denied of Brother by you 
 but in illustration clearly of the autocratic character the 
 Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction arrogates to 
 itself. And yet you ask, let me hope innocently, " Wherein 
 it is that the Supreme Council of the United States of 
 America, its Territories and Dependencies, is more Repub- 
 lican in its character, more of a Representative body than the 
 Northern Supreme Council .■' " 
 
 My answer is contained largely by producing history from 
 the latter, and runs through this document. It is " more 
 Republican and more Representative " in this : It has, in 
 September, 1886, in Grand Consistory of , put a mem- 
 ber of the Thirty-Third Degree upon trial, and expelled him 
 for unmasonic conduct, thereby denying that a 33d degree is 
 touched by any "magic wand" or other power that can put 
 him beyond the reach " of discipline by any masonic body of 
 which he may be a member." 
 
 It not only permits complaints to be made, but does not 
 repulse or insult thenl by denial and with the assertion that 
 those who make them " usually over estimate their qualifica- 
 tions." It gives, not permits only, to Grand Consistories the 
 right to legislate on local affairs, and to govern their State 
 organizations after the manner of Masons, witnessed more 
 nearly in the Grand Lodge system. 
 
 It not only permits nominations to be made by election in 
 subordinate bodies, of brethren to receive the Thirty-Third 
 Degree, but confers the grade on brethren so elected. It does 
 
15 
 
 claim the reserved power to confer the Thirty-Third Degree 
 for meritorious cause, but does not ignore protests against 
 such action, and override the practically unanimous objections 
 of its Hon.-. Sov.\ Gr.'. Ins. ■. Generals. It does not ask, but 
 denies any right to Grand Lodges, Chapters or Command- 
 eries to enact constitutional definitions in its behalf, and 
 thereby seek to impose obligations which beget strife, promote 
 discord, and thus bring reproach upon Freemasonry, at the 
 "dictum" of a self -declared "Autocracy." In short, it con- 
 fides in the integrity of its subordinate bodies, believes they 
 are better acquainted with the local affairs of the Rite, and 
 governs for the greatest good of the greatest number. Thus 
 it cannot be an Autocracy or "self-derived power," and there- 
 fore is "more Republican in its character, and more of a 
 Representative body than the Northern Supreme Council." 
 
 In the interests of Freemasonry, I beg to subscribe, as you 
 addressed me, and to remain. 
 
 Yours, 
 
 John Haigh. 
 
GAYLAMOUNT 
 
 PAMPHLET BINDER 
 
 Manufactured by 
 
 GAYLORD BROS. Inc. 
 
 Syracuse, N.Y. 
 
 Stockton, Calif. 
 
 Cornell University Librarv 
 HS397 .H14