Culver & Farrington Building
(No. 198 West Third Street)
First home of Ancient Landmark Lodge No. 5. The upper floor was fitted up for Masonic purposes by Minnesota Chapter No. 1 R.A.M.
In The Beginning
On Wednesday evening, Feb. 23, 1853, representatives from the Lodges then existing in the Territory of Minnesota-St. Paul Lodge of St. Paul, St. John's Lodge of Stillwater and Cataract Lodge of St. Anthony-met in convention in St. Paul to take measures to organize a Grand Lodge. Temporary organization was effected and a committee appointed to draft a constitution and regulations for the government of a Grand Lodge. The convention then adjourned until the following day, when a constitution was adopted and a Grand Lodge regularly formed with W. Bro. A. E. Ames of Cataract Lodge, St. Anthony, as Grand Master.
On June 21, 1853, Grand Master Ames issued a dispensation for the organization of a new Lodge at Minneapolis, Hennepin county, to be known as Hennepin Lodge. At the Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge, Jan. 2, 1854, representatives from the new Lodge appeared with the books and records of that Lodge and petitioned for a charter. The committee on "Lodges U. D." after examining the work, returns and by-laws of the Lodge, presented resolutions recommending that a charter be issued. The report of the committee was received by the Grand Lodge by a vote of 12 to 4, Deputy Grand Master Aaron Goodrich and the representatives of St. Paul Lodge voting in the negative. The Deputy Grand Master then moved to lay the resolutions on the table, which motion was negatived by a vote of 7 to 8, the representatives of St. John's Lodge adding their votes to those previously cast in opposi tion to the granting of the charter.
Pending further action in the matter the Grand Lodge was then called from labor to refreshment until 8 o'clock the following morning. Upon reconvening at the appointed time it was observed that the representatives of St. Paul Lodge were not present. The supposition was that they hoped. by absenting themselves, to pre vent a quorum and thus defeat favorable action in the matter of granting a charter to the new Lodge. If such was their expecta tion it failed of realization, how-ever, for the Grand Lodge adopted the resolution granting a charter to Hennepin Lodge No. 4 by a vote of 10 to 1, Deputy Grand 'Master Goodrich casting the nega tive vote.
The real motives which prompted the representatives of St. Paul Lodge to absent themselves from the second day's session of the Grand Lodge was for years a subject of controversy among the brethren who were in attendance at that session, and the true solution of that problem is something that must forever remain a mystery. The most commonly accepted theory was-and not with out some degree of plausibility-that the brethren of St. Paul Lodge were jealous of the great power which the votes of a second Minneapolis Lodge added to the votes of the appointive officers of the Grand Lodge, would place within the grasp of the Grand Master. He might, if he so desired, perpetuate himself in office indefinitely and assume a dictatorial sway over all the affairs of the Grand Lodge, disposing of them to suit his own personal whims and ambitions. The intense rivalry which is so distinguish ing a feature of all relations between the twin cities was, even in that early day, in the infancy of their existence, as marked as it is today, and undoubtedly had its influence on the motives of the St. Paul brethren.
W. Bro. Geo. R. Metcalf, in his "History of the Grand Lodge," referring to the question of the granting of a charter to Hennepin Lodge, says:
"The opposition to such action has been usually ascribed to the fear that with another Lodge in the neighborhood of St. An thony, the Grand 'Master would have been able to have perpetuated his hold on the Grand East indefinitely. Such a view is unreason able. No one was less likely to override constitutional require ments than Grand Master Ames, and the explanation, the most rational and probable, if expressed in this address would but renew the consideration of a controversy which began in the early days of the Grand Lodge and only ceased with the death of the contest ants."
Bro. Metcalf has delved deeply into this subject and his view of the matter will be accepted without question. That his estimate of Grand Master Ames is a just one is amply borne out by all the information that can be obtained regarding the life of that distin guished Mason.
That all concerned in this episode were sincere Masons, and were consistently seeking to further the best interests of the fra ternity in Minnesota, can hardly be doubted after a study of the early Masonic records and a knowledge of the prominent part taken by them in the social and business life of the community.
