Talk:List of presidents of the United States who were Freemasons

Redirect?

Given that everyone listed in this article is also listed at the broader List of Freemasons... do we really need this list?
Perhaps keep the title but convert it to a redirect to List of Freemasons. Blueboar (talk) 16:29, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Renewing this question... should we redirect? Blueboar (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC) Blueboar (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Vice Presidents of the United States which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

James Madison

I believe James Madison should be added to the list. He was a Freemason, though his exact Degree dates are lost, his membership as a Brother of the Fraternity are well documented. A Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Virginia, Br. John Dove, verified James Madison's membership, even stating that in 1800 A.D. James Madison helped Found and was a Charter Member of Hiram Lodge No. 59 of Virginia. In a letter to Madison dated February 11, 1795, still located in the Library of Congress, Governor John Francis Mercer of Maryland congratulated James Madison on becoming a Freemason. Further, on September 20, 1817, James Madison marched in Procession and in Regalia with Charlottesville Lodge No. 90 and Widow's Sons Lodge No. 60 for the Masonic Dedication of the Cornerstone to what would become the University of Virginia. As a Freemason (F.& A.M.) myself, I can certainly attest without doubt that had President Madison not been a Brother, he would not have been able to partake in these events and deeds. He should not be excluded because the date of his Raising, and the like, have been lost to antiquity. Thetruchairman (talk) 09:25, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

The problem is that WP has rules. Every list published by reliable sources omits Madison’s name. For WP to include him in our list, we would need to be able to cite some fairly solid sources. And we can not include things based on our own Original Research. Blueboar (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm... on looking into this question a bit further (to see if I could find out why the reliable sources don’t think he should be included)... apparently Madison himself addresses the question, and wrote that he was never a Freemason. Curious. Blueboar (talk) 11:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Madison wrote his denial during the anti-Masonic period, so he might have reason to lie later in life. If the original poster has sources to confirm the 1800 lodge founding and the 1817 parade, let's see them. Jjazz76 (talk) 21:17, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Official/proven freemasons vs those who don't want to make it public

Should be titled "list of presidents that are/were officially freemasons", because the list is not closed... It's by the nature of a secret fraternity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.91.51.235 (talk) 10:27, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• Nope, in the US, membership in Freemasonry is not secret. It is something members are proud of (and often brag about). The various state grand lodges keep historical membership records which are available to the public (and they are happy to assist with inquiries). So we know which US Presidents were members and which were not. It isn’t a closed list (since it is possible that some future President might be a Freemason, and thus added to the list)... but it IS a complete list. Blueboar (talk) 12:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Chester A. Arthur was a Mason?

You'll see in this NYT reprint appearing in the Masonic Token of July 15 1881, written by Masons for Masons, it clearly references in the article 'The Anti-Masonic Defeat", that "this crushing defeat should not however discourage the anti-Masons. Their cause is a noble one. Garfield, Arthur, Hancock and English are all Freemasons, and as such will unquestionably aid one another in the future, as in the past, in every variety of crime. The accursed spirit of Freemasonry must be put down, and the anti-masons must never cease to nominate candidates until they finally triumph at the polls, in spite of the desperate and corrupt devices of their opponents"., the Masonic Token appearing to accept the membership of all candidates. Garfield is accepted and already on the list, Hancock is openly Charity Lodge #190, Norristown, Pennsylvania, and English's obituary in 1927 was clear he was Santia lodge no 25, AF/AM. That just leaves Arthur and it appears to be true? Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Generally one needs more than one perhaps primary source for it to county for Wikipedia. If you can find 2-3 good secondary sources for this we can probably add it. Jjazz76 (talk) 02:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

The White House Historical Society mentions "Arthur witnessed the masonic dedication services for the Washington Monument on February 21, 1885" [1] (which I recognise is not conclusive), and another Freemason dedication in Providence although they refer to him as a "civilian"[2], whether Arthur was a Mason was mentioned by Jim Underwood and Tom Reeves on C-Span[3], Scottish Rite Masonic Museum holds a letter from him thanking them for a book donation...none of these are concrete, only the NYT reprint of the Masonic Token Volume 2 of 1881 seems to be explicit. Perhaps others will find more. Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 03:17, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, we definitely need more than a passing mention in a news report that is primarily about anti-masonic politicians. Blueboar (talk) 12:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

(Just a minor clarification, the first article linked is a pro-Masonic newspaper printed by the Masons, where they accept that Chester Arthur is a mason and urge their readers to not be discouraged by the fact the Anti-Masons are attacking masons right now because it doesn't matter where both Presidential candidates and both VP candidates are masons, so there's no problem) - it quotes the anti-Masons, but it's being published and accepted by the pro-Masons. But I take your point more is necessary. Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

yeah these are decent tries, but i don't quite think make the cut. A witness or a thank you letter just implies he interacted with the masons not that he was one.

That said - I appreciate your efforts. Sometimes stuff does just get lost in the shuffle, especially with more obscure presidents. For example Alexander Hamilton (not an honorary degree) never graduated from King's College but did get an honorary Master's in the 1780s from Columbia. And no one seemed to know that as far as I can tell, despite it being in many primary sources from the time. So do keep at it! Jjazz76 (talk) 06:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The Grand Lodge of Rhode Island published History of freemasonry in Rhode Island in 1895, which on pg206/207, "The laying of the cornerstone of the Burnside Memorial Hall" at Bristol on Tueday September 25 1883 was the occasion of a large and creditable display of the Masonic Fraternity...Grand Master Lyman Klapp presided, having on his right Brother Chester A. Arthur, president of the United States...at the close of the oration the Civic Marshal Col. Norris presented President Arthur to the assembled concourse.", you're not a "Brother" without taking the Masonic oath[4]. It repeats the term for him again on p572 and 731. That's a Masonic source. William Henry Grimshaw in 1903 publised this which also lists Arthur as a Freemason (but also lists Jefferson who's only known to have admitted membership in a cryptic "FHC", and Lincoln who was almost certainly not a Mason). Separately https://newspaperarchive.com/bristol-bucks-county-gazette-jun-24-1880-p-4 is an 1880 newspaper (negatively) commenting that "Generals Garfield and Arthur, who are both Masons". It seems both Masons and non-Masons acknowledged it at the time. Keep in mind one of the complicating factors on Arthur is that on Nov 16 1886, two days before death, he ordered that all his papers and belongings be gathered up and burned. Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 07:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

• This thread got me interested… if Arthur was a Mason, he would have joined a Lodge in New York State (where he lived for most of his life). So… I contacted the Grand Lodge of New York… and they have NO record of him being made a Mason. They make a big deal about the various New York Masons who were famous, but never mention Arthur as one. They have a display in their library (open to the public) with memorabilia from all Masonic presidents, but Arthur is absent. I’m gonna have to say he wasn’t. Blueboar (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for checking. I'd venture to guess the except for like finding some 1700s minutes with the name of Madison or Jefferson the list as it stands is pretty accurate, certainly for Presidents post-1850. Jjazz76 (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I still maintain Chester Arthur has rather compelling evidence he was treated as a member and seen as a member by those in-power and likely was a member even if that fact is not openly acknowledged today or may not have been in his home-state, etc - and there's no record of him denying the anti-Mason claims which were frequent in accusing him (I've only listed where the Masons themselves printed the anti-Mason claim against Arthur). That said, I'm amused to see Jefferson on your list because I've always assumed he was among the least likely - he admittedly had the Orientalism and humanist interests, but I've always taken his writings to be inconsistent with what I see from Mason colleagues of his - it's interesting the world of Masonry at the time of the revolution to be sure. Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I always associate Jefferson with being a Deist, and there is a certain deism in Masonry. Maybe you mean the exclusivity is what would make him not interested?

One note that you may not know is as Mason members sign a member roll in their home lodge, as well as usually a secretary will usually note who is a meeting. So not only can we prove Washington was a Mason, but I know for example he attended a lodge meeting in NY in 177X or 178X. I'm forgetting the exact year.

So if Arthur was a remotely active Mason we'd have lots of evidence of it, and frankly folks would be shouting it from the rooftops. Unless he like went once to a lodge that had only a few members and never did anything with Masonry again. Jjazz76 (talk) 21:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Looking at your sources more, I see the claim about Rhode Island. Ok that is one source.

These two historians seem to believe he was not:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?151431-1/life-portrait-chester-a-arthur

They do think he was in a fraternity at Union College and was a "club man" so perhaps there was some Freemason adjacent club he was in that made the Mason from Rhode Island assume he was a Mason.

I would think for us to make a "disputed claim" I'd like to see at least 2 more secondary sources, but really a primary source would be the key. Jjazz76 (talk) 21:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I'd suggest there's not enough to put him in the spreadsheet, but there is enough to list Arthur alongside the current statement "Also, there is speculation suggesting that Thomas Jefferson was a Freemason; however, there is no record of him being initiated into any lodge", adding the sources above to make the same sentence reference both Jefferson and Arthur. Virginia Courtsesan (talk) 07:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I'm somewhat fine with you trying to summarize what we found and adding it. It seems honestly there is more evidence for Jefferson than Arthur, but very little evidence for either. Jjazz76 (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Masons as President

Not all Presidents were listed needs to be up to date. 170.205.169.118 (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Article is up to date. Jjazz76 (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Listing parties

We seem to be have a disagreement about whether this list should include the political parties each president was affiliated with. Please discuss, rather than edit war. My opinion is that political party is irrelevant to the topic of list. It is information that can easily be found in other articles. No need to clutter up this article with irrelevant information. Blueboar (talk) 11:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it's very important, because i found it astonishing how freemasonry is connected with this much Presidents of both great parties - Democratic Party and Republican Party. Don't you think that would be an interesting fact to think about for other readers, too - especial in times of presidential election? Wikiprediger (talk) 18:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, that's the thing - it's not obviously connected with any party in particular, so that column doesn't help you draw any conclusions. And there were Masonic Presidents who belonged to other parties, or none. It really doesn't add anything to this list.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:27, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

It has been estimated that from 1870 up to 1930 (during what some historians call “the golden age of Fraternalism”) 1 out of every 5 American men were Freemasons… If that estimate is accurate, I’m surprised that there weren’t more presidents who were members. Blueboar (talk) 21:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Sure, twink twink ;-) birthdates and times of presidency do not add anything, too. but you're right - here is nothing to see. twink twink. Wikiprediger (talk) 06:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

that's fantastic! if so many were freemasons, why did't they had an own party for humanity and morality? twink twink. Wikiprediger (talk) 06:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Because Freemasonry stays away from politics. Freemasonry is about bringing people together in friendship and harmony. It tries to promote a feeling of camaraderie between people of different faiths, different backgrounds, and different political views, etc. Politics divides people, and can disrupt the harmony of the lodge. Blueboar (talk) 12:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Table column with party affiliation removed?

I think it is an important additional fact. Why did you remove this column? Thank you. Wikiprediger (talk) 18:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Because I don’t think it actually is an “important fact” in the context of this article.

To give an analogy: the fact that George Washington had false teeth might be considered an “important fact” in an article about dentistry… but isn’t important to mention in our list of US Presidents. Blueboar (talk) 22:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)