Volume 32

1919216 pages

Key papers

— Origin of Additional Degrees (Tuckett)
— Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (Klein)
— Peculiarities of the Book of Constitutions (Baxter)

[Page 1] Frontispiece

Portrait of J. E. Shum Tuckett

Photograph by Frank Holmes, Photographer, Clifton.

Signature: J. E. Shum Tuckett

[Page 2] Title Page

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum

Being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, London.

[Illustration from the Isabella Missal, British Museum, Add. MSS. 18,551, circa 1500 A.D.]

Edited for the Committee by W. H. Rylands, F.S.A., P.A.G.D.C., and W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D.

Volume XXXII.

W. J. Parrett, Ltd., Printers, Margate. 1919.

[Page 3] Blank page

[Page 4] Table of Contents

LODGE PROCEEDINGS.

Date	Page
Friday, 3rd January, 1919	1
Friday, 7th March, 1919	56
Friday, 2nd May, 1919	77
Tuesday, 24th June, 1919, St. John's Day in Harvest	96
Friday, 3rd October, 1919	146
Saturday, 8th November, 1919, Festival of the Four Crowned Martyrs	163

NOTES AND QUERIES.

Topic	Page
Church of the Four Crowned Martyrs at Canterbury	73
Mellitus, Archbishop of Canterbury (619-624), and the Quatuor Coronati	73
Square	74
Free mason in 1599	74
Society of Moonkification	74
Maister Mason, &c.	141
Bro. Isaac Chilcott	141
The Leland-Locke MS.	141, 174
Shakespeare and Freemasonry	142
'Seven' and 'Three Master Masons'	171
Foot Cloth—Painted Cloth—Floor Cloth—Flooring	172
Freemasonry in France 1732-3	173
A Roman Catholic Estimate of English Freemasonry	173
The 'Opera di San Pietro'	174

OBITUARY.

[Page 5] Table of Contents — Continued

OBITUARY — Continued.

PAPERS AND ESSAYS.

The Origin of Additional Degrees. By J. E. S. Tuckett ... 5

'Pure' and 'Ancient' Masonry; Article II. at the Union in 1813; 'Additional' Degrees; Their origin; The Theories advanced not wholly but partly new; They are experimental and invite critical examination and discussion, 5; Alleged Foreign (i.e., non-British) Origin of the earliest Additional Degrees discredited; Examination of the Foreign evidence to 1750; The Paris Lodge 1725, and the Walsh Regiment; Banier and Le Mascrier; Newspapers, English, American, Foreign, 6; Ramsay's Oration, new light upon the date of its first publication, 7; Voltaire; Documents at Stockholm; l'Avocat Barbier; de la Tierce, 8; The Herault-Carton affair; Relation Apologetique, 1738, 9; Earliest Allusion to an association between Freemasonry and the Order of Knights Templar; Les Fri-Macons Hyperdrame, 1740, 10; Apologie pour l'Ordre, 1742; Le Frere Americain; The Degree Chev. de l'Aigle; The Abbe Perau, 11; French Regulations of 1743; the Simonnet MS. of 1744; La Franc-Maçonne, 1744; Le Sceau Rompu, 1745; 'Ecossois' Masonry, 12; L'Ecole des Francs-Maçons, 1748; Masonic Symbolism and Legend before 1717; The Third Degree Legend; The Crusades; The Fraternity R.C.; Adamson's Muses Threnodie, 1638; Swift; Ramsay; Dassigny; Samber's Masonic Formulae, 14; Long Livers, 1722; Stukeley's Order of the Book; 'Verus Commodus' and Desaguliers; The Stirling Brasses, 15; Freemasonry and the House of Stuart; The Church of Rome and Freemasonry; Papal Bulls and Police Crusade in France; Failure of the attack, 17; Scots Masonry; its claim to superiority; Chambers' Cyclopaedia, 1728; Letters in the Daily Journal, 1730; Resolutions of Grand Lodge, 18; Scots Lodges in London, Salisbury and Bath; The Royal Order of Scotland; The Lodge at Swallwell, 1746, 19; Scots Masonry asserts itself in France; References to additional degrees in France from 1742 onwards, 21; Scottish and Jacobite origin of Scots Masonry; Prince Charles Edward Stuart claimed as its chief during his lifetime, 24; Conclusion: The 'Additional Degree' movement commenced with Britons, not Foreigners; Claim of such degrees to be a part of Freemasonry, 25. Comments by Gordon Hills, 31; W. J. Songhurst, 34; Edward Armitage, 40; Sydney T. Klein, 42; Cecil Powell, 43; Henry Lovegrove; W. B. Hextall, 44; Count Goblet d'Alviella, 46. Reply by J. E. S. Tuckett, 47.

[Page 6] Table of Contents — Continued

PAPERS AND ESSAYS — Continued.

Vestiges of the Craft in Spain. By Sydney T. Klein ... 57

The Square and Compasses in the Cathedral and the Church of San Lesmes, Burgos, 57; History of the Church and of its Founder, Adelelmo, 58; A legend of the Saint and the Queen of England, 61; Masons' Marks on buildings in Seville, 62; Valencia, 63; Tarragona, 64; Barcelona, 65; and Gerona, 66. Comments by Gordon Hills, 67; J. E. S. Tuckett, 69; H. G. McLachlan, 70. Reply by Sydney T. Klein, 72.

Three Masonic Novels. By Henry Lovegrove ... 79

Amy Lawrence, the Freemason's Daughter, 79; The Freemasons, 80; Love and the Freemasons, 81. Comments by Gordon Hills, 83; W. B. Hextall, 85; R. H. Baxter, 86; J. E. S. Tuckett, 87; C. Gough, 90; Sir Alfred Robbins, 92; W. J. Songhurst, 93. Reply by Henry Lovegrove, 94.

Peculiarities of the Book of Constituions. By Rodk. H. Baxter ... 97

Constitution or Constitutions; Grand Lodge composed of all Private Lodges on Record, 97; Qualifications for Grand Office; Powers of the Grand Wardens, 98; The Grand Stewards; London Rank, 99; Provincial and District Grand Officers; Local funds for charitable and other Masonic purposes, 100; Private Lodges, 101; Petitioners for Warrants; Provisional Warrants in Districts; Qualifications for Office; The Confirmation of Minutes, 102; Credentials required from Visitors; Honorary membership; The mode of working in Lodges of Instruction, 103; The admission of Candidates; Clearance Certificates, 104; Regalia, 105. Comments by Gordon Hills, 105; W. B. Hextall, 107; Lionel Vibert, 108; J. H. Stirling, 109; W. J. Songhurst, 110; J. Walter Hobbs, 111. Reply by R. H. Baxter, 113.

Lodge No. 20, Antients. By W. J. Songhurst ... 114

Notes on the Minute Book and some members of the Lodge, 114; The By-Laws, 115; The Minutes, 119; Lists of Members and attendances, 128; Lists of Visitors, 134; Cash Accounts, 137.

Notes on some Trade Guilds at Ludlow. By T. J. Salwey ... 149

The Palmers Guild, founders of the Grammar School; The Fletchers Guild; Federation of the Trade Guilds as Stitchmen and Hammermen; Charters regulating the Guilds, 149; The Government of the Hammermen by Six men and Two wardens; The meeting place in the Church of St. Laurence, 150; Fees paid for admission of Freemen, 151; Revisions of the Ordinances, 152; Decline of the Guild; Admission of non-Operatives; The virtual extinction in 1835, 153. Comments by Gordon Hills, 154; W. B. Hextall; Canon Horsley, 160; Andrew Hope, 161.

Inaugural Address. By J. E. S. Tuckett ... 164

The Toast of the Worshipful Master. By Gordon P. G. Hills ... 167

[Page 7] Index (Subject)

Entry	Page
Additional Degrees, The Origin of	5
Audit Committee, Report of	2
Barcelona, Masons' Marks at	65
Book of Constitutions, Peculiarities in the	97
British Origin of Masonic Degrees	6
Burgos, Masons' Marks at	57
Chapters (R.A.) referred to: Glasgow	146
Hartington, No. 916	169
King Solomon's, No. 2029	146
Methuen, No. 1533	169
Panmure, No. 720	148
Strict Benevolence, Sunderland	147
Chevalier de l'Aigle, Degree of	11
Church of Rome and Freemasonry	17
Clearance Certificates, when required	104
Constitution, Peculiarities in the Book of	97
Continental Freemasonry derived from England	6
Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle	11
Degree of Royal Arch	15
Degrees, Ecossois	12
Degrees, The Origin of Additional	5
'Ecossois' Masonry	12
England, Masons' Marks in	68
'English Masters' in Lodge at Swallwell	20
Exhibits: Apron, Hand-painted ... 147; Craft, Brazil ... 148; Rose Croix, Brazil ... 148
Certificate (M.M.), Lodge St. George, North Shields ... 147; (M.M.), Grand Lodge of England ... 148; (R.A.), Grand Chapter of England ... 148; (R.A.), Chapter Strict Benevolence, Sunderland ... 147; (Rose Croix), Grand Orient of Brazil ... 148
Jewel, R.A., England ... 148; Buffaloes ... 148; Oddfellows ... 148
Fiction, Freemasonry in	79
'Fifth Order' in Masonry	15
Floor Cloth	172
Foot Cloth	172
France, Freemasonry in	2, 173
Free-mason in 1599	74
Gerona, Masons' Marks at	66
Gormogon attack on the Craft	16
Grand Office, Qualification for	98
Grand Wardens, Powers of the	98
Guilds at Ludlow	149

(Right column:)

Entry	Page
Hammermen's Guild at Ludlow	149
Honorary Masons	18
Jacobite Lodges	16
Knights Templar, Early allusions to association with Freemasonry	10
Larmenius, Charter of	166
Legend and Symbolism before 1717	14
Leland-Locke MS., The	141, 166, 174
Lincoln, Masons' Marks at	68
Lodges referred to: Antiquity, London ... 28, 41; Bayard, No. 1615 ... 79; Bath ... 27, 30; Devil Tavern, Temple Bar ... 19; Gallery, No. 1928 ... 96; Hartington, No. 916 ... 169; Jubilee Masters, No. 2712 ... 96; Kaiser-i-Hind, No. 1724 ... 79; l'Union, Frankfort ... 11; Lily, Richmond, No. 820 ... 148; Loyal, Monmouth ... 141; Loyalty, No. 1533 ... 169; Mary Chapel, Edinburgh ... 146; Moira, No. 92 ... 79; Mourning Bush, Aldersgate ... 41; Old Marburian, No. 3533 ... 169; Paris, 1725 ... 6; Robert Thorne, No. 3663 ... 169; St. George, North Shields ... 147; St. John's, Glasgow ... 146; Salisbury ... 19; Solomon's Temple, Hemming Row ... 41; White Bear, Golden Square ... 41
No. 1, Antients ... 134; No. 3 ... 134; No. 4 ... 134; No. 5 ... 135; No. 8 ... 134; No. 15 ... 134; No. 16 ... 134; No. 18 ... 134; No. 20 ... 114; No. 24 ... 136; No. 27 ... 135; No. 31 ... 135; No. 36 ... 136
Ludlow Guilds	149
Maister Mason, in 1675	141
Mason Word, The	36
Masons' Marks in England	68
Masons' Marks in Spain	57
Master Masons, 'Seven' and 'Three'	171
Moonkification, Society of	74
Novels, Masonic	79
Opera de San Pietro, The	174
Oration of the Chevalier Ramsay, its first publication	7
Palmers' Guild at Ludlow	149
Papal Bulls and Freemasonry	17

[Pages 8–9] Index — Persons Referred To

(Extensive alphabetical index of persons with page references — approximately 400+ entries spanning two pages in two-column format. Notable entries include:)

[Page 10] Index — Continued / Contributors / Illustrations

CONTRIBUTORS.

Name	Pages
Armitage, Edward	40
Baxter, Rodk. H.	74, 86, 97, 113
Goblet d'Alviella, Count	46
Gough, C.	90
Hextall, W. B.	44, 85, 107, 141, 160
Hills, Gordon P. G.	31, 67, 77, 83, 105, 145, 154, 167, 173, 174
Hobbs, J. Walter	111
Hope, Andrew	161
Horsley, Canon	72, 160
Klein, Sydney T.	42, 57, 72
Lovegrove, Henry	44, 79, 94
McLachlan, H. G.	70
Palmer, F. G.	112
Powell, Cecil	43
Robbins, Sir Alfred	92
Salwey, T. J.	149
Songhurst, W. J.	34, 93, 110, 114, 141, 174
Stirling, J. H.	109
Tuckett, J. E. S.	5, 47, 69, 73, 87, 164, 172, 173
Vibert, Lionel	108
Westropp, T. J.	73, 171

ILLUSTRATIONS.

Subject	Page
Masons' Marks, England	69
Masons' Marks, Spain	58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66
Portrait, J. E. S. Tuckett	Frontispiece

[Page 11] Half-Title Page

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum.

[Page 12] Blank page

[Page 13] Lodge Proceedings — Friday, 3rd January, 1919

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,

Being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge of A.F. & A.M., London, No. 2076.

VOLUME XXXII.

FRIDAY, 3rd JANUARY, 1919.

The Lodge met at Freemasons' Hall, at 5 p.m. Present:—Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M.; J. E. S. Tuckett, S.W.; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary; Herbert Bradley, I.G.; Edward Armitage, P.M.; and E. H. Dring, P.M.

Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle:— Bros. Lieut.-Col. George Barclay, P.G.D., Hugh Cumberland, P.A.G.D.C., Thos. G. Dew, W. J. Chichele Nourse, P.A.G.D.C., G. J. Gissing, H. J. Ball, Ben Alexander, Percy Allen, Geo. W. Sutton, C. Gordon Bonser, H. J. Atkinson, Arthur Heiron, Walter Dewes, Robert Colsell, P.A.G.Pt., Hugh C. Knowles, P.A.G.Reg., as J.W., Alfred C. Silley, James Scott, John H. Pullen, C. Miller, George Brown, W. Douglass, L. Hemens, Major A. Sutherland, Robert J. Soddy, H. S. Beaman, Henry Hyde, F. W. le Tall, L. G. Wearing, Henry Harvey, Fred S. Terry, G. H. Fennell, F. Carpenter, W. C. Ullman, Algernon C. Collins, P.A.G.D.C., E. A. Seyd S. Barlet, P.G.St.B., E. Payne, H. Johnson, L. Ellis Ingram, and G. H. Fullbrook.

Also the following visitors:—R. A. King, of St. George's Lodge No. 370; F. G. Gadsdon, W.M. of the Purley Lodge No. 3136; Arthur L. Gay, P.M. of the Southern Cross Lodge No. 6 (N.Z.C.); George Logan, P.G.Stew.; George G. Griffiths, of the Anglo-American Lodge No. 2191; A. Rowatt Maxwell, of the Lodge of St. John No. 39; A. Burnett Collins, of the Waller Rodwell Wright Lodge No. 2755; Howard J. Bonser, of the Fitzroy Lodge No. 569; James R. Gibb, of Mary's Chapel Lodge No. 1 (S.C.); W. C. Dix, of the Wickham Lodge No. 1924; and Frank A. Williams, of the Cripplegate Lodge No. 1613.

Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. John T. Thorp, P.G.D., F.M.; R. H. Baxter; F. H. Goldney, P.G.D., P.M.; Edward Macbean, P.M.; Edward Conder, P.M.; Geo. L. Shackles, P.M.; W. B. Hextall, P.M.; F. J. W. Crowe, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; T. J. Westropp; and Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.M.

[Page 14] Lodge Proceedings — Continued

Four Masonic Associations and thirty Brethren were admitted to membership of the Correspondence Circle.

The Report of the Audit Committee, as follows, was received, adopted, and ordered to be entered on the Minutes:—

PERMANENT AND AUDIT COMMITTEE.

The Committee met at the Offices, No. 27, Great Queen Street, London, on Monday, 23rd December, 1918.

Present:—Bro. Gordon P. G. Hills, in the Chair, with Bros. Dr. W. Wynn Westcott, J. P. Simpson, E. H. Dring, W. J. Songhurst, Secretary, and A. S. Gedge, Auditor.

The Secretary produced his Books and the Treasurer's Accounts and Vouchers, which had been examined by the Auditor and certified as being correct.

The Committee agreed upon the following

REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1918.

BRETHREN,

With very deep regret we record the death, during the past year, of Bro. Hamon le Strange, Provincial Grand Master of Norfolk; of Bro. John Ross Robertson, Past Grand Master of Canada, Past Grand Warden of England; and of Bro. Admiral Sir Albert Hastings Markham, K.C.B., Past District Grand Master of Malta; all valued members of the Lodge. Our numbers are reduced to 32.

The St. John's Card issued under date of 27th December, 1917, shewed a total membership in the Correspondence Circle of 2,952. Of these 179 have been removed:— 54 by death, 47 by resignation, and 78 for non-payment of dues. On the other hand, 205 have been added on election, and the total now stands at 2,978, of whom, however, about 170 remain on the 'War List.'

We desire to express warmest thanks to our Local Secretaries for much good work performed under trying conditions. The death of Bro. Joseph Binney, who had acted for the Sheffield district since 1891, is much regretted. Bro. David Flather has very kindly consented to take over the duties in this important section of West Yorkshire.

The accounts for the year ending 30th November last, which are herewith presented, again shew a loss in working, a result not surprising considering the unsettled condition of the world. Two parts only of Volume xxx. (1917) of the Transactions, with St. John's Card, were published, and these absorbed the whole of the amount in reserve from the 1917 accounts, leaving a third part of the Volume still to be issued, and paid for. Subscriptions for 1917 received during the past year amounted to £205 19s. 6d., and this sum has been added to the reserve in order to provide for the cost of this third Part; £1,014 11s. being similarly reserved for the 1918 Volume.

[Page 16] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

The two old Stirling Brasses show that by the middle of the century quite a number of additional degrees were in working order in Scotland.

And now we must consider the interesting question of the part which Freemasonry undoubtedly did play in the activities of the adherents to the Cause of the Royal House of Stuart. The disastrous failure of the expedition of 1715 convinced the Jacobites that from King James III. (the Old Pretender) nothing further was to be expected in the shape of active personal leadership upon the field of battle. But although schemes involving an appeal to arms were for the time in abeyance, their hopes and trust in the future did not fail, and the power and influence of the Stuart Party continued to be a serious menace to the Hanoverian occupant of the Throne of England. Indeed, at no time from the accession of George I. to the final desertion of the Stuart Cause by the King of France after Culloden (1746), could the King of England de facto be sure that he would not sooner or later be forced to quit in favour of the Prince who to the Jacobites was the King de jure. During the years which followed the failure of the '15 the Jacobites at home and abroad were busy with the work of organisation and consolidation, the building up of the resources of the party in preparation for the struggle which must be fought to a finish before that great day when the King should enjoy his own again. To help on this work no stone was left unturned, no possible source of strength ignored. To the master minds of the Jacobite movement the institution of Freemasonry would seem to possess points of very considerable interest and very possible importance and utility. During the ten years or so which followed the formation of Grand Lodge the Craft had been more and more prominently displayed before the eyes of the public. The distinguishing feature, one to arouse curiosity and wonder, was the alleged inviolable and impenetrable secrecy of the Order. And, as we have seen, these were years of Masonic innovation or rather development, meaning by that the development of Masonic Legend into Ceremonial or Degree form. The privacy of Masonic Lodges would recommend them as very convenient secret and safe meeting places but for the fact that Masonry being known to Jacobite and Hanoverian alike could afford no serviceable cover to either. Very many of the leading Jacobites, noblemen as well as commoners—especially amongst the Scottish members of the party—are known to have been of the Craft and to some of these occurred the plan of creating a Freemasonry apart, to be made subservient to the Cause they had so much at heart, with Ceremonies and secrets peculiar to itself and jealously guarded from even the 'Masters' of ordinary (that is Craft) Masonry. But accompanying the activities of the Jacobite Party aiming at the Restoration of the House of Stuart, there was a very determined campaign in progress on the part of the Roman Catholic Church aiming at another Restoration—that of the Papal Power in Great Britain. Bro. Chetwode Crawley, in A.Q.C., vol. xxiv., has shown how the appearance of the first Book of Constitutions with its 'Charges' in 1723 was immediately followed by the active and persistent hostility of the Church of Rome directed against the Craft, and the idea that the G.L. of London was, so to speak, in Hanoverian hands, must have contributed not a little to accentuate this feeling. The Gormogon Society, which first appeared in 1724, was very distinctly hostile to the Craft, very clearly Jacobite in its sympathies, and is generally considered to have been of Roman Catholic origin. The Duke of Wharton's lapse from Craft Masonry and his association with the Gormogons was presumably connected with one of the occasions on which he passed from the Hanoverian into the Stuart Camp. As we know, the Gormogon attack upon the Craft resulted in failure, and after a few years the Society faded out of existence. The Bull of Pope Clement XII. of 1738 was another dead failure. It was never more than local in its effect, and in France, as Père Simonnet very sadly confesses, it was not:—

reçue et publié suivant les formalitez requises, et par consequent n'y ait pas la meme force que dans les Etats de la Domination du Pape et dans les Pais d'Inquisition.

[Page 17] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Neither the Bull nor the efforts of the Police and Government were successful in checking the spread of Craft Freemasonry throughout France¹ and in many other countries on the Continent, while in Great Britain the Bull produced no effect whatever—as, indeed, how could it? We know that Craft Freemasonry was introduced into France by Stuart partisans, Englishmen, or let us rather say Britons, and the fact that the early Craft Lodges in France attracted a very large proportion of members of high social rank, which would be difficult to account for in any other way, is easily explained once we admit that the Stuart Party was actively concerning itself in the fortunes of the newly-formed Society. Another point about the early French Craft Lodges, which is brought out very clearly in M. Simonnet's MS., is the large number of Protestants to be found amongst the members. Thus it appears that the Stuart Political Party and the Roman Church were at first at cross-purposes as regards Freemasonry, the former acting as its protector and hoping to make something out of it, and the latter bent upon its ruin and destruction. A remedy for this state of things was found by the creation of the two parallel sets of Degrees which came to be known as 'Irish Masonry' and 'Scots Masonry' respectively. It seems that at first there was but one Degree of each, the 'Irish Master' (Maitre Irlandois) and the 'Scots Master of Saint Andrew' (Maitre Ecossois de St. André),² but a little later the number was increased to four, and for political purposes (as a system of classification) this number would be found to be more useful than a single one could be. The wholesale fabrication of degrees came much later, when the hopes of the Jacobites had faded away into mere memories, and the (suggested) original purpose to be served no longer exercised the minds of their leaders.

Of 'Irish Masonry' practically nothing is known as it lasted but a short time and never at any time met with the success which fell to the Scots Degrees. The final Scots Degree was known under a variety of names:—Knight of the Eagle, of the Pelican, of the Pelican and Eagle, of Heredom, of Saint Andrew, of Rose and Cross, Perfect Mason, the best known being Knight of the Eagle (Chevalier de l'Aigle) and Sov Prince Rose Croix (Souv Prince de Rose Croix S.·.P.·.D.·.R.·.C.·.). With considerable modifications we have it now as the 18° of the A. & A.R. There is undeniable evidence that in their earliest forms the Ecossois or Scots Degrees were Roman Catholic: I have a MS. Ritual in French of what I believe to be the original Chev. de l'Aigle or S.·. P.·. D.·. R.·.C.·., and in it the New Law is declared to be 'la foy Catholique,' and the Baron Tschoudy in his L'Etoile Flamboyante of 1766 describes the same Degree as 'le Catholicisme mis en grade.' (Vol. I., p. 114). I suggest that Ecossois or Scots Masonry was intended to be a Roman Catholic as well as Stuart form of Freemasonry, into which none but those devoted to both Restorations were to be admitted. When the failure of the Papal Bull of 1738 became obvious in 1742-3, Ecossois Masonry began to claim to be superior to and to possess very marked privileges as compared with 'ordinary' Craft Masonry (to which Protestant and Roman, Hanoverian and Jacobite, could and did equally belong), the obvious intention being to destroy the latter's influence. If my theory is correct the establishment of Ecossois Masonry was a very astute move, as it provided for the Church a welcome chance of snatching victory out of defeat, while at the same time promoting the two-fold object of the double Restoration. The tendency to social exclusiveness was strongly marked in the early period of Ecossois Masonry in France.

We must now consider the evidence upon which the theory just stated is based. The earliest notice in print of this particular movement beyond the Craft

¹ It is rather remarkable that the anti-Masonic activity of the Police continued after the death of Cardinal Fleury in January, 1743. In 1744 the Police Interdict was re-published and the celebrated raid on the Lodge at the Hotel de Soissons took place. The property of the Lodge was confiscated and Denis Le Roy the Landlord very heavily fined. Mons. Simonnet gives a contemporary account of this and other raids. See note p. 21.

² Thorv mentions grades with titles such as Maitre Anglois, and says that they formed part of Irish Masonry. In any case they are later and do not concern our present enquiry.

Note: Pages 3–15 of this volume (the balance sheet, profit and loss account, and beginning of Bro. Tuckett's paper) were processed in the previous chunk (pages-001-015.md). The content above begins at the point where page 16 of the PDF corresponds to printed page 16 of the journal.

Appendix: Pages 3–15 transcribed in this chunk

(The PDF pages 16–30 correspond to printed journal pages 3–17 as shown in the page headers. The following is the complete transcription of all pages in this chunk.)

[PDF Page 16 = Journal Page 3] Balance Sheet, 30th November, 1918

Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge. — p. 3

Various important economies have been carried out in order to reduce the consumption of paper without impairing the value of the publications, but the full effect of these will only be felt in connection with Volume xxxi. corresponding to the year 1918. The first Part of this Volume is well in hand, and we may expect during 1919 to catch up some of the arrears in publication. This, however, will only be possible if Brethren pay their subscriptions promptly. We must again point to the large amount of arrears shewn in the Accounts—£373 11s. 4d. being still due for 1918 alone.

We feel assured that after Peace has been declared and business affairs generally assume a more normal condition, our expenditure will fall to a reasonable level.

For the Committee, Gordon P. G. Hills, in the Chair.

BALANCE SHEET, 30th NOVEMBER, 1918.

Liabilities.

	£	s.	d.
To Life Members' Fund (245 Members)	1600	16	0
„ Subscriptions, etc., received in advance	136	12	10
„ Correspondence Circle, 1917 Balance in hand	190	15	2
„ do. 1918	1014	11	0
„ Sundry Creditors	21	13	5
„ Sundry Creditors re Publications	17	9	9
„ Profit and Loss Suspense Account, being outstanding Subscriptions as per contra, subject to realization	752	18	2
„ Lodge Account— £ s. d.
Balance 30th Nov., 1917: 84 4 5
Receipts: 35 3 2
119 7 7
Less Payments: 40 8 3	78	19	4
£3813	15	8

Assets.

	£	s.	d.
By Cash at Bank	233	5	4
„ Investment, £1,300 Consols at 60 per cent.	780	0	0
„ Sundry Debtors for Publications	15	7	9
„ Sundry Publications	415	3	6
„ Furniture— £ s. d.
Balance 30th Nov., 1917: 18 4 7
Additions during the year: 6 16 0
25 0 7
Less Depreciation for the year: 7 7 7	17	13	0
„ Sundry Debtors for Subscriptions in arrear—
1918 Correspondence Circle: 373 11 4
1917 ditto: 205 8 6
1916 ditto: 109 9 11
1915 ditto: 42 0 9
1914 ditto: 16 11 10
Back years: 10 15 10	752	18	2
„ Repairs—
Balance 30th Nov., 1917: 80 0 0
Less Amount written off: 20 0 0	60	0	0
„ Profit and Loss Account	1539	7	11
£3813	15	8

[PDF Page 17 = Journal Page 4] Profit and Loss Account for the year ending 30th November, 1918.

PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT for the year ending 30th November, 1918.

Dr.

	£	s.	d.
To Salaries	475	0	0
„ Rent, Rates and Taxes	157	11	2
„ Lighting and Firing	25	7	10
„ Stationery	58	19	10
„ Postages	133	6	8
„ Office Cleaning	28	6	2
„ Renewals and Repairs	38	7	10
„ Insurance	17	6	3
„ Telephone, etc.	9	1	0
„ Carriage and Sundries	20	0	3
„ Local Secretaries' Expenses	3	2	5
„ Library Account	41	7	0
„ Depreciation on Furniture	7	7	7
£1075	4	0

Cr.

	£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.
By Correspondence Circle Joining Fees, 1918	101	5	6
„ 1918 Subscriptions	6	16	6
„ 1916 ditto	46	15	0
„ 1915 ditto	21	0	0
„ 1914 ditto	7	13	9
„ Back ditto	3	15	9	187	6	6
„ Back Transactions				29	0	0
„ Lodge Publications				37	14	2
„ Various Publications				16	15	3
„ Interest on Consols: 23 11 4
„ Discounts: 20 7 6				43	18	10
„ Life Memberships lapsed				44	2	0
„ Appreciation on Investments				52	0	0
„ Balance carried forward				654	7	3
£1075	4	0

	£	s.	d.
To Balance from last Account	875	0	8
„ Balance brought forward	664	7	3
£1539	7	11

	£	s.	d.
By Balance carried forward	1539	7	11
£1539	7	11

This Balance Sheet does not include the value of the Library, Museum, and the Stock of Transactions, and is subject to the realization of Assets.

I have examined the above Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Account with the Books and Vouchers of the Lodge, and certify the same to be correct and in accordance therewith.

Alfred S. Gedge, Chartered Accountant, 3, Great James Street, Bedford Row, W.C.

23rd December, 1918.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett read the following paper:—

[PDF Page 18 = Journal Page 5] The Origin of Additional Degrees

THE ORIGIN OF ADDITIONAL DEGREES.

BY BRO. J. E. S. TUCKETT, T.D., M.A. (Cantab.), F.C.S., S.W., No. 2076.

[Illustration: Decorative initial letter "O" with ornamental woodcut]

F the many problems that face the Masonic student none surpass in importance the question of the development of primitive Masonic Instruction into separate exclusive 'Degrees' with accompanying Ceremony or Ritual. The orthodox view, based upon Article II. of the Articles of Union of 1813, is that primitive Masonry developed into the three Craft Degrees with the (English) Royal Arch, and then came to a permanent halt. Art. II. runs thus:—

It is declared and pronounced, that pure Ancient Masonry consists of three degrees, and no more; viz., those of the Entered Apprentice, the Fellow Craft, and the Master Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch. But this article is not intended to prevent any Lodge or Chapter from holding a meeting in any of the degrees of the Orders of Chivalry, according to the constitutions of the said Orders.

The meaning is quite clear 'three degrees, and no more,' the R.A. being in some mysterious sense 'included' with the rest without being itself a separate 'Degree.'¹ According to this view those other Degrees (which for convenience may be called Additional Degrees) are not real Masonry at all, but an extraneous and spontaneous growth springing up around the 'Craft' proper, later in date, and mostly foreign, i.e., non-British in origin, and the existence of any such Degrees is by some writers condemned as a contamination of the 'pure Ancient Freemasonry' of our forefathers. Even the English Royal Arch has been declared to be an importation, and the theory of its foreign origin is still brought forward from time to time. This question of pure Ancient Masonry and the origin of Additional Degrees I propose to consider from a different point of view, and I hope to be able to show that the opinions which have so long held the field, and have been so confidently maintained, require very considerable readjustment in the light of the steadily growing mass of evidence available.

As it is the origin or inception of Additional Degrees which is in question, attention will be confined to such as appeared before the middle of the eighteenth century, but it is not suggested that the year 1750 has any special significance in connection with the discussion. The theory now proposed in opposition to the 'orthodox' view may be stated briefly thus:—

I. That before 1717 Freemasonry possessed a Store of Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism of wide extent. That from 1717 the Grand Lodge, selecting a portion only of this Store, gradually evolved a Rite consisting of E.A., F.C., M.M., and R.A. That the restriction of the terms 'pure,' 'Ancient,' and (in a certain sense) 'Craft' to the Degrees included in this Rite is arbitrary, and due solely to the accident of selection by the G.L.

II. That the earliest Additional Degrees were founded on other portions of the same Store. That they were founded by Britons, and are as much a British Institution as the G.L. Rite itself. That they are therefore entitled to recognition as a part of pure and ancient Masonry. The value of any particular Degree depends upon its own intrinsic merit which alone determines its right to continued existence.

¹ The clause concerning 'the degrees of the Orders of Chivalry' is very obscure, but does not affect the argument.

[PDF Page 19 = Journal Page 6] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

III. That there is no evidence that any Additional Degree of Foreign (i.e., non-British) Origin came to this country during the period named.

In the following pages I think I may fairly claim to establish Part III. I am, however, fully aware that it is not so with either Parts II. or I., and I want to make it clear that the theories therein contained (which are partly but not wholly new) are now put forward experimentally in the hope that they will be fully tested and discussed. It will be convenient to dispose of III. first, and to do this requires a careful examination of all the evidence which points to the existence of Additional Degrees, either at home or abroad, before 1750. The evidence easily divides itself into two parts, namely, that derived from foreign sources and that derived from British sources. Let us commence with the former.

The foundation of the Paris Lodge in 1725 by Charles Radcliffe has quite recently occupied our attention (see A.Q.C., vol. xxvi., p. 22), and the only point which need be mentioned now is that the founders were all of them Britons. If the existence of a Masonic Lodge in an Irish-French Infantry Regiment from 1688 be admitted, then again the influence is wholly British, in this case Irish (see A.Q.C., vol. xxxi., p. 7).

The account of Freemasonry given in Cérémonies et Coutumes Religieuses . . . Bernard Picart. Amsterdam. J. J. Bernard. Vol. iv., 1736, was written in 1735, either by the Abbé Antoine Banier or the Abbé Jean Baptiste le Mascrier, or possibly by the two jointly. Banier was born at Clermont in 1673 and died at Paris in 1741, having attained to considerable eminence as an author. In 1714 he published his Historical Explanation of the Mythological Fables, two volumes 12mo, which secured his admission to the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres. Other successful works followed until in 1732 there appeared at Amsterdam his two volumes folio of a Translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses with fine plates by Bernard Picart. Le Mascrier was born in 1697 at Caen and was also a prolific writer, his works including a Translation of Cæsar's Commentaries and a History of the Revolution in the East Indies. He died at Paris in 1760. The two Abbés acted as general editors of Cérémonies et Coutumes Religieuses and they superintended the re-issue of the earlier volumes at Amsterdam in 1735-9. Banier's last publication was an entirely new edition (Paris, 1741; 7 vols. folio) of the same work. Bernard Picart, born at Paris in 1673, was the son of an engraver of whom little or nothing is known. The son studied Architecture under the famous Sebastian le Clerc, but he followed the same profession as his father, and attained to great fame therein. The Picarts, being Protestants, removed from Paris to Amsterdam, where Bernard became acquainted with and was employed by John Frederic Bernard, the famous bookseller and author, who was the compiler and part author of the Cérémonies, &c. Bernard Picart died in 1733. Monsieur Simonnet, in his Idée juste, &c. (MS. dated 1744), ascribes the account of Freemasonry in Cérémonies, &c., to Banier alone, but le Mascrier seems also to have published an account of the 'Religions du Monde,' for the writer of a Lettre Apologétique pour les Francs-Maçons, contained in the rare little volume entitled L'Ecole des Francs-Maçons. (A Jerusalem, m.dccxlviii.), says that:—'Monsieur l'Abbé le Mascrier dans ses Religions du Monde, a tracé le 'Roman de nos usages; nétant pas Franc-Maçon il lui était impossible d'en écrire 'l'Histoire,' and dismisses it as a crib from Le Secret des Francs-Maçons (by the Abbé Gabriel Louis Perau (1700-1767) published at Geneva in 1742). Banier, like le Mascrier, was a non-Mason.

The account in Cérémonies, &c., written in 1735 opens thus:—

Il s'agit ici de la Confrérie établie en Angleterre sous le nom de Free-Massons, c'est-à-dire Massons libres, qui a essayé de former deux ou trois Colonies en Hollande.

There is no need to quote any further, throughout the article the institution of Freemasonry is described as essentially English, and there is no hint of any Masonic developments in France or anywhere else passing back into England.

The Newspapers, English and American, of the years 1736 and 1737 contain numerous little paragraphs announcing the appearance and rapid increase of Freemasonry in Paris and elsewhere on the Continent and the efforts of the Government

[PDF Page 20 = Journal Page 7] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

to effect its suppression.¹ It is always represented as an English Society taking root in foreign soil, and there is no sign of any movement in the opposite direction.

In any attempt to determine the origin of our English Royal Arch, or of any of the High Degrees, recourse is necessarily made to the famous 'Oration' certainly written if not delivered by the Chevalier Ramsay, and to the equally famous tract by Dr. Fifield Dassigny. In both of these there are passages which are of immense importance in the discussion of this subject, which, so far as I am aware, have never been noticed by previous writers, although they bear directly upon the theory of a foreign Origin. These will receive attention in due course.

Whether Ramsay delivered his speech or not is doubtful, but it is certain that he wrote it. It was printed in an obscure and obscene Paris paper called the Almanach des Cocus for 1741 and is there said to have been 'pronounced' by 'Monsieur de R—— Grand Orateur de l'Ordre.' It was again printed in 1742 by Bro. De la Tierce in his Histoire Obligations et Statuts, &c. . . . à Francfort sur le Meyn . . . mdccxxxii., and De la Tierce says that it was 'prononcé par le Grand-Maitre des Francs-Maçons de France' in the year 1740. Later German printed versions say that the Grand Orator delivered the speech, but do not say on what occasion. A. G. Jouast (Histoire du G.O., 1865) says the Oration was delivered at the Installation of the Duc D'Antin as G.M. on 24th June, 1738, and the same authority states that it was first printed at the Hague in 1738, bound up with some poems attributed to Voltaire, and some licentious tales by Piron (Alexis, born Dijon 1689, died Paris 1773). Bro. Gould remarks²:—

If such a work really existed at that date, it was probably the original of the "Lettre philosophique par M. de V——, avec plusieurs pièces galantes," London, 1757, and again in 1795; but Kloss, in his "Bibliographie" knows nothing of it.

Nevertheless Jouast was practically right. Mons. Simonnet, in his MS. of 1744 already referred to, makes very frequent use of the 'Discours de Mr de Ramsay' which he says is to be found:—

dans le volume des Lettres Philosoph⁸ de Mr de Voltaire imprimé à la haye en 1739.

Voltaire's Lettres Philosophiques followed his Tragedy Zaïre, and the book gave such offence by its profaneness that warrants were actually issued for apprehending its author, who was forced to go into hiding at Cirey on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine in company with Gabrielle Emilie de Breteuil Marquise de Chastelet. Thus Simonnet proves that Jouast's description of the first printed version of the speech is substantially correct (but that the year was 1739 and not 1738) and at the same time clears up a hitherto doubtful point in Voltairean Bibliography.

The final paragraph of Ramsay's Oration as it appears in De la Tierce's book of 1742 commences thus:—

Des Isles Britanniques l'Art-Roïal commence à repasser dans la France sous le regne du plus aimable des Rois, &c., &c.

According to Ramsay, therefore, France was at this time receiving Masonic enlightenment from England.

Original documents preserved in the archives of the Grand Lodge of Sweden, which were first published as recently as 1892, state in the year 1737 the Baron (later Count) K. F. G. Scheffer received at Paris in the 'Prince of Clermont's' Lodge the three St. John's Degrees and also two Ecossois Degrees. Scheffer became a friend of Charles Radcliffe and from him received a 'Deputation' to constitute Symbolic Lodges in Sweden. (See Gould's Concise History, p. 379.) Bro. P. Duchaine (La F.M. Belge au XVIII° Siècle, p. 136) cites evidence of the existence of an Ecossois grade in 1733.

In Miscellanea Latomorum for June, 1914, I first drew the attention of Masonic students to a very early—one of the earliest—accounts of French

¹ See A.Q.C. xxv., p. 353. ² See Gould, History, III., p. 83.

[PDF Page 21 = Journal Page 8] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Freemasonry. It is from Le Journal de l'Avocat Barbier (vol. II., pp. 148 and 149) and bears date March of 1737, that is the same month of the same year in which Ramsay was proposing to deliver his Oration, more than a year before (according to Jouast) it was delivered, and considerably more than a year before it was first printed with Voltaire's Lettres Philosophiques. We can therefore safely assert that the author, a non-Mason, never heard of or saw the Ramsay Oration.

Nos seigneurs de la cour ont inventé, tout nouvellement, un ordre appellé des frimassons à l'exemple de l'Angleterre, ou il y a aussi différents ordres de particuliers, et nous ne tardons pas à imiter les impertinences étrangères. Dans cet ordre-ci étaient enrolés quelques-uns de nos seigneurs d'État et plusieurs ducs et seigneurs. On ne sait quoi que ce soit des statuts, des règles et de l'objet de cet ordre nouveau. Ils s'assemblaient, recevaient les nouveaux chevaliers, et la première règle était un secret inviolable pour tout ce qui se passait. Comme de pareilles assemblées, aussi secrètes, sont très dangereuses dans un État, étant composées des seigneurs, surtout dans la circonstance du changement qui vient d'arriver dans le ministère, M le cardinal de Fleury a cru devoir étouffer cet ordre de chevalerie dans sa naissance, et il a fait défense à tous les messieurs de s'assembler et de tenir de pareils chapitres.

This account is quoted in full in Dict. Hist. des. Inst. Mœurs et Coutumes de la France, par A. Chéruel. Paris. 1874. Now this is capable of two interpretations according to the exact meaning we assign to the word 'inventé.' The first is that French courtiers were at this time making up or creating a Freemasonry of their own following the fashion set in England, but the new Masonry thus created was something quite different from the English, and this reading is to some extent supported by the use of expressions such as 'chevaliers' 'chevalerie' 'chapitres.' If this interpretation is correct then Barbier must be passed as evidence that the manufacture of additional Masonic Degrees in France was in full swing early in the year 1737, but even so he affords no evidence that any of the novelties were passing across the Channel to England at this time. But the paragraph may equally well mean that French courtiers had quite recently founded or set up Masonic Lodges after the pattern (i.e., working the same ceremonies) as the English Lodges worked at home. In point of fact, we know that this did actually happen at this very time. The use of expressions 'chevaliers' 'chevalerie' and 'chapitres' must then be excused as a blunder not very serious in a non-Mason. As a further support to the second interpretation we should note that Dr. Desaguliers and the Duke of Richmond were present at some of the meetings, and that it is generally believed that it was the Duke of Richmond who initiated the Duc d'Antin, the future Grand Master ad vitam of French Freemasonry, at Aubigny in this same year 1737. I need hardly point out that if the first interpretation of Mons. Barbier's meaning is the correct one, then some political feature in the new Masonry accounts for the violent opposition of the Cardinal-Minister Fleury, a secret enemy of the Stuart Cause, which is not easy otherwise to understand.

If those Brethren who possess a copy of De la Tierce's book will turn to the end they may possibly find there two pages of announcements of books in French on sale by the same publisher and bookseller, François Varrentrapp, of Francfort. If these pages are present—they are generally missing—they will find amongst the books advertised two works by a Monsieur A. de la Barre de Beaumarchais (who must not be mistaken for the celebrated Pierre Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais, author of Figaro, &c.). The first of these books is about Holland, Ancient and Modern; the second is announced thus:—

de Beaumarchais, Amusemens Littéraires ou Correspondance Politique, Historique, Philosophique & galante. 8. 1738-39. III. Tomes.

It consists of a series of Letters, written from various places at various dates and containing racy notes upon events of the day, which were thus collected and

[PDF Page 22 = Journal Page 9] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

published in book form after having appeared in various Parisian newspapers or journals. Three of these letters contain references to Freemasonry and (thanks to Mons. Simonnet's MS.) I am able to draw the attention of Masonic students to them, viz., Letter I., dated Paris, 6th December, 1737; Letter IV., dated Paris, 26th December, 1737; and Letter VI., dated Francfort, 7th January, 1738. The last announces the opening of a new Masonic Lodge at Heilbron. The first two contain a contemporary account of the famous Hérault-Carton incident, which I now translate:—

Lettre 1re Paris. le 6 Decemb. 1737.

. . . The famous Carton of the Opera succeeded in overcoming it (the secrecy of Freemasonry). About a year ago she conceived the fancy to discover the Secret cost what it might. Very opportunely for her just at this time a Free Mason began to press his suit to her favours. She demanded from him in return to know in what consisted the Mysteries of his Order. For a long time he declined to satisfy her upon the one point while she declined to satisfy him upon the other. The unhappy lover thus found himself in the same fix as was Samson; at last he surrendered in the same way. The victorious Carton communicated the Secret to Mr. Heraut Lieutenant General of Police. Now she boasts of having been able to accomplish more than Queen Elizabeth (of England) who could never obtain a similar confidence from the Earl of Essex . . . .

Lettre 4me Paris. le 26 Decemb. 1737.

. . . It is true that the Free Masons give out (according to their excellent plan) that this new Delilah has been fooled just like the original one, and that we have not discovered through her the answer to the riddle. It may be that they are telling the truth: but their marked uneasiness and their secret conferences seem to say that they flatter themselves too much in this respect, and that the wiser amongst them know it. Well! Well! Why should not the Secret of this Society get loose some time, like that of so many others? . . . My opinion is that the Free Masons may congratulate themselves that a Fraternity as numerous as theirs has been able to exercise and weary for two centuries the vigilance of the Sovereigns of England. This fact is a credit to their Order. But at the same time they must console themselves at being found out (now). What vexes me in this affair is this, that a secret so long kept in safety in the hands of the English should have lasted such a very brief time when in ours.

For further information concerning this incident and its consequences Brethren are referred to Bro. Gould's History, vol. III., p. 90, and to his Paper in A.Q.C., vol. xvi., p. 46 and 47; also to Bro. Chetwode Crawley's Papers in A.Q.C., vol. ix., p. 84, and xiii., p. 149. It appears that Hérault having published an 'exposure' based on the document he received as above, this drew forth a reply of which the title is generally given as:—Rélation apologique et historique de la Société des F.M., par J.G.D.M.F.M., Dublin, Chez Patrice Odonoko, 1738, 8vo. (It was really printed in Paris.) Mons. Simonnet frequently mentions this Rélation, &c., but he invariably gives the second word in the title as apologétique. This is the book which was burned at Rome by the Public Executioner on 1st February, 1739, by order of the Inquisition and was supposed to have been written by the Chevalier Ramsay, and is ascribed to him in the newspaper notices so often quoted. Mons. Simonnet, who makes extensive use of this work and gives very copious extracts from it, certainly did not regard the Chevalier Ramsay as its author or he would not have failed to mention so interesting a fact in connection with it, and Bro. Gould (History, vol. III., p. 91) considered that the internal evidence was sufficient to disprove the Chevalier's responsibility for this tract. But whoever the author may have been he was quite certain that Freemasonry was English in origin and came to France from England. In none of the extracts given by

[PDF Page 23 = Journal Page 10] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Simonnet is there the slightest trace of any French development passing in the reverse direction.

Another work of about the same date (1737 or 1738), entitled Recueil de Chansons. Livre de la très noble et très illustre Société et Fraternité des Maçons Libres. À l'usage des Respectable Loges de France,¹ is provided with a Preface by 'le frère Ricaut.' Mons. Simonnet draws very largely upon this, but here, too, no such reference as we are seeking is to be found. This is one extract:—

. . . from the English Nation where it took its birth (Freemasonry) has passed to many others. . . . (England) her (i.e., Freemasonry's) own chosen Isle . . .

the Freemasonry referred to being Craft only.

At Aix in Provence in 1704 was born Jean Baptiste de Boyer, afterwards Marquis d'Argens.² While still very young he adopted the Army as a profession in defiance of his father, who promptly cut him off with the proverbial shilling or its local equivalent. Having served with distinction and having received honourable wounds at Kell and Philipsburg, he quitted the Army and removed to Holland, where he set up as a man of letters. Frederick William of Prussia was his friend, and on his accession to the throne invited d'Argens to his Court at Berlin, and appointed him one of his Court Chamberlains. d'Argens remained in Berlin for twenty-five years, and then returned to his native Aix, where he died in 1771. His numerous writings are characterised by a spirit of antagonism to the Church, and, in fact, to religion generally. They include Lettres Juives, Lettres Chinoises, Lettres Cabalistiques, La Philosophie du bon Sens and Mémoires Secrets de la Republique des Lettres. While in Holland, d'Argens published Lettre d'un Sauvage depaysé, par Mr le Marquis D'Argens. Amsterdam. Chez François Joly dans le Dil'Steeg. Du lundy. 1738 (month not stated). It is a long and amusing account of all that the author has been told about Freemasonry and its objects and aims. He does not refer to Degrees, but he has a most remarkable reference to Freemasons and Knights Templars:—

Je ne leur conseillerois pas de s'aviser de vouloir prendre la place des Templiers, et je ne crois pas non plus qu'ils y pensent.

The references to the Knts. of St. John of Jerusalem in Dean Swift's Grand Mistress, 1731, and in Ramsay's Oration, 1738, are well known, but this is the earliest so far traced allusion to any association between Freemasons and the Original Order of K. Templars. It shows that in 1738 rumours of a 'Templar Succession' were in the wind just before the date, 1741, of Von Hund's 'Patent.' Simonnet transcribes the Lettre d'un Sauvage in full, giving notes about the author. He says that D'Argens was 'admitted into the Society of Free Masons 'at Berlin in 1742.' There is a very amusing account of the initiation of d'Argens in the Preface de l'Ordre des F.M. trahi, &c., 1745.

A Grosses Universal Lexicon, Halle and Leipzig, 1739, contains an article on Freemasonry in which occurs:—

As therefore it is certain that this Brotherhood took its origin in England and has there much increased, we must look upon those which have spread in other countries as descended therefrom, and this first occurred in Holland;

but that is all that concerns our present enquiry.

In 1740 there appeared a piece in prose with the title Les Fri-Maçons hyperdrame. À Londres: Chez J . . . T . . . dans le Strand. M DCC XL., 2nd edition, 1742; the author's name being given as Vincent. The 'Avertissement' states that:—

¹ Not to be confused with 'Chansons nôtées de la très vénérable Contrariée des 'Maçons Libres' . . . Le tout recueilli et mis en ordre par Frère Naudot. 1737.' There is also a 'Recueil de Chansons, pour la Maçonnerie des Hommes et des Femmes: 'Augmenté de plusieurs Vaudevilles nouveaux. À Sophonaple, L'An de la renaissance 'des Vertus. 3,5,7.' But it is of much later date.

² He was the elder brother of the Monsieur de Boyer Marquis d'Eguilles who was received at Holyrood by Prince Charles Edward as accredited Ambassador from Louis XV.

[PDF Page 24 = Journal Page 11] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

This piece was to have been played by the 'Comediens François' early in 1737 . . . (but) certain 'contretems' prevented its receiving this honour . . . Free Masonry was extremely fashionable at that time.

This piece is on the whole flattering to Freemasons, the Secrecy, the Qualifications required in Candidates, the Terror inspired by the Ceremony of Reception, and the Exclusion of Ladies, are all dwelt upon, together with some more or less good-natured ridicule. I have not seen the work, and am relying upon Père Simonnet's account of it, but apparently it is Craft Masonry only which is represented. Bro. Woodford tells us that Jacob Tonson was the publisher and that the author's real name was Clement de Genève—but who or what he was 'does not quite clearly appear.' Bro. Woodford implies that the Jesuits replied with a Tragi-Comedy entitled Rhadamiste et Zenobie, in derision of Freemasonry, which was produced in 1741 at the College Dubois at Caen.

In 1742 there appeared a small octavo book of 118 pages with 4 pp. of Songs and Music with the title:—Apologie pour l'Ordre des Francs-Maçons. Par Mr N * * * Membre de l'Ordre. Avec deux Chansons composées par Le Frère Américain. À La Haye Chez Pierre Gosse. MDCCXLII. This edition is exceedingly rare, but there is a later one published:—La Haye: Gosse, Dresde: Walther. The English Origin is frequently referred to in the book, which appears to know nothing but Craft Masonry. But 'Le frère Américain' (and this is specially noteworthy) mentions by name the Degree of Chev. de l'Aigle:—

Ajoutons à nôtre Regle Un Point qui Vous plaira fort C'est qu'au Chevalier de l'Aigle On boive un grand rouge bord. Meitre Vénérable, &c.

The two 'Chansons' occur at the end of the book and are not paged with the rest of it. This is the last verse of the second song.

The same year, 1742, saw the publication at Geneva of Le Secret des Francs-Maçons by the Abbé Gabriel Louis Calabre Pérau, a Frenchman, born 1700, died at Paris 1767, Prior of the Sorbonne. His works include (1) a Memoir of Jerome Bignon, the precocious child genius and friend of Grotius; (2) a Continuation of The Lives of Illustrious Frenchmen, commenced (but left unfinished) by N. Castres d'Auvigny. Le Secret des F.M. is one of the earliest of the Continental 'exposures.' I have not seen the printed book, but I have a contemporary MS. of it, and there are many passages which show that the Abbé had become possessed of an early English Original, e.g.:—

Une chose plus grande que vous parceque God en anglois veut dire Dieu.

There is no reference to anything beyond the three Symbolic Degrees.

The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, in his Cyclopædia, tells us that, according to Kloss, a certain Bro. J. Uriot was the "Author of the first printed exposition of the real aims of Freemasonry in a work entitled 'Le Véritable Portrait d'un 'Franc-Maçon.' Frankfort. 1742." The correct title of the work in question is as follows:—

Lettre à Mr de Vaux, Conseiller de Sa Majesté le Roi de Pologne, Duc de Lorraine, et de son Altesse Electorale le Prince Palatin: par Uriot, Membre de la Loge de l'Union, à Francfort, le 13 juillet. 1742. Lue et approuvée dans la Loge de l'Union établie en cette Ville, et imprimée la même année, à la dite Ville de Francfort sur le Meyn.

Mons. Simonnet makes very frequent use of this publication. It is reprinted in full in L'Ecole des Francs-Maçons, 1748, and contains nothing outside the Craft Degrees.

Of Bro. de la Tierce, who was the author of Histoire Obligations et Statuts de la très vénérable Confraternité des Francs-Maçons . . . Francfort sur le Meyn. Chez François Varrentrapp. mdccxxxii., not very much is known. He was clearly a Frenchman, and in the letter which comes immediately after the

[PDF Page 25 = Journal Page 12] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Dedication to Baron Gotthart von Kettler he tells us that he composed the work in London in 1733, and that it was approved by the Lodges there. But in the book as published we have a full report of the Chevalier Ramsay's Oration, which was not printed until 1739 as we have seen, therefore it is clear that de la Tierce overhauled his work at some time later than 1739. Dr. Anderson is said (by Bro. Woodford in the Cyclopædia) to have been a friend of his and to be indebted to him for the 1738 edition of the Book of Constitutions, but it is just as likely that the 1738 Constitutions helped de la Tierce with his revision for the press. Unless the Ramsay speech be regarded as such, there is no reference to additional degrees, and the English Origin is expressly recognized (p. 197).

Bro. Gould (History, vol. III., p. 141) gives a transcript of Article 20 of the Regulations issued by the Grand Lodge of France on 11th December, 1743 (the day of Clermont's election as G.M.):—Art. 20. As it appears that lately some brothers announce themselves as Scots Masters, claiming prerogatives in private Lodges, and asserting privileges, &c., &c. This important Regulation will claim our attention again later.

As for M. Simonnet's own opinions—apart from those expressed in the documents included or transcribed by him—Freemasonry is Anathema because it is English, because it hails from England the accursed, the home of heresy and free-thinking, where Papal Bulls create no panic, and where the Holy Father of Rome is but lightly esteemed. To this theme he returns again and again:—

Can one hope to gather good fruit from so evil a tree? one whose sap and nurture are derived, &c., &c., &c. Such is the Society of Free Masons in England. . . . Did not the English introduce this Society into France and other Catholic States purposely in order silently there to undermine Religion, &c., &c., &c.

And so forth. But never a word of any contribution from France to England in exchange. M. Simonnet's MS. is dated July, 1744. By the way, he asserts that Monsieur 'Rapin Toiras aux fastes d'Angleterre 11 volume' states that Freemasonry was founded in England in 1692 during the reign of Queen Mary, spouse of William III. I have not been able to verify this reference.

Le parfait Maçon ou les Véritables Secrets des quatre grades d'Apprentis, Compagnons, Maitres ordinaires et Ecossois, &c., 1744, tells of several Ecossois Degrees, and says that 'this variation of Freemasonry begins to find favour in France.'

La Franc-Maçonne . . . par Madame . . . Bruxelles, 1744, states that Freemasonry possesses seven Degrees.

Der sich selbst vertheidingende F.M., Francfort and Leipzig, also of 1744, refers to the election of the Earl of Derwentwater to succeed (Sir) James Hector Maclean as G.M. of France, and thus acknowledges a British influence.

Le Sceau Rompu, ou la Loge ouverte aux profanes, par un franc-maçon, à Cosmopolis, 1745, alludes to the connection with the Knightly Orders, as do also the 2nd and 3rd editions of Catéchisme des Francs-Maçons, dédié au beau sexe; Leonard Gabanon; à Jérusalem et Limoges. 1st edition 1740, 2nd edition 1747, 3rd edition 1749. The author's real name was Louis Travenol and the book was printed and published at Paris.

L'Ordre des Francs-Maçons trahi et Le Secret des Mopses révélé. À Amsterdam. m.dcc.xlv., is another work of the 'exposure' type. It also asserts that:—

It was in England that the Free Masons (Society) took its birth,

and that France was indebted to England for 'le bonheur d'être Franc-Maçon.' The whole body of the work deals with the Craft Degrees only, but there is a most important footnote announcing the appearance of 'Ecossois' Masonry—of which I shall have some more to say presently. The author is apparently not the Abbé Larudan, who followed with his Les F. M. Ecrasés Suite du Livre intitulé L'O des F.M. trahi. À Amsterdam. 1746.

In 1748 there appeared the first edition of L'Ecole des Francs-Maçons. À Jérusalem. m.dcc.xlviii., a very interesting little book with a very graceful

[PDF Page 26 = Journal Page 13] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

engraved frontispiece. The references to England are many, e.g.:—

Nous sommes Maçons Libres?—C'est la traduction du terme Anglois. (p. 13.)

Les Anglois—L'heureuse Nation qui nous transmit le moyen le plus facile d'assurer le bonheur. (p. 43.)

l'Angleterre seule en conserva toutes les connoissances (de l'Art Roïal) . . . c'est de là même qu'il s'est répandu dans l'Univers. (p. 72.)

But the book touches upon nothing beyond the three Symbolic Degrees.

Dr. Oliver, in Revelations of a Square (1855), p. 69, cites 'The Testament of a Freemason; ou le Testament de Chevalier Graof,' a Brussels publication of 1745, based on an English original which Bro. Dring has been unable to trace. Oliver describes the work as a 'pretended revelation of Martin Clare's revised lectures and ceremonies' written by a disappointed candidate for Grand Office. It is very unlikely that any English Original ever existed.

Les Plus Secrets Mystères des Hauts Grades de la Maçonnerie dévoilés, ou le Vrai Rose-Croix, Traduit de l'Anglois; suivi Du Noachite, Traduit de l'Allemand. À Jérusalem. m.dcc.lxviii., is a well known work by 'M. de Berage, Chevalier de l'Eloquence de la Loge de M. de Saint-Gellair, Chevalier Commandeur-Lieutenant, Inspecteur-Général des Loges Prussiennes en France, 'l'an de l'Ordre. 4658 [sic].' It gives a full account of seven 'additional' grades.¹ My reason for mentioning it here is that the Catalogue of the Worcestershire Masonic Library and Museum, edited by Bros. Taylor and Hughan, 1891, p. 43, cites an edition of this work of the year mdccxlvii. If this exists it comes within the period I am considering.

Some writers refer to a work entitled L'Adept Maçon, of the year 1747, but I have no knowledge of its contents.

The above is a representative collection of the evidence to be derived from foreign sources within the period selected. Except Ramsay and 'Le Frère Américain' all are foreigners, mostly Frenchmen. Practically all recognize, and most of them lay emphasis on, the British Origin of Freemasonry. The majority show no knowledge at all of anything other than the Symbolic Degrees. With the doubtful exception of Barbier (1737) and the vague coupling of Freemasonry with the Knightly Orders by D'Argens and Ramsay, there is no foreign mention of Additional Degrees before 1742 (from which date the foreign references become more and more numerous and ample—the reason for this will appear later). But NONE afford any indication of such passing to us from the Continent.

The examination of the British evidence will complete Part III. of my thesis and will lead to Parts II. and I. Everything points to an extreme simplicity in Ceremonial in the early days of Freemasonry before the advent of Grand Lodge and central control. But there exists a mass of evidence which shows that long before 1740 (and also long before 1717) Masonic Symbolism and Legend were undergoing a process of growth and development, a process which may fairly be described as a bringing up to date of the Traditional History in the Old MS. Constitutions, thus paving the way for, and providing the material for, Ceremony or Ritual whenever the time should be ripe for its appearance. In an Addendum I have brought together a large number of pieces of evidence ranging from 1638 to about 1750 containing indications of something beyond, i.e., additional to, what we know as the Symbolic or Craft or St. John's Degrees. The earliest direct mention of the Third or Sublime Degree of a Master Mason, either in print or manuscript, is of date 1723, but Bro. Rev. C. J. Ball has proved that what I may perhaps describe as the essential materials of that degree existed for an uncertain but long period before the creation of the Grand Lodge, and according

¹ Parfait Maçon Elu, Elu de Pérignan, Elu des Quinze, Petit Architecte, Grand Architecte, Chev. de l'Epée et de Rose Croix, Le Noachite ou Chev. Prussien. The date 4658 is a slip for 4758.

[PDF Page 27 = Journal Page 14] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

to Prof. Marks and Prof. Hayter-Lewis the Story of Hiram Abiff is at least as old as the fourteenth century.¹ However that may be in fact, from the moment when a Legend of the First Temple and a Loss became part of Masonry no long interval would elapse before the appearance of a further Legend of a Recovery and (as likely as not) of the Second Temple, if indeed these were not associated together from the beginning. With the Temple at Jerusalem occupying a prominent place in Masonic teaching it would have been all but miraculous had our ancient Brethren's attention not been drawn to the wonderful story of the Crusaders and their mighty building achievements, and Legends of Knightly Masons with Sword and Trowel would follow as a matter of course. Nor would the mysterious Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross fail to impress itself upon the minds of the Speculative members of the fraternity. It must not be imagined that I wish to imply that in these early days anything of a Ceremonial nature was attempted, but I do suggest that the reading or reciting of these legends formed part of the Lodge labours of our ancient Brethren when they 'talked Masonry' and that all members were eligible to be present and no doubt contribute.

So that when, in 1638, Adamson, in his Moses' Threnodie, brackets together as near akin the mysterious Fraternity R.C., the mysterious Mason Word, and the mysterious Gift of the Second Sigil he does so because an association between them was already an accepted part of Masonic tradition. Again, when Dean Swift in his Grand Mistress (written 1727-1729) tells of:—

The Knights of St. John of Jerusalem or the Knights of Malta, to which two Lodges I must nevertheless allow the Honour of having adorned the ancient Jewish and Pagan Masonry with many Religious and Christian Rules

and of:—

the famous old Scottish Lodge of Killwinin,

the Dean is not inventing a new thing (which if it were new would be pointless), but is giving expression to a well recognized part of legendary Craft lore. The Chevalier Ramsay, again, in his Oration of 1738 tells us of the 'intimate union' set up between the Masonic Brotherhood and the 'Chevaliers de S'Jean de Jerusalem,' of the Second Temple and sword and trowel, of 'Kilwin' in the West of Scotland, and that it was 'in Scotland that our Order was preserved in all its 'splendour.' Ramsay was no more the inventor of these stories than was Swift, who said nearly the same thing ten years before, or Dr. Dassigny six years later. For Dassigny tells us that:—

were it expedient, it could easily be proved that the Knights of Malta, and many other religious orders and societies, did borrow their solemn usages from our antient fraternity.

In 1737, the year before Ramsay's Oration was first printed, a writer 'Jachin' in the Craftsman and the Gentleman's Magazine supposed that the Title 'Grand Master' was being used by the Knights of Malta. And it is quite clear that the Marquis d'Argeus in 1738, when he thinks the Masonic Brotherhood would be showing but little wisdom if they sought to take the place of the Knights Templars, is referring to current theories of Masonic 'Templar Succession.' The Knightly Orders references in the Sceau Rompu (1745) and in Travenol's Catechisms of 1747 and 1749 may be regarded in a similar manner. Here and there, possibly before 1717, certainly just after that date, Brethren were striving to translate some of these legends into action, i.e., Ceremonies or Degrees. This is not mere conjecture, for the researches of Bro. Edward Armitage at the Bodleian resulted in the discovery of the so-called 'Masonic Formulæ' in Robert Samber's handwriting, proving conclusively that he, either alone or in association with others, was, in about the year 1721, engaged in this sort of enterprise. This fragment

¹ Compare also:—(1) The entry for 24th June, 1721, in the Minutes of G.L. relating how Bro. Maskall was installed 'in Hiram Abiff's Chair on the Grand Master's left Hand.' This 'entry' is, however, of later date than the alleged occurrence. (2) The long account of Hiram Abiff in the 1723 Book of Constitutions which is a proof that the Legend of the III° was already a part of Masonic Tradition.

[PDF Page 28 = Journal Page 15] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

of ritual greatly enhances the evidential value of the well known expressions in Samber's Preface to Long Livers and also, be it said, to the Masonic under-meaning of the main body of that curious work. Again, the Diary of Rev. W. Stukeley records the institution of the 'Order of the Book' or 'Roman Knighthood'—Knighthood, please note the expression—in 1722, and further that it was actually worked is shown by the later entry of the admission of Lords Hertford and Winchelsea. Whether this 'Order' was connected with Masonry or not, the entry in the Diary is proof that Stukeley—a Freemason—was at work framing a Ceremonial Order and working it, i.e., conferring it upon 'candidates.'

The R.A. is met with in embryo in 1723 in the first Book of Constitutions 'The well built Arch' (see Addendum No. 7), and again in the Catechisms of 1723 'The Rainbow' and 1724 (Addendum No. 8). The appearance of 'Gentlemen Masons' with distinctive 'Badges' in 1725 (Addendum No. 11) is highly suggestive in the light of later references, such as, for example, Banner XIX. in the Harlequin Freemason Procession (see A.Q.C. xxi., p. 151):—

XIXth Banner Royal Arch—Six Gentlemen Masons Two, bearing the Pageant

Compare with this the Youghal Procession (Addendum No. 33). What, we may ask, does Art. II. in the 1723 Constitutions mean when it grants to the W.M. of a Lodge authority to congregate the members of his Lodge into a Chapter? And what was it that happened to those three Brethren in 1734 when they were 'made Chapters' by Dr. Desaguliers as reported by Micky Broughton? (A.Q.C. xxx., p. 190.) And what was the 'Rule of Three' which a Master must understand in 1726? (A.Q.C. xxiii., p. 324.) In spite of the opinion expressed by Bro. Hughan in his Origin of the English Rite (p. 72), the first of the Two Letters to a Friend signed 'Verus Commodus' (reproduced in Gould's History, vol. III ) affords ample evidence that the R.A. was worked in 1725. In A.Q.C., vol. xxx., Bro. Songhurst has convinced us that the author of the Letters is speaking of Dr. Desaguliers:—

He makes wonderful Brags of being of the Fifth Order . . . The Doctor pretends, he has found out a Mysterious, Hocus-pocus Word, which belongs to the Anathema pronounc'd against Ananias and Saphira . . . and he farther pretends, That against whomsoever he (as a Member of the Fifth Order) shall pronounce this terrible Word, the Person shall instantly drop down dead, as they did.

The use of the expression 'found' is, perhaps, not specially significant, but the reference to the Tetragrammaton (which we recognize by its traditional properties) and its association with 'the Fifth Order' are, to my way of thinking, conclusive. We know from Dassigny that in its early days the R.A. was 'an organis'd body 'of men who have passed the chair,' and hence the five steps:—(1) E.A., (2) F.C., (3) M.M., (4) Chair, (5) R.A. The Ritual of 1730 with its allusion to—(The Word) 'which was once lost, and is now found' (Addendum No. 15), is worthy of notice. Bro. Hughan's concluding remark on the Verus Commodus passage is:—

. . . but certainly the equivocal reference to such a position, rank, or dignity [i.e., the fifth Order] cannot fairly be assumed as describing the R.A. Degree, at a time when apparently it was not known to exist.

It should be unnecessary to point out that it is the Tetragrammaton reference which 'describes the R.A. Degree,' not the mention of a 'fifth Order,' which, however, as has been shown, fits in exactly with what we learn a little later from Dassigny in the passages referring to the R.A. in his Serious and Impartial Enquiry (1744). This has been so admirably summed up by Bro. Hughan in his Origin of the English Rite that I need not repeat one word of it here, and will rest content with giving the reference to the edition of 1909, pp. 74-76.

[Page 31] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued) — Discussion

(PDF pages 31–45 correspond to printed journal pages 18–32)

[PDF Page 31 = Journal Page 18] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Degrees is, I believe, a remark made in the course of an article on Freemasonry in the famous Cyclopædia compiled by the learned Ephraim Chambers and first published, in two volumes folio, in 1728. Ephraim Chambers was born of Quaker parents at Kendal, where he was educated. While still young he came to London and was apprenticed to Mr. John Senex, the celebrated 'Cartographer, Globe-maker, Engraver and Bookseller,' who dwelt 'at the Sign of The Globe, in Salisbury Court, over against St. Dunstan's Church, near Fleet Street.' Bro. John Senex was a member of the Lodge (XV. in the 1723 List) which met at 'The Greyhound' in Fleet Street, of which he was S.W., and also of another (or is it the same?) Lodge which met at 'The Fleece' in Fleet Street. He (Senex) was Junior Grand Warden in 1723, in which year he published the first edition of the Book of Constitutions. His name appears as Grand Warden upon the first page of the earliest Minute Book of the G.L. of England. Senex also published an elaborate engraved Plan of Jerusalem with views of K.S.T. and its principal ornaments. In 1728 he was made F.R.S., and in 1729 Ephraim Chambers received the same honour, and as it is well known how many of the Fellows of the Royal Society at about this time were also members of the Craft, we see that Chambers must have numbered many prominent Masons among his friends. The remark in the Cyclopædia is as follows:—

There are certain Freemasons who have all the characteristics of Rosicrucians.

The Brethren referred to—'certain Freemasons'—evidently formed a class apart from the 'ordinary' Brethren, and clearly they were to be found here at home in Great Britain. When the author wrote 'Rosicrucians' I have no doubt he had in his mind the Mysterious Fraternity R.C., but equally I have no doubt that he was misled by a similarly sounding title, and was really reporting the existence of Rose Croix Ecossois or Scots Masons.

The next printed reference of the same kind is to be found in the Daily Journal, a London Newspaper, of the 5th September, 1730, which contains an attack on Freemasonry in a letter signed 'A.Z.', professing to give a 'True Account' of its 'Antiquity and Institutions.' The following occurs:—

. . . . . . there is a Society abroad, from whom the English Free-Masons (ashamed of their true origin, as above) have copied a few Ceremonies and taken great Pains to persuade the World that they are derived from them, and are the same with them: These are call'd Rosicrucians from their Prime Officers (such as our Brethren call Grand Master, Wardens, &c.) being distinguished on their High Days with red crosses.

The same remark as before applies to the use of the word 'Rosicrucians' only that here it is quite clear that the writer cannot be thinking of the older Rosicrucians. It is to be noted that this time the Society is abroad and that English Freemasons are copying a few ceremonies, i.e., some Degrees. The words 'there is a Society abroad from whom the English Free-Masons' seem to suit very well the situation I am suggesting, namely, a Society of British origin but worked abroad by Britons (in exile for political reasons) calling themselves 'Scots Masons.' That the G.L. of England in 1730 was disturbed by the existence of Freemasons other than those of their own flock is shown by the G.L. Minutes of 28th August and 15th December:—

. . . the Resolution of the last Quarterly Communication for preventing any false Brethren being admitted into Regular Lodges, and such as call themselves Honorary Masons.

. . . several Rules . . . for their security against all open and secret enemies of the Craft.

. . . to prevent the Lodges being imposed upon by false Brethren or Impostors, (it is) Proposed that, &c.

It is not clandestine or merely irregular makings which are here aimed at—it is separate organisations. [The Honorary Masons seem to have been Hanoverian, not Stuart. See A.Q.C. viii., p. 135; also xxiii., p. 327.]

[PDF Page 32 = Journal Page 19] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Thory makes the statement that Irish Chapters existed in Paris from 1730, but gives no authority, therefore his statement must not be taken as establishing that particular date 1730. Nevertheless, seeing that Scots Masonry was certainly being worked in England from 1733, there is nothing impossible or even improbable in Thory's assertion. The Rawlinson MSS. at the Bodleian include a MS. List ot Lodges of the year 1733, which contains:—

Devil Tavern, Temple Bar, a Scotch Mason's Lodge.

And Pine's Engraved List of 1734 has:—

(Figure of Devil.) Scott's Masons' Lodge, Devil, Temple Bar. 2d and 4th Munday.

And the Pocket Companion for 1735 has a similar entry. This Lodge continued to meet at the Devil until 1736, when it moved to Daniel's Coffee House, Temple Bar, and in this same year, 1736, it was erased, i.e., struck out in ink, from the List, and appears no more. The Lodge seems to have been associated with Lodge No. 8, constituted 25th April, 1722, which also met at the Devil from 1733 to 1736, and then moved to Daniel's. The members of No. 8 were not exclusively or even mainly Scotsmen. Brethren should consult Bro. John Lane's Paper in A.Q.C., vol. i., p. 167, from which I have taken the particulars concerning this Scots Mason Lodge. That it worked Scots, i.e., Ecossois Masonry, will not nowadays be doubted. Bro. Hughan (English Rite, p. 138) was of opinion that it was a Lodge:—

mainly, if not exclusively, composed of brethren from Scotland, hence the title. Such a lodge would not have been warranted by the Regular Grand Lodge, for the purpose of working aught akin to a 'Scottish Degree.'

But Bro. Hughan adopted this explanation because in his History

our W.M. (Bro. Gould) fixes 1740 as the year when the Scots Degrees were fabricated, so that the Scotts' Masons' Lodge of 1733 had no connection with that novelty. (A.Q.C., vol. i., p. 176.).

which, to me, is a singularly unconvincing argument. Bro. Lane showed that the Lodge in question had no date of Constitution, never paid for a Charter or Constitution, and although a London Lodge, never attended Grand Lodge.

The Minutes of a Salisbury Lodge contain the following:—

Oct. 19. At this lodge were made Scotts Masons, five brethren of the lodge,

one of them being its W.M., Bro. Staples. (See Bro. Goldney's History of F.M. in Wiltshire, p. 101.) The Minutes of the R. Cumberland Lodge at Bath in the same year record that:—

Jan. 8. 1746. Bros. Thomas Naish and John Burge were this day made Scotch Masons, and paid for making 2s 6d each,

and at a later date five more members of this Lodge received 'Scotch' Mason Degrees. It is clear that a Jacobite Masonic agent was touring the West of England in 1746. It is really surprising that Bro. Hughan should have considered that the Salisbury Minute was of 'quite a different character' to the record of the Scotts Masons Lodge of 1733, for, as a matter of fact, the only apparent difference is that one is earlier and the other later than 1740.¹

In the month of April of 1737 a long and wearisome letter, signed 'Jachin,' appeared in The Craftsman and also in The Gentleman's Magazine, the burden of which is 'Freemasonry, a Dangerous Society.' The letter contains many of the popular catch-words of the day, and is in reality a violent Hanoverian manifesto protesting against the services which Freemasonry was rendering to the

¹ In the course of the discussion following this Paper, Bro. Edward Armitage has drawn attention to the working of Scots Masonry at Extraordinary Lodge Meetings at Bath in 1735 and at the Lodge of Antiquity in London in 1740.

[PDF Page 33 = Journal Page 20] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

opposite cause and curiously hinting at what are now sometimes called 'arrière-loges,' which hold the true secret and keep it jealously from the ordinary Brethren. The following extracts will be sufficient to explain what is meant:—

. . . how artfully They have dispersed themselves in different Lodges through all Parts of the Kingdom and particularly in this great Metropolis . . . to beat up for Volunteers . . . they admit . . . even Jacobites, Nonjurors,¹ and Papists.

'Beating up for Volunteers for Foreign Service' was the popular catch-phrase for enlisting recruits for the 'King over the Water.' The writer constantly insinuates that the Roman Church and the Inquisition are behind the scenes, and of course the Jesuits are not forgotten. And then after admitting that many 'of the most undoubted Affection to his Majesty's Person, Family, and Govern-'ment' are to be found in the Society he goes on to argue that no 'sure Depen-'dence' can be found to issue from that fact:—

Besides how can We be sure that those Persons who are known to be well-affected are let into all their Mysteries? . . . And who knows whether They may not have an higher Order of Cabalists who keep the grand Secret of all intirely to Themselves?

In short, Jachin puts the case very clearly from his own point of view, and is not altogether uninformed as to what was afoot with a section of our Fraternity.

Of Ramsay's Oration I will say no more than that it appears to me to be an effect not the cause of 'High' Degrees.

The Royal Order of Scotland is frequently stated to be of Stuart origin, but whether that is correct or not I cannot say. Bro. D. Murray-Lyon (Hist. of the L. of Edinburgh, ed. 1900, p. 346), who examined its archives, says that 'in one of the MSS. the Grand Master at London sets forth that he had held office 'since 1741.' Bro. Hughan (Origin of Eng. Rite, ed. 1909, p. 137) copied from the oldest Minute Book now extant at Edinburgh the dates—1743 and 1744—of two Chapters (Southwark and Deptford), and he says that there were two 'Time Immemorial.' Bro. Murray-Lyon says that in 1750 there were five Chapters in London and one at Deptford. Thus the Royal Order was in fairly flourishing condition during the period 1741 to 1750. The record of the Lodge of Industry, Swallwell, Gateshead, July 1st, 1746, with its curious references to 'the dignity of a Highrodiam' and to 'Damaskin' and 'Forin,' is well known, and also the conjectures concerning its meaning. Bro. Gould quotes the "N.B." which follows the entry in question:—

The English Masters to pay for entering into the said Mastership 2s. 6d. per majority.

I entirely agree with Bro. Gould that this 'N.B.' points to the Steps referred to being 'some form of Scots Masonry.'

As regards the R.O. of Scotland and the Rite of Perfection or Hérédom, it is evident that the advantage of seniority lies with the British Order. Bro. Gould has dealt with this point in his Paper 'The Degrees of Pure and Ancient Freemasonry' in A.Q.C. xvi., at p. 51.

To the faithful followers of the exiled Royal House it must have seemed that the year 1740 marked the beginning of a new era of Hope. The long peace—for them a period of weary waiting—came to an end in 1739. The somewhat trivial war between Great Britain and Spain proved to be but the prelude to a much greater struggle, the war of the Austrian succession, in which all the leading Powers of Europe were speedily involved, and in the general upheaval surely would be found the ardently longed for opportunity to strike a blow for the Restoration of the rightful King of England. Neither James II. nor James III. (the Old Pretender) could boast of the gifts which would have enabled them to take full advantage of the chance, even if it had occurred earlier, but now that the chance had, or seemed to have, come, the Leader was ready to hand. Prince Charles Edward—the Jacobite Prince of Wales—possessed all those qualities requisite for

¹ See p. 23, post.

[PDF Page 34 = Journal Page 21] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

a hero of romance, a repairer of broken fortunes, the leader of a forlorn hope. Young—in 1740 he was not yet of age—of strikingly handsome person, tall and of robust physique, accustomed to, and excelling in, manly exercises, with an affability and charm of manner which endeared him to all who came in contact with him, he had also the fire of a consuming enthusiasm for the great Cause which he represented. Added to this, he had made his first campaign while still a boy of 14, in the company of his cousin the Duke de Liria (son of the Duke de Berwick), and in it had shown that, in addition to personal courage and coolness in danger, he gave promise of military talents which were not found wanting in the course of his brilliant but ill-fated expedition of '45. In January of 1743 Cardinal Fleury died, the Cardinal Minister who had done his best to stamp out Freemasonry in France, the pretended friend but secret enemy of the claims of the House of Stuart. To him succeeded Tencin, a devoted upholder of the Cause, who owed his Cardinal's Hat to the influence of King James III. at Rome. The result of the change was soon apparent. By the end of the year (1743) France was pledged to co-operate in the projected Invasion of England on behalf of James III., and Prince Charles Edward had received an invitation to France to join in the preparations. With help expected from Spain and promised by France no wonder that the hopes of the Stuart Party at home and abroad rose high, and with a great expeditionary force collected at Dunkirk all seemed to indicate that at last the day so long and so earnestly prayed for had come. As we now know, the expedition of 1744 fell through, and for the moment these hopes were dashed, but Prince Charles Edward did not lose heart, and the events of the first half of the following year, culminating in the victory of the French over the British at Fontenoy, seemed to him to give promise of better things. By August of 1745 Prince Charlie was in Scotland and the memorable '45 had begun.

The years 1739 to 1745, so big with the fate of the Stuarts, witnessed also some remarkable developments in Masonic affairs, the two sets of phenomena being indeed intimately connected. In 1738 the Duc D'Antin was elected Grand Master ad vitam of French Freemasons, and it was then that the French Grand Lodge assumed definitely its independence of the Grand Lodge at London. Dr. Anderson's Book of Constitutions bears witness to this, adding that:—

. . . they have the same Constitutions, Charges, Regulations, etc., for substance, with their brethren of England.

Bro. Gould (History, vol. III., p. 140) makes this comment:—

This . . . tends to prove that up to this date French innovations on the rite of Masonry had not made themselves known,

which is perfectly correct, but it does not prove that the innovations (French or Scottish) did not at this date exist. The Lodges over which the Duc D'Antin ruled were Craft Lodges, and the 'innovations' as yet were quite apart from Craft Masonry and certainly not subscribing to its Constitutions, Charges, or Regulations. The year 1743, which opened with the death of Fleury, the anti-Masonic and anti-Stuart Cardinal Minister, and the advent to office of his pro-Stuart successor Tencin, ended with the adoption of the Stuart cause by the Government of France. The same year saw the death of D'Antin and the election of Prince Louis de Bourbon, Comte de Clermont, as his successor. These events, and the complete failure of the anti-Masonic Police Crusade¹ and the Papal Bull, were, doubtless, the cause of an entire change of policy on the part of the 'High Degree' authorities which dates from this time. Scots Masonry or Ecossoisisme now boldly came forward and claimed to be not merely a part of Masonry but the real Masonry, possessed of superior knowledge and entitled to greater privileges and the right to rule over the ordinary, i.e., Craft Masonry. The motive for this remarkable claim has already been explained. It was not submitted to tamely by the G.L. of France, which, on the very day of Clermont's election, altered its Title to 'Grande Loge Anglaise de

¹ It is significant that the Police persecution of Freemasons came to a sudden stop in 1744. The case against Denis Le Roy was the last prosecution of the kind.

[PDF Page 35 = Journal Page 22] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

France,' thus proclaiming that it was 'Maçonnerie Anglaise,' which it recognized, and that with other 'Maçonneries'—whether Ecossoise, Irlandaise, or what not—it had neither part nor lot. To make the position clear and beyond cavil it reissued the English Constitutions of 1723 and 1738 as its own, but with this significant addition:—

Art. 20. As it appears that lately some brothers announce themselves as Scots Masters, claiming prerogatives in private Lodges, and asserting privileges of which no traces are to be found in the archives and usages of the Lodges spread over the globe, the Grand Lodge . . . has decreed that these Scots Masters, unless they are Officers of Grand Lodge or of a private Lodge, shall not be more highly considered by the brothers than the other apprentices and fellows, and shall wear no sign of distinction whatever.

To save space I will not repeat the claims in detail, they are admirably summed up by Bro. Gould (History III., p. 92) and will be found also in Bro. Lane's Paper in A.Q.C., vol. i., p. 173. [By Art. 42 of its Constitutions of 1756 the French G.L. practically submitted to the whole of them.] This 'forward movement' by the Stuart-Masonic-Party is referred to in a footnote, lettered (a), in the 1745 edition of L'Ordre des F.M. trahi:—

"I am not ignorant that a vague rumour is circulating amongst Free-"masons, concerning a certain Order which they call 'Les Ecossois' "superior as they make out to ordinary Freemasons and having their "own peculiar Ceremonies and Secrets . . . if they have any Secret "peculiar to themselves they are extremely jealous concerning it for they "conceal it from even the Masters of Freemasonry."

A further and a very striking reference to the propagandist activity of Scots Masonry in 1743 is to be found in a work to which reference has already been made—I mean Dassigny.

The paragraphs written by Dr. Fifield Dassigny in the Serious and Impartial Enquiry, 1744, referring to the Royal Arch, quoted by Bro. Hughan in his Origin of the English Rite, have been repeated so often by later writers who have dealt with this important subject, and always without any reference to other portions of the same tract, that one is tempted to ask if these writers have seen either the original or one of the reprints. Here is a passage which bears very directly upon the question of High Degrees and of Stuart Masonry, yet I have never seen it quoted in any of the many previous attempts to solve the problem:—

The honours due to the Craft forbids [sic] me to pass over a certain set of unprofitable labourers, who under a pretence of knowledge in the art, strive to lead astray, after their irregular method, many persons of credit and reputation.

Remarks.

It is too well known that in this city lately hath appeared a number of mean and low spirited wretches, who, (if ever just) have turned rebels to our well formed Government, and artfully brought into their iniquitous net several unguarded men, who from me shall meet with pity instead of blame (because they knew not the truth) wherefore I shall beg leave to acquaint them, that the laws of our Constitution are so agreeable to the disposition of every good man, and so easily performed that I dare say no one can have an excuse for not obeying; but as these labourers work not to serve our worthy masters, they receive instead of the advantages accruing from our vineyard, the just reward of their actions, and in each honest breast are stigmatized with a name I here shall not mention.

These despicable traders or hucksters in pretended Masonry, every prudent Brother ought carefully to avoid holding any converse with them; but as that learned apostle, St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Thessalonians, very justly advises, Withdraw yourselves from every

[PDF Page 36 = Journal Page 23] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us; &c., &c.

Dr. Dassigny, in the passages quoted by Bro. Hughan, informs us that the minds of the Dublin Brethren had some short time prior to 1744 ("lately") been disturbed about Royal Arch Masonry in consequence of the claims of an impostor (a single one) and his exposure by a genuine member of that excellent part of Masonry. In the passage which I have just quoted Dr. Dassigny tells us something quite different, namely, that "lately," and I suggest this means 1743, a number of traders or hucksters in pretended Masonry had appeared in Dublin artfully fishing for recruits to this new system. This is a statement of the greatest importance and its bearing upon the question at issue will presently become clear. Dassigny published this in 1744, and it is well known that the Jacobites were very active in Dublin in the Stuart interest during the period preceding the expedition of Prince Charles Edward and the Rebellion of 1745. Ostensibly the paragraphs I have quoted are aimed at 'rebels' to Masonic 'Government,' but I am of opinion that a double meaning is intended and that the Doctor is denouncing the political activities of Jacobite emissaries disguised under the form of a 'pretended Masonry.' Compare also the paragraph (which occurs a little further on and which is quoted by Bro. Hughan and others following him) concerning Italians and the Italic Order. I suggest that by Italians and Italian Order he intends a reference to the Court of King James III., i.e., the Old Pretender at Rome, and to the 'Ecossois' (Italic) Order of Masonry. If this interpretation of these passages in Dassigny be accepted as correct, then no support is to be found here for the theory of a French (or indeed of any Foreign) origin for the Degree developments which we are considering, for the Jacobites were Englishmen, Scots, and Irish, some of them, but by no means all, in temporary exile. There is, however, strong support for the theory (certainly not a new one) that the Stuart adherents were making very determined efforts to enlist Freemasonry in the service of him whom they regarded as their rightful Sovereign. The employment of travelling Jacobite-Masonic-Agents in Great Britain is clearly established by the A.Z. letter, the G.L. Resolutions of 1730, the Jachin Letter of 1737, the Dassigny paragraph just referred to, and the sporadic working of Scots Masonry in Craft Lodges in the West of England in 1746.

At some time during the winter 1746-7 there appeared the first edition of James Ray's well known Compleat History of the Rebellion from its First Rise, in 1745, to its Total Suppression, at the glorious Battle of Culloden in April, 1746. At A.Q.C. xxix., p. 386, I have reproduced a very curious reference to Non-jurors, Jacobites, and Freemasons taken from this work. Speaking of a Jacobite Nonjuring Chapel the author says:—

I dont know of what Body the Congregation consists, they not allowing any to come amongst them but such as are of their own Sort, who (like the more worshipful Society of Free Masons) are under an Oath not to divulge what is transacted there, except it be to a just and lawful Jacobite, as he or she shall appear to be upon Examination.

The wording suggests something more than mere badinage. It is clearly the author's intention seriously to suggest that religious services in Nonjuring Chapels were made a pretext to cover up treasonable political practices and I am not sure that it is not also his intention to imply that this was being done under the form of a pretended Jacobite Freemasonry, in his opinion less 'worshipful' than the ordinary kind—in fact, Irish or Scots Masonry. The passage may be compared with the Dassigny testimony above. If such be Ray's meaning it will be noticed that he makes the Jacobite Masonry androgyne. I have found no actual evidence that at the outset Scots Masonry possessed Degrees for women, but it undoubtedly did so later. Clavel, in Histoire pittoresque de la Franc-Maçonnerie, &c., Paris, 1843, p. 111, says that Female Freemasonry commenced 'about' 1730 in France, but no authority in support of that particular date is given. The Society of the 'Mopses' was androgyne, as is shown in the account of them given in Le Secret des Mopses révélé. A Amsterdam. 1745

[PDF Page 37 = Journal Page 24] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

We have seen that 'Le Frère Americain,' whom we may claim as a Briton, mentions the Rose Croix Degree as Chev. de l'Aigle in 1742. The events of 1743 are alluded to in two publications of 1744 already noticed:—Le Parfait Maçon, 'this variation (Scots Masonry) . . . begins to find favour in France,' and La Franc-Maçonne, where the Craft is held up to ridicule for its ignorance of the Seven Degrees of Freemasonry. To 1743 Thory assigns the invention at Lyons of the Kadosch. It may fairly be claimed that the year 1743 was one of supreme importance in the Annals of the Stuart Cause and of Stuart Masonry, and it is impossible to escape the conviction that there was a very intimate connection between the two.

That the authors of Scots Masonry were Jacobites and Scotsmen seems indisputable, but when and where the work was accomplished are questions which I cannot pretend to answer with any confidence. That it must have been long before 1740, the date 'fixed' by Bro. Gould, has been, I think, made clear. It may have been before and in preparation for the expedition of 1715, or at any time between 1715 and 1728. Seeing that it is now admitted that Freemasonry was introduced into Paris in 1725 by Jacobites, the period 1725-1728 suggests itself with some degree of insistence. But mere conjecture is futile. Of course, the movement may have commenced earlier and in Scotland—hence the name and place traditions—but on the whole it appears much more likely that it did so in France at the period last indicated. Prince Charles Edward's own personal connection, if he ever had any, with Freemasonry and the additional Degrees, is a subject all by itself, and I cannot attempt to deal with it here. It has been said that Bros. Begemann and Hughan have proved that the Prince was 'never a Freemason at all,' but they have not done so. Dr. Begemann has tried to shake the credit of a particular story concerning the Prince, and Bro. Hughan, in his Jacobite Lodge at Rome, has repeated the general line of the Doctor's argument and it is recommended that statements connecting the Prince with Freemasonry should be received 'with caution.' This caution may very well also be exercised in receiving the assertion in the Allgemeines Handbuch der Freimauerei that Von Waechter asserted that Prince Charles Edward asserted to him (Von Waechter) in 1777 that he (the Prince) 'was not even a Freemason.' That Prince Charles was at the head of Scots Masonry and the Royal Order of Scotland is vastly more likely than that he was not. The Arras Charter is either genuine or a forgery of not later than 1779, when the Document was produced. The two certificates owned by Bro. Thorp (see A.Q.C. xv., p. 94) are admittedly genuine, and are dated 1758 and 1772. In all three of these documents Prince Charles is represented as in supreme command of Scots Masonry, and all three are of a date earlier than the Prince's death, which took place in 1788. So that Scots Masons claimed him as their Chief on their official documents during his life time.

The conclusion to which this review of the evidence points is that the institution of Masonic Degrees or Ceremonies outside, beyond, or additional to what we now call the 'Craft,' was not the work of Foreigners but of Britons. Granted that later (much later) the 'High' Degree Movement abroad amongst foreign Brethren attained to dimensions far greater than it ever did at any time with our own countrymen, whether at home or in exile, still the beginnings took place here in England where such Degrees were in existence even before Freemasonry (the Craft) had been carried by Britons into France. And these beginnings I place as far back as 1717 and include therein the development of the Third Degree itself. The Temple Legend of Hiram and the Loss (and Recovery?) was but one portion only of the available Legendary Craft Lore, but being the portion selected and adopted by the Premier Grand Lodge the speedy result was the definition of a Rite of Three well marked Degrees which henceforward was to enjoy a monopoly of the honourable titles 'Pure,' 'Ancient,' and 'Craft.' There is nothing in the III° Legend or in the Degree itself which marks its claim to those titles as superior to the claim of many another of the extra or additional Degrees, and it is the accident of its selection by the G.L., and that alone, which has caused the M.M. Degree to be so regarded. While this hardy infant—the III°—was being born and nursed into vigour and general recognition, many others

[PDF Page 38 = Journal Page 25] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued) — Addendum

based upon other portions of the same Legendary Store were being brought into the world, some doubtless still-born, some doomed to perish in infancy, while others—and amongst them our Royal Arch—were destined to thrive and survive. In 1813, for the sake of peace and harmony and (above all) Union, the R.A., which had hitherto been refused official recognition, was admitted into the G.L. Rite, and thus became 'Pure' and 'Ancient' and 'Craft.' And what our Jacobite Brethren did was to take still other portions of the same Store, adapting them in a manner which to them seemed perfectly justifiable to the service of that Cause which for them was Sacred, in which they were risking all and in which they were ready to lose all.¹ The Cause, with its faithful followers, has passed away, but, freed from all political association, many of the Degrees remain.

The value of any particular Degree or of any Rite built up of such Degrees depends upon its own intrinsic merit as a reasonable and legitimate development of Masonic Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism, and upon this will depend also its survival as a part or branch of Freemasonry.

ADDENDUM.

(1) 1638. The Muses' Threnodie (Adamson).

'For we be Brethren of the Rosie Crosse. 'We have the Mason Word and second sight.'

A.Q.C. xi., p. 196, and xx., p. 357. Gould, Concise Hist., p. 77.

(2) 1663, etc. Early occurrence of emblems later associated with R.A. or other additional Degrees, e.g.:—

The Old Flat Rule at York. A.Q.C., vol. ii., p. 110.

The Pierpoint Chair at Lincoln. A.Q.C., vol. v., p. 68.

The Molyneux Papers. Arcane Schools, p. 406.

(3) 1688. The Dublin 'Tripos'

'Freemasonized the new way.'

Sadler, Reprints and Revelations, p. xxi.

(4) 1721, circ. Robert Samber's 'Masonic Formulæ.'

A.Q.C. xi., p. 108.

(5) 1721. Robert Samber's Long Livers.

The Preface (written 1721) and the Work itself (published in 1722).

A.Q.C. xi., p. 103. Gould, History II., p. 124.

(6) 1722. Diary of Rev. W. Stukeley, M.D.

Nov. 7. Order of the Book instituted. Dec. 28. I made them both Members of the Order of the Book or Roman Knighthood.

A.Q.C. vi., p. 130.

(7) 1723. The First Edition of the Book of Constitutions.

'The well built Arch.'

Art. II. The Master of a particular Lodge has the Right and Authority of congregating the Members of his Lodge into a Chapter at pleasure.

¹ It is curious how History repeats itself. In 1816 some of the more zealous partizans of the Emperor Napoleon instituted the 'Maçonnerie Napoléonienne' with General Bertrand as its first G.M. A Masonic System dedicated to the Restoration of the fallen dynasty, it had in all five grades, the final one being 'Chevalier de la Couronne d'e Chêne.'

[PDF Page 39 = Journal Page 26] Addendum (continued)

(8) 1723. The Flying Post. No. 4712. April 1723.

'A Mason's Examination' contains:—

Q. Whence comes the Pattern of an Arch? A. From the Rainbow.

Compare the Seal of the York Grand R.A. Chapter, Stirling Brasses No. 41 below, and other early representations of the R.A.

Gould, History III., p. 487. Hughan, English Rite, p. 125.

1724. The Grand Mystery of the Free Masons Discover'd.

Catechism contains:—

Q. Whence is an Arch deriv'd? A. From Architecture.

A.Q.C. xi., 25, and Gould, History III., 475.

(9) 1724. The Gormogon Society.

A.Q.C. viii., p. 114, et seq.

(10) 1725. Two Letters to a Friend. Signed Verus Commodus.

[Dr. Desaguliers] 'makes wonderful Brags of being of the Fifth Order . . . pretends he has found out a Mysterious Hocus-pocus Word, which belongs to the Anathema pronounc'd against Ananias and Saphira '... and he further pretends, That against whomsoever he (as a Member of the Fifth Order) shall pronounce 'this terrible Word, the Person shall instantly drop down dead.'

And:

An advertisement in the Daily Journal is quoted:—'. . . 'a New Lodge will be open'd, at the St. Alban's Tavern '. . . for regulating the Modern Abuses . . . 'where 'tis desired, that all the old real Masons will be 'present . . .'

And:—

Also in the Daily Journal '. . . whimsical kinsmen of 'the Hod and Trowel, having (a new Light received from 'some worthy Rosicrucians). . . .'

Gould, History III., 479. A.Q.C. xxii., p. 82.

(11) 1725. A Dublin Newspaper.

'Gentlemen Masons . . . Fine Badges painted full of 'Crosses and Squares with this Motto Spes mea in Deo 'est.'

Chetwode Crawley, Cæm. Hiber., Fasc. II. Compare Banner xix., in the Harlequin Freemason procession. A.Q.C. xxi., p. 151.

(12) 1726. Honorary Masons Apollonian Masons The Society of Real Masons

'the necessity there is for a Master to well understand the 'Rule of Three.'

A.Q.C. xxiii., p. 324.

(13) 1727-9. A Letter from The Grand Mistress (Dean Swift).

'The famous old Scottish Lodge of Killwinin.' 'The Knights of St. John of Jerusalem or the Knights of

[PDF Page 40 = Journal Page 27] Addendum (continued)

'Malta, to which two Lodges I must nevertheless allow the 'Honour of having adorned the antient Jewish and Pagan 'Masonry with many Religious and Christian Rules.'

Also references to 'Rosicrucians' and 'Druids.'

Sadler, Reprints and Revelations, p. 375.

(14) 1728. The Cyclopædia (Ephraim Chambers).

There are certain Freemasons who have all the characteristics of Rosicrucians.

(15) 1730. Ritual of 1730.

The Word 'which was once lost, and is now found.'

Hughan, English Rite, p. 84.

(16) 1730. The Daily Journal. 5 Sept. Letter signed A.Z.

English Masons imitating a Society of 'Rosicrucians' abroad. Red Crosses.

(17) 1730. Minutes of G.L. of England. 28 Aug. and 15 Dec.

Resolutions concerning precautions against 'false brethren,' 'open and secret enemies of the Craft,' 'Impostors.'

Gould, History II., p. 386.

(18) 1730. The alleged existence of Irish Chapters in Paris.

The authority is Thory, who gives no evidence in support. But Nos. 15, 17 above, and No. 20 below lead me to accept it as likely to be true.

(19) 1733. Rawlinson's List (1733), Pine's List (1734), The Pocket Companion (1735), include a 'Scotch' or 'Scott's' Masons Lodge at the Devil, Temple Bar.

A.Q.C. i., p. 167.

(20) 1733. Grade of Ecossois in Belgium

P. Duchaine. La F.M. Belge au XVIII° Siècle. p. 136.

(21) 1733. The Sackville Medal 'Ab Origine' at Florence by L. Natter. 1733. (See footnote¹ below). The Lodge possibly dates from 1730.

A.Q.C. xii., p. 204; xiii., p. 142, 149.

(22) 1734. Certain Masons 'made chapters' by Dr. Desaguliers.

Letter to Duke of Richmond.

A.Q.C. xxx., p. 190.

(23) 1735. Scots Masonry at Bath.

Oct. 28th, 1735. 'On the same day the Lodge met Extra-ordinary.' 10 made and admitted Scots Master Masons.

(Min. of R. Cumberland L. Bath.) Trans. Somerset Masters Lodge 1917. Art. Masonic Lodges of Bath by G. Norman.

(24) 1737. Le Journal de l'Avocat Barbier. Vol. II., p. 148, 149.

'chevaliers,' 'chevalerie,' 'chapitres.'

Miscell. Latom. June, 1914.

(25) 1737. The Craftsman and The Gentleman's Magazine both for month of April. Long letter signed Jachin.

. . . the Title of Grand Master; . . . in Imitation of the Knights of Malta. . . . to beat up for Volunteers . . . admit . . . even Jacobites, Nonjurors, and Papists.

[PDF Page 41 = Journal Page 28] Addendum (continued)

. . . how can we be sure that those Persons . . . well-affected are let into all their Mysteries? . . . who knows whether . . . higher Order of Cabalists . . . who keep the grand secret of all intirely to themselves.

(26) 1737. Archives of G.L. of Sweden. Documents published 1892. Baron Scheffer received in Paris in 1737 two Ecossois Degrees.

Gould, Concise History, p. 379.

(27) 1738-9. The Chevalier Ramsay's Oration. First printed 1739 in Voltaire. Lettres Philosoph.

'Quelque tems après notre Ordre s'unit intimement avec les 'Chevaliers de St. Jean de Jerusalem.'

'Cette union se fit à l'exemple des Israëlites lorsqu'ils 'élevèrent le second Temple. Pendant qu'ils manioient la 'truelle et le mortier d'une main, ils portoient de l'autre 'l'épée et le bouclier.'

'Une loge établie à Kilwin dans l'ouest d'Ecosse.'

'[Notre Ordre] se conserva . . . dans sa splendeur 'parmi les Ecossois.'

(28) 1738. Lettre d'un Sauvage depaysé, par Mr. le Marquis D'Argens. Amsterdam. 1738. (See footnote¹ below.)

'Je ne leur conseillerois pas de s'aviser de vouloir prendre 'la place des Templiers, et je ne crois pas non plus qu'ils y 'pensent.'

The earliest reference to F.M. and the Original K.T. so far traced.

(29) 1740. Scots Masonry at the L. of Antiquity. 1740. 17 June.

9 made Scotch Master Masons at an 'Audit' meeting not a regular Lodge.

A.Q.C. xxv., p. 179.

(30) 1741, etc. The Royal Order of Scotland.

'. . . the documents we have had the privilege to examine . . . In one of the MSS. the Grand Master 'at London sets forth that he had held office since 1741; 'and in July, 1750, there were in London five Royal Order 'Chapters, and one at Deptford.'

D. Murray Lyon, Hist. of L. of Edinburgh, ed. 1900, p. 346.

'The Royal Order of Scotland . . . is . . . senior '. . . in respect to the preservation of records. A 'Grand Lodge . . . London . . . termed Time 'Immemorial . . . two Chapters . . . Another in 'Southwark is dated Dec. 11, 1743 . . . one at Dept-'ford Dec. 20, 1744. These dates were copied by me from 'the oldest minute book extant at Edinburgh.'

W. J. Hughan, Origin of English Rite, ed. 1909, p. 137.

1741. The Society of Modern Masons.

A.Q.C. xxiii., p. 324.

(31) 1741-2. The alleged 'Patent' of Von Hund. (See footnote¹ below.)

Gould, History III., chap. xxiv.; also A.Q.C. xxvi., p. 63.

[PDF Page 42 = Journal Page 29] Addendum (continued)

(32) 1742. Mention of the Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle by 'Le Frère Américain.'

This occurs in the last verse of the second of two 'Chansons' by 'le Frère Ameriqvain' bound up at the end (but not paged with the rest of the work) of Apologie pour l'Ordre des F.M. par Mr N * * * . . . À La Haye . . . Chez Pierre Gosse. mdccxlii.

See ante, p. 11.

(33) 1743. The Masonic Procession at Youghal.

'Fourthly, the Royal Arch carried by two Excellent Masons.'

Chetwode Crawley, Cæm. Hibern. Fasc. I. Faulkner's Dublin Journal. Jan., 1743.

(34) 1743. Art. 20 of Rules and Regulations issued by the G.L. of France 11 Dec., 1743. The G.L. changes its Title to G.L. Anglaise de France.

Art. 20 shows that 'Scots Masters' have 'lately' claimed prerogatives and asserted privileges. These repudiated. To wear no sign of distinction.

Gould, History III., p. 141.

For account of the Privileges claimed see:— Gould, History III., p. 92.

(35) 1744. A Serious and Impartial Enquiry, &c. Dr. F. Dassigny.

(a) The well known passages concerning R.A.

(b) Freemasonry connected with Knts. of Malta and other religious Orders and Societies.

(c) Traders in pretended Masonry. Italians. Italic Order. Political undermeaning to the references.

The whole work is reproduced in Bro. Hughan's Memorials of the Masonic Union. Leicester. 1913.

(36) 1744. Le Parfait Maçon ou les véritables Secrets des quatre Grades d'Apprentis, Compagnons, Maitres ordinaires et Ecossois.

Mentions several Scots Degrees.

'This variation . . . begins to find favour in France.'

(37) 1744. La Franc-Maçonne . . . Bruxelles.

States that Freemasonry possesses Seven Degrees.

(38) 1745. Le Sceau Rompu, ou la Loge Ouverte, &c., à Cosmopolis.

Freemasonry connected with Knightly Orders.

(39) 1745. L'Ordre des Francs-Maçons trahi et Le Secret des Mopses revelé. À Amsterdam.

Footnote refers to a 'vague rumour' concerning 'Les Ecossois.' They conceal it (their own peculiar secret) from even the Masters of Freemasonry.

(40) 1745. The alleged 'Charter' granted by Prince Charles Edward Stuart to a Rose Croix Chapter at Arras.

Gould, History III., 158.

The original Document is not forthcoming and until it is no reliance can be placed in the story.

(41) 1745, circ. The Ancient Stirling Lodge Brasses.

A.Q.C. vi., p. 108, and Hughan, English Rite, p. 78.

Bro. Hughan says 'their date is likely to be somewhere

[PDF Page 43 = Journal Page 30] Addendum (continued)

'about the middle of the eighteenth century.'

The Brasses include references to:—

Redd Cros or Ark—Sepulchere—Knights of Malta—Night Templer—(Rainbow) Arch.

So also do the 'By-Laws of 1745,' of which only a later transcript is extant.

(42) 1746. L. of Industry. Swallwell. Gateshead. July 1st, 1746.

References to Highrodiam, Damaskin, Forin. Also:—

'N.B. The English Masters to pay for entering into the 'said Mastership 2s. 6d. per majority.'

Hughan, O. of E. Rite, p. 139. Gould, History, vol. II., p. 458.

(43) 1746. Scots Masonry at Salisbury and Bath.

"1746. Oct. 19. At this lodge were made Scotts Masons five brethren of the lodge."

F. H. Goldney, Hist. of F.M. in Wilts., p. 101.

"Jan. 8. 1746. Bros. Thomas Naish and John Burge were this day made Scotch Masters, and paid for making 2s. 6d. each."

(Min. of R. Cumberland L., Bath.) Gould, History, vol. II., p. 458.

(44) 1747. Berage. Les Plus Secrets Mystères des Hauts Grades, &c. &c. 1768.

A ritual of seven grades.

The Catalogue of the Worcestershire Masonic Library (ed. by Bros. Taylor and Hughan) cites an edition of the same work in 1747.

**(45) 1747. } ** Catéchisme des Francs-Maçons . . . Leonard Gabanon à 1749. } Jérusalem et Limoges. 1740.

The editions for 1747 and 1749 connect Masonry and the Knightly Orders. The author's real name was Louis Travenol.

(46) 1746-7. James Ray's Compleat History of the Rebellion . . . 1745.

The Congregation of a Nonjuring Chapel said to be 'under 'an Oath not to divulge what is transacted there, except it 'be to a just and lawful Jacobite, as he or she shall appear 'to be upon Examination.'

A.Q.C. xxix., p. 386.

¹ We have seen that in 1738 the Marquis D'Argens had knowledge of rumours of a 'Templar Succession' theory in connection with Freemasonry. This Templar Movement is that which later on (1751) under Von Hund changed its original motif and developed into the Strict Observance. That in its original form the Strict Observance was a Jacobite scheme is practically admitted by Bro. Gould:—

'The persistency with which so many forms of the high grades have been 'ascribed to the political tendencies and conspiracies of the Jacobites, together 'with a comparison of dates and the confessions of Von Hund himself, might 'almost justify us in believing that during his stay in Paris, circa. 1742, he 'was made acquainted with an ill-defined and half-formed scheme of the 'Stuarts for recruiting men and money, their political intentions being 'carefully concealed from him; that this scheme was dropped after the 'crushing defeat of Culloden in 1746: and that, consequently, when Von 'Hund set about reviving the Templars in earnest in 1751, he was left to his 'own devices. This will account for the fact, that although he certainly 'received his first instructions from Lord Kilmarnock and other partizans

[PDF Page 44 = Journal Page 31] Addendum (continued) — Discussion begins

'of the Stuarts, no trace of Jacobite intrigues ever blended with the teachings 'of the Strict Observance.'

Gould, Hist. III., ch. xxiv. A.Q.C. xxvi., p. 63 et seq.

It will be remembered that Von Hund claimed to have been received into 'The Order of the Temple' by an unknown 'Knt. of the Red Plume' in the presence of Lords Kilmarnock and Clifford, and that he was presented to Prince Charles Edward, who was, he thought, Grand Master of the Order. Bro. P. Duchaine supplies some of the missing facts concerning Von Hund's Masonic career. He tells us that Von Hund was initiated at Frankfort, 18th October, 1741, received the Degree of Master at Gand during the Summer of 1742, shortly after received the grade of Ecossois at Brussels, and departed for Paris at the end of the same year. (See La F.M. Belge au XVIII° Siècle, P. Duchaine, 2011, p. 467.)

But the famous 'Sackville Medal' struck at Florence in 1733 by Lorenz Natter with its 'Ab Origine' legend gives reason to suppose that the Templar Movement referred to above dates back at least to 1733. Bro. Gould in his History, Vol. III., p. 300, says:—

'. . . the only Lodge (i.e., in Tuscany) of which we hear supposed to have 'been founded in 1733 by Lord Sackville . . . probably never existed at 'all. Its existence has only been inferred on the authority of a medal by 'Natter dated 1733, which medal is almost certainly a fraud perpetrated at a 'much later date in the interests of the Strict Observance. From this 'suppositions Lodge, however, both the Swedish System and the Strict 'Observance have professed to receive that light denied to England in 1717; 'but whether this legendary transmission inspired the medal, or whether the 'medal gave rise to the legend, I am unable to say. . . .'

Since this was written Bros. Begemann and Chetwode Crawley in A.Q.C., vols. xii. and xiii., have established beyond question the authenticity of the medal and date; indeed, the latter has shown grounds for putting the Florence Lodge back to 1730. (A.Q.C. xiii., p. 149.) Now at this period the Old Pretender and his Court were established at Rome and his exiled adherents were to be found in most of the Italian towns but particularly at Florence and Leghorn, where the British Colony was especially numerous. According to Bro. R. Greeven (The Templar Movement in Masonry. Benares. 1899. p. 29):—

'Templarism especially in its clerical development is saturated with open 'allusions to the Pretenders and to the Jesuits and Florence . . .'

and it may be remembered that 'Florence' is among the Notes added by Chefdebien d'Amand to the Cahier entrusted to him by Savalette-de-Langes. (See A.Q.C. xxx., p. 154.) In his Concise History of 1903 Bro. Gould shows signs of a change of attitude on the subject of Stuart Masonry: at p. 321 he says:—

'The Scots Degrees smoothed the way for the Templar Movement in Masonry, 'called the Strict Observance, and the key to the problem. . . . it is 'contended, may be found in the extent to which the Jesuits moulded the 'Stuart agitation, ending with the rising of 1745-6.'

DISCUSSION

Bro. Gordon Hills, W.M., said:—

Bro. Tuckett has brought before us a most interesting paper, brimful of information and dealing with some of not the least difficult points in Masonic history. We are very much indebted to him for so freely offering the fruits of so much labour and research for our criticism. Bro. Tuckett expressly invites criticism and so I have devoted a good deal of pains in considering the views expressed. I must confess that I agree that the paper calls for criticism, but owing to the many issues which arise, and a somewhat uneven distribution of material for criticism, I have not found it any easy matter to do justice to our Brother's effort. In fact, one cannot attempt to deal exhaustively either with the paper or with one's own views upon all the matter it touches upon.

It seems to me that whilst Bro. Tuckett rather over-burdens some of his points with evidence, others are left to depend very much on surmise, and on some questions his evidence seems rather contradictory in itself, and, after all, criticism, within the bounds at disposal to-night, is apt to come to not much more than preferring one's own form of surmise to Bro. Tuckett's statement.

My own feeling about the interpretation of Article II. of the Union is that it is a very good approximation to the truth. The tacit authority it gives to Chivalric Degrees has been very largely ignored, and hence generalisations to the effect which Bro. Tuckett quotes have been conceived to be orthodox.

Certainly one reason which has led many Brethren to inveigh most strongly against Chivalric Degrees has been a very praiseworthy, but entirely mistaken idea, that loyalty to the Craft involved the renunciation of such bodies, whereas United

[PDF Page 45 = Journal Page 32] Discussion (continued)

Grand Lodge itself has expressly recognised the legitimacy of practising their rites. The position has been very like the story told by President Wilson of Charles Lamb, who said, "I hate that fellow," and when a friend expostulated, "I did not know you knew him," replied, "I don't; I can't hate a man I know." I have heard of stalwart supporters of the Craft, yet revilers of High Degrees, being converted, when they knew what they were talking about by experience, into most zealous supporters of these rites.

Bro. Tuckett nowhere distinctly states in his paper what he includes as "Additional Degrees"; it is an expression which has the authority of Bro. Gould behind it, and he included the Royal Arch under that denomination; whilst Bro. Tuckett, apparently, would also include the Third Degree, classifications neither of which commend themselves to my mind.

Personally, I cannot help thinking that the question of Degrees has been confused and unnecessarily complicated by working backwards in investigation. Our Degrees originated from actual mediæval craft conditions, and it does not matter whether they were conferred on one, two, or three occasions; the number of grades and significance depended on actual operative practices, and I believe we can certainly recognise at least three conditions as a basis, not excluding the possibility of further steps having been in use. That ceremonies and working were at a low ebb at the time of the 1717 Revival, does not necessarily imply that such was the case in mediæval times, when the likelihood leans to the contrary.

I draw a distinction between Bro. Tuckett's views as to the Origin of Additional Degrees and his theory as to the agencies which he considers were instrumental in developing them. I am much in agreement with the former, but the latter seems to me to be a theory of Jacobite interventions, by no means new, and which, although supported by some exceedingly interesting outlines of contemporary Stuart activities, depends in this case rather on assertion than evidence.

I had the subject of the origin of Chivalric Degrees in my mind when I wrote my recent Inaugural Address, entitled "Patron Saints and Masonry," as my hearers may have gathered. My own opinion is that the essentials of these Degrees date back to those mediæval days when it was not so much that "Freemasonry possessed a Store of Legend, Tradition and Symbolism of wide extent" peculiar to itself, as that it could draw upon such sources which were common property, enriched by church, by chivalry and folklore, when such things took the place the available literature of the day now fills. That Freemasonry had particular legends and customs of its own, as had other trades—the Blacksmiths, for example—cannot be doubted. Current legends made very different appeals to different classes and trades, and in so important a Craft as Masonry, having intimate associations with all grades of society, the outlook and possibilities would be far spread. But my own feeling is that, looking at the religious standpoint of the mediæval Craftsman to whom the Regius Poem and originals of the Old Charges applied, and comparing it with the Christian teaching of the Chivalric Degrees, the sum total is only what was the inevitable corollary to such a consideration of the Craft and its legendary associations in those days, and no very deep mysticism nor anything more than the simple faith of the devout Churchman was involved. To imagine that the Craftsmen of those days were content to halt their story at the building of the First or even of the Second Temple is contrary to all reason, but this is what was the effect of the action of the Modern Grand Lodge in 1723. Bro. Gould wrote¹ that it was "by the alteration of the Masons Creed in 1723, there cannot be a doubt" that the seed was sown from which the first of the "additional degrees" ultimately germinated. The result was that the degrees dealing with the Old Testament period were restricted to the implications and conditions of that Dispensation, and thus the Craft Degrees were thrown open for Jewish Brethren and for a very much larger circle, with the happy results we see to-day. Here, to my mind, we see the origin of the development of so-called Chivalric Orders. Some Brethren of those days were not content for themselves with anything less than what seemed to them, as it does to many of us to-day, the only

¹ Concise History, 318.

[Page 46] Discussion — The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

(PDF pages 46–60 correspond to printed journal pages 33–47)

[PDF Page 46 = Journal Page 33] Discussion (continued)

logical outcome of our ritual, and so such ceremonies have been preserved and transmitted to our days. Up to this point, I think I may claim that there is considerable agreement between Bro. Tuckett's and my own surmises, but when he introduces the theory that the root idea in such survivals was a political one, I feel we must part company.

Bro. Tuckett brings forward a mass of evidence to support the British origin of modern Freemasonry, and I do not think that that question will be in doubt by any English student of the Craft. Yet one must not forget that there was the Compannonage in France, and that operatives there had customs and legends, but it was in England, though the Revival of 1717, that the great impetus was given which brought about Freemasonry as we have it on our modern basis.

In this connection expressions used by Bro. Tuckett seem to me very open to objection. He writes a great deal about "Britons" and "British" in regard to our rites. There never has been a British Rite of Freemasonry, the G.L. Rite is an English and not a British one, and the uses of Freemasons in Scotland and Ireland, and probably in different parts of England and Wales, both before and after 1717, differed very considerably. So much so that eventually, for a considerable time prior to the Union of 1813, the Scotch and Irish governing bodies and their subordinate Lodges organised on the lines of the English G.L. of 1717, were in touch with the Grand Lodge of those who claimed to work on the Antient lines and not with the Grand Lodge of England. Thus Bro. Tuckett's third definition is not satisfactory, because, as regards English Freemasonry, usages in Scotland or Ireland, though akin, yet really were as likely to be foreign to our environment as if they had been imported from the other side of the Channel. Because French, American, or English writers represent Freemasonry as of English origin, that does not rule out the possibility of so-called Scotch or Irish Degrees having been of Scotch or Irish origin.

We are told by Bro. Gould that the "Old Scottish Mason word" which was imparted as the main part of a very meagre ceremony at the close of the sixteenth century is unknown. I think this is a mistake. Bearing this in mind in our present connection, I do not think it requires much research to gather what was the inducement to become a Scots Master; surely the knowledge to be gained in Royal Arch, Scots, Irish Masters Lodges and in the unexplained English Masters Lodges of early date was very similar, and the pretensions of Scots Masters were not without some foundation.

We know that an abortive effort was made, in which the Duke of Wharton was concerned, to bring Jacobite politics into touch with Freemasonry, and at the close of the period selected by our Brother there seem to be attempts to connect so-called Scotch Masonry on the Continent with the Jacobite Cause. I do not see, however, that it is any evidence of political activities connected with the Craft, even if we admit that the Masons who introduced the English usages in France were many of them adherents of the Stuart Cause. It is most probable that it would be partisans of that party, rather than those of other politics, who would most frequent that country, and have friends there amongst whom they would introduce what they had joined in England merely because it was a popular and fashionable society for certain classes to join. There was not necessarily any political motive, and all the tendency of the Craft regulations was opposed to any introduction of politics.

I feel some doubt about the relevance of the reference to the Templars and Freemasons by the Marquis D'Argens in 1738, but, as Bro. Tuckett admits, it does not refer to England, and, to my mind, only suggests a point on which the Continental Templar theories differ from the English legend.

I cannot see how the antagonistic positions of the Roman Church and Jacobite Cause can be harmonised in the easy manner which commends itself as plausible to Bro. Tuckett. M. Simonnet's own views about Freemasonry clearly represent the official view of the Papal authorities, but, nevertheless, at these earlier periods it is certain that Roman Catholics were no more deterred from joining the Craft in France than they were in Great Britain; all the same, one

[PDF Page 47 = Journal Page 34] Discussion (continued)

cannot wonder that the later extravagancies of Continental pseudo-Masonry did nothing to allay suspicion, but only further aroused the opposition of that Church.

Bro. Tuckett refers to Professor Hayter-Lewis and Professor Marks' Story of Hiram Abiff as proving the antiquity of that legend. Personally, I think there are other and sound reasons for placing this amongst the store of mediæval Craft lore, but as regards this particular reference, I am afraid the support is nil. A question by the former recalled to the memory of Prof. Marks, who was not a Mason, that he had met with in some ancient Arabic MS., which he could not then identify, the record of a sign or password which he believed he had read, "We have found our Lord Hiram." Bro. Yarker, who was certainly not likely to take a commonplace view in such a case, in a note contributed to our Transactions (V. 228), pointed out that the sentence, "We have found in our Lord (Allah) Cherim" (or Kerem), that is 'rest,' is a form of salutation amongst Mahomedans to the present day, and commented: "I, myself, entertain no doubt that it was this phrase which Professor Marks saw, and, being a non-Mason, misinterpreted," which, I think, disposes of that particular evidence.

One of the puzzling features of this period is the Royal Order of Scotland, claiming that country as its place of origin, and yet, as our Scotch historians point out, first heard of as a thriving body in England. It is, perhaps, on the basis of the constitution of this body—"that the King of Scotland is hereditary and perpetual Grand Master" of the Order,—that the antagonistic statements about the Craft membership of the Stuart Royal Family are to be explained. Its present ritual seems to me to contain verbiage which may well date back through various stages to the time of the Regius MS., and it contains elements of most of the Chivalric and supplementary degrees. It is such a 'Rosy-Cross' as we find as part of this Rite which, as I believe Bro. Tuckett rightly claims, was confused with Continental Rosicrucian activities.

I do not agree with Bro. Tuckett's political application of Dr. Dassigny's reference to Masonic charlatanism, and the idea that those conferring the Scots Degrees in England were at all necessarily political agents. The attempt to give a Masonic colour to the reference to the Non-juring Congregation seems too far-fetched, and, in fact, as I said before, I cannot quite follow Bro. Tuckett's reasoning on these points, but look forward and hope that further research may bring us assurance one way or another in what are still such obscure and debatable matters.

Bro. W. J. Songhurst said:—

The quotation from the Articles of Union with which Bro. Tuckett opens his paper raises at once the very important question of the differences in practice between the Antients and the Moderns, one of which was almost certainly the recognition or non-recognition of the Royal Arch. So late as November, 1792, the Grand Lodge of the Moderns resolved, "That this Lodge do agree with its Committee, that the Grand Lodge of England has nothing to do with the Proceedings of the Society of Royal Arch Masons," while letters from the Secretaries of that Grand Lodge dating back to 1759¹ show distinctly that whatever its members might do in a personal capacity, officially they knew nothing of the degree.

The Antients, on the contrary, considered the Royal Arch to be the "Root, Heart, and Marrow of Free-Masonry,"² and so it is not to be wondered at that at the Union of the two Grand Lodges in 1813, which was in effect "an unequivocal surrender on the part of the Moderns,"³ the Antients should have succeeded in retaining that which they prized so highly.

With the knowledge that (a) the Royal Arch was known to and worked by the Antients in 1756, and inferentially from their establishment as a governing body in 1751; and (b) that the Antients derived their work from the Grand

¹ Spencer wrote in that year, "Our Society is neither Arch. Royal Arch, or Antient." ² Laurence Dermott, in Ahiman Rezon, 1756, p. 47. ³ A.Q.C. xxviii., 145.

[PDF Page 48 = Journal Page 35] Discussion (continued)

Lodge of Ireland, founded in or before 1725; and with the belief that (c) the Grand Lodge of Ireland derived its work from the premier Grand Lodge in London; we seem to have a chain of evidence tending to show that this premier Grand Lodge of 1717 had at its inception some knowledge which was subsequently lost, at all events, in its Lodges generally. Bro. Tuckett has gone still farther and has given references to what he considers may indicate a knowledge even in pre-Grand Lodge days of something beyond what we now term the Craft degrees, and these references are worthy of very careful consideration, even though the relevance of all may not at first sight be quite apparent.

It is perhaps worth while speculating upon the probable practices of the Operative Masons from which it is generally considered our present-day work has been derived. A youth desirous of learning the Art or Mystery of building construction would be apprenticed to a Master Mason, and would enter into an engagement to behave during his apprenticeship in a proper manner, and to keep his Master's trade secrets. This act of apprenticeship would constitute what we should now term a degree. At the end of the seven years for which he was bound, or at the age of 21 years, the deed of apprenticeship would be returned to him, and having then presumably learned all his Master had to teach, he would be capable of taking a contract and of supervising work himself. Some formality might have to be observed on the return to him of his Articles, constituting what we should call a second degree, but it seems highly improbable that any additional instruction was needed in order that the ex-apprentice might practice his trade. It is, however, quite possible that though free from his Articles he was not free of the Guild, and that some further step was necessary in this direction before he could legally follow his calling as a Master Mason. If this theory be accepted we should thus have two formal 'degrees' of admission to, and freedom from, apprenticeship, and a third which might perchance be based upon some traditional history, as there were no further trade secrets to be communicated. Or as an alternative we might perhaps assume that a third degree was merely derived from some ceremony practised amongst the workmen themselves by which the new member had to 'pay his footing.' In neither case, however, does there appear to be any necessity for the traditional history to contain any reference to a loss or a recovery; and it is therefore necessary to examine very carefully the evidence put before us by Bro. Tuckett, which to him seems to indicate that in pre-Grand Lodge days something was known in connexion with Masonry very suggestive of what we call the Royal Arch. I note, however, that Bro. Tuckett is of opinion that "Everything points to an extreme simplicity of ceremonial in the early days of Freemasonry before the advent of Grand Lodge," and so he may perhaps accept the theory that I have just propounded.

Perhaps one of the most interesting of Bro. Tuckett's references is to the Muse's Threnodie, which proves that what was called 'The Mason Word' was known to exist so early as 1638, but I do not think it shows anything more, in spite of the fact that the term is used by the writer in such association as to suggest mystery and power. Although this is the earliest known mention of 'the Mason Word' it is not the only one, and I think it should be considered in conjunction with others, two of which are given in A.Q.C. vii., 55, 56. The first of these appears in a letter presumed to have been written in 1678 or possibly 1697. The writer says:—

The Lairds of Roslin have been great architects and patrons of building for these many generations. They are obliged to receive the Mason's word which is a secret signall masons have thro' out the world to know one another by. They alledge 'tis as old as since Babel when they could not understand one another and they conversed by signs. Others would have it no older than Solomon. However it is, he that hath it will bring his brother mason to him without calling to him or your perceiveing of the signe.

The other occurs in a document said to have been written in 1791 though only a

[PDF Page 49 = Journal Page 36] Discussion (continued)

print of 1815 is known. The writer says he has "found fyve Curiosities in Scotland" of which No. 2 is:—

The Mason word, which tho' some make a Misterie of it, I will not conceal a little of what I know. It is lyke a Rabbinical Tradition, in way of Comment on Jachin and Boaz, the two Pillars erected in Solomon's Temple (i Kings, 7, 21) with ane Addition delyvered from Hand to Hand, by which they know and become familiar one with another.

We find another mention of the term in a document drawn up in 1715 in connexion with a dispute between the Masters and Journeymen of Mary's Chapel, Edinburgh,¹ but in this instance no information is given to enable us even to guess what the 'Word' was, the principal point between the disputants being apparently the collection of fees when the 'Word' was communicated.

We may also note the reference in The Scots Magazine for 1755, which, however, does not seem to help Bro. Tuckett's argument, and, in fact, there appears to be so much confusion about the 'Word' and its use, that it can hardly be put forward in support of any particular theory. It will have been noticed, however, that all these references come from Scotland.

The appearance of interlaced triangles even in conjunction with the square and compasses seems to me rather remote from the subject, as we find this symbol as a Mason's Mark, as well as a religious emblem, in many parts of the world and at very different periods. I should not expect to see it definitely associated with the Royal Arch until well into the second half of the eighteenth century.

The MS. in the Molyneux papers does not appear to help in any way. Its date though put down as 1711 is really very uncertain, and the mark with which it is headed is more likely to be a Christian symbol than anything connected with the R.A. The print in The Arcane Schools is a very poor attempt at reproduction and does not represent its proper form.

The reference to "Freemasonized the new way," in the Dublin Tripos of 1688, is, I think, too vague to help us, though it seems to indicate that something unusual was then being brought in. It is, however, more than likely that "the new way" merely refers to the ridiculous "Society of Freemasons" which the writer declared had recently been introduced at the University.

With regard to the terms Rosicrucian, Rosy Cross, Red Cross, Rose Croix, etc., I am sure that even in the present day there are many Masons who are unable to understand the distinctions which their use conveys to those who are acquainted with particular bodies to which they refer, and I see nothing remarkable in the fact that Chambers, in his Cyclopædia, should say that "certain Freemasons" possessed the characteristics of Rosicrucians. Bro. Tuckett points out that in all probability Chambers had friends who were Freemasons, and possibly it is these of whom he wrote. He was cautious in not giving an opinion about the Order generally. He could only describe those with whom he was actually acquainted as being in possession of some mysterious knowledge which seemed to him akin to that of the earlier Rosicrucians.

I must confess that I pay very little heed to the Oration said to have been delivered by the Chevalier Ramsay, though Bro. Tuckett is to be congratulated on having traced it in print in 1739. I see in it only an attempt, in which Ramsay was preceded by Swift and Anderson, and followed by many writers as irresponsible as himself, to show a likeness if not a connexion between Masonry and the old Orders of Chivalry; and in one particular reference I regard him more as a student of the Bible than as one who sought to indicate any special phase of Masonic ritual or ceremonial of his day.

So, too, I should hesitate to place much reliance upon the statements of Dassigny. The information furnished by Bro. Crawley² in regard to his character

¹ Murray Lyon, History of Lodge of Edinburgh, 1873, p. 141. References to the communication of the 'Word' in other Scottish Lodges will be found on pp. 22-3 of that work. ² Cæmentaria Hibernica, fas. ii. Three generations of the D'Assigny family, p. 7.

[PDF Page 50 = Journal Page 37] Discussion (continued)

and career does not tend to inspire confidence in his writings. The most that can be said with certainty is that the term 'Royal Arch' was known to him, and that in Dublin it meant something apart from or in addition to the ordinary Craft degrees of the time.

Anderson's mention of a "well built arch" in 1723, and similar references to "an Arch" in Catechisms of 1723 and 1724 are vague and contradictory, and while they may have been inserted with the object of drawing attention to a particular portion of work then known and practised, they may equally be only casual references to a detail in Architectural construction. The Antients in 1752 expelled a member who had declared that "the Rainbow was the Royal Arch."

Stukeley's "Order of the Book" is in my opinion entirely unconnected with the question. During the period of Bro. Tuckett's investigation hundreds if not thousands of Clubs, Orders and Societies were formed, some of a purely social character, some with a scientific basis, real or assumed, some undoubtedly political, and some even distinctly revolutionary. The "Order of the Book" is only one of many such organizations, and I do not see that it had any Masonic connexion nor that it can form the basis of any Masonic argument. For such a purpose it seems to range with Byrom's Shorthand Society to which members were admitted ceremonially, and whose principal officer was known as the Grand Master.

I have not attempted to criticize all the pieces of evidence that Bro. Tuckett has put forward in support of his views, but in spite of the fact that I have expressed disagreement with him in regard to many of them, I am most thoroughly in accord with his opinion that something very suggestive of what we now call the Royal Arch was known to Masons in the early years of Grand Lodge.

As evidence in support of this view I should, however, be disposed to include references to 'Masters Lodges' and to 'Scots Lodges,' and with this Bro. Tuckett would certainly not agree, his idea, on the contrary, being to connect the latter with the 'Ecossois' degree.

In 1888 Bro. Gould suggested¹ that the degree of 'Scots Mason' was introduced from Scotland by Anderson. I have found nothing to justify a statement that Anderson at any time interfered with Ritual. It is not known that he was even a Mason when he came to London in or before 1710. He himself only states that he was ordered to 'digest' the Old Charges or MS. Constitutions. He is not recorded as attending Grand Lodge between 1723 and 1730, and in fact his attendances there were mainly concerned with the publication of the two Editions of the Book of Constitutions, which were his personal property. So far, then, as we are aware his interest in Freemasonry was entirely of a financial character. But while I cannot see any reason for the suggestion that the 'Scots Masons' Lodges owed their existence or name to any influence of Anderson, I would point out that Desaguliers visited the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1721, and I suggest that this visit should be viewed in conjunction with the letter of Verus Commodus of 1725, the 'Scots Masons' of 1733, etc., and the letter to the Duke of Richmond of 1734.

I do not see that there is the very slightest reason for accepting the theory that these 'Scots Masons' as such were working for the Stuart cause. Referring to the records of meetings in Wiltshire and Somerset in 1746, Bro. Tuckett says, "It is clear that a Jacobite Masonic agent was touring the west of England." That someone was on tour is quite possible, but the Jacobite influence is not apparent. The only evidence of such an influence appears to be in the name 'Scots,' but to me this is evidence in the opposite direction. I can quite conceive the possibility that some members of some Lodges were Jacobites, but it is surely in the highest degree improbable that they would brand themselves as such, or permit themselves to be called 'Scots Masons' if that term meant what Bro. Tuckett suggests; and I cannot look upon it as at all likely that a "Jacobite Masonic agent" would openly tour the country and make known in the Lodges that he had admitted certain named members to a degree limited to adherents of

¹ A.Q.C. i., 177.

[PDF Page 51 = Journal Page 38] Discussion (continued)

the Stuart cause. Surely if they had been Jacobites they would have sought to work in secret and avoid all suspicion of disloyalty to the reigning House. It seems to me that the very fact that the Lodge Minutes record these men as 'Scots masons' effectually shows that there was no Jacobite influence at work in connexion with the degree.

On the question of the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church towards Masonry, I do not feel able to speak so confidently, but it occurs to me as highly improbable that Roman Catholics would openly and deliberately put forward and exploit—even in support of the Stuart cause—degrees said to be connected with an order which the heads of their Church had so thoroughly condemned. That the Papal Bull of 1738 utterly failed to operate in all places in which it was not officially promulgated is well known, but in Rome it almost certainly had the effect of suppressing the so-called Jacobite Lodge which had been established there, and yet Bro. Tuckett contends, perhaps not without reason, that the Romish Church looked to the Stuart restoration as a means towards regaining its own temporal power in Great Britain. I confess I am quite unable to understand the motives which at any time actuated the Romish Church either for or against Freemasonry, and can only say that—openly, at least—its opposition has been as consistent as it has been persistent, and in this country, at all events, without any effect.

The question, however, still remains—how could Freemasonry be expected to exercise any influence either for or against the Stuart cause? Bro. Tuckett puts it that, "To the master minds of the Jacobite movement the institution of Freemasonry would seem to possess points of very considerable interest and very possible importance and utility." I am more inclined to support the view of Bro. Speth, who wrote in 1894 of Freemasonry in England¹

that in the early years from and before 1717 its aim was simply none at all, at least not consciously so, that the Lodges were partly convivial societies, the remnants and survivals of ancient trade societies, of which nothing more than the conviviality remained, with a certain amount of mystic ceremonies which had been handed down. Men of education joined the Lodges on account of the ceremonies and mystery in the first instance, and frequented them probably afterwards because they found themselves comfortable there, and it was a new experience to mix on such intimate terms with a class of men to whose society they were not accustomed. In order to continue this comfortably, it was necessary to proscribe religious and political conversation, as precisely at this time politics and religion were dangerous topics to moot, and thus a base was formed from which our present ideas evolved quite naturally.

If this view be correct, and I believe it is, I again ask—How could Freemasonry be expected to exercise any influence either for or against the Stuart cause? In my opinion, Bro. Tuckett has not put forward any evidence whatever which can be accepted as supporting the theory.

I keep an open mind with regard to the place of origin of the 'Ecossois' degrees, as I feel that the evidence at present before us is scanty and contradictory. As I have already indicated, I cannot agree that the "Scotch Mason's Lodge" at the Devil Tavern² was in any way connected with them. Barbier (1737) seems dead against a British origin, and I think his mention of 'Chevaliers,' 'Chevalerie,' etc., shows that, even if he had no personal knowledge of the matter, he gave the information as it was given to him by someone who did know. And if there is even a possibility that these 'Ecossois' degrees had their origin on the

¹ A.Q.C. vii., 173; quoted in part in A.Q.C. xxiv., 237. ² Bro. Tuckett seems to make a point of this Lodge having been "erased, i.e. struck out in ink, from the list." I do not think any argument can be based upon this. I believe it will be found that Bro. Lane took his information from the Official Copies of the Lists preserved at Freemasons' Hall. These official copies were specially prepared, with spaces for noting attendances of representatives, etc., and when a Lodge was removed for any reason it would be natural for the Secretary of Grand Lodge to put his pen through the entry.

[PDF Page 52 = Journal Page 39] Discussion (continued)

Continent, I see no reason for assuming that those who formed them were necessarily British Masons living there. Most of the books from which Bro. Tuckett has quoted simply express the view that Freemasonry originated in England, and this view will be generally accepted. There are scarcely any references which can be taken definitely as having any bearing upon the origin of 'high degrees,' and one in particular (Apologie pour l'Ordre) may perhaps be noted as an example of the manner in which such references can be viewed from different standpoints. Bro. Tuckett mentions that "le frère Americain" was not a Frenchman, and that the Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle is mentioned in one of his songs. Now in the first place, so far as I can see, a Degree is not mentioned in the quotation, but only a title Chevalier de l'Aigle, and in the second place L'Americain appears to have been the name of a French family, for I have a Masonic Certificate of 1774 which is signed by, amongst others, a certain Lamarque L'Americain as Registrar of the Chambre des Provinces under the Grand Orient. I do not for a moment wish to imply that Bro. Tuckett is necessarily wrong in his deduction, and perhaps the point might be cleared up by a closer examination of the other contents of the book from which the quotation is taken.

I do not attach much importance to the statement in 1813 that "pure antient Masonry" was to be considered as consisting of certain degrees "and no more," the idea being, as I take it, merely to put a limit upon degrees which were to receive the official sanction of the new United Grand Lodge. The inclusion of the Royal Arch appears to me quite reasonable, as it was evidently admitted to be an essential portion of the Third Degree. It was fully realized that "degrees of the Orders of Chivalry" were in existence, and their working was not prohibited. It is quite possible that official recognition was withheld because membership required a Christian belief, while "pure Antient Masonry" was looked upon as non-sectarian. This particular point may perhaps affect Bro. Tuckett's argument in regard to degrees such as the Rose Croix and Royal Order of Scotland, as to whose origin we have so little definite information.

To sum up:—Bro. Tuckett has based his arguments upon the assumption, "That before 1717 Freemasonry possessed a Store of Legend, Tradition and Symbolism of wide extent." I see nothing to support this view, and, on the contrary, I consider that the knowledge consisted merely in simple forms of recognition. That substantially what in the present day is known as the Royal Arch was included in such means of recognition is to my mind extremely probable. I feel, however, very doubtful whether presumed knowledge in Scotland in 1638 can be taken as evidence of the same knowledge in London in 1717. The position of so-called Scotch degrees at a later date (1756-7) is made clear by the official correspondence between the Grand Lodge of Holland and Dr. Manningham, D.G.M., in London.¹

Bro. Tuckett will find the following in the Free-Masons accusation and defence, London, 1726, p. 34:—

As for your story of the Universality of Masonry, it's all a Juggle. You have been deceived to the last degree. I have been in France, Spain, and Italy, yet never heard a word of this stuff before. You would be laughed to scorn in any of those Countries, to mention any Thing so compleatly ridiculous.

This, for what it is worth, indicates an English, or British, origin for Freemasonry, a view which, I think, is generally accepted. That the same can be said for the so-called high degrees is perhaps not so evident. At all events, I am unable to accept the suggestion that they were derived from a store of tradition in hand before 1717, for I see no evidence that such a store existed,—a store, that is to say, which was exclusively in the hands of Freemasons and not obtainable from Biblical and other well-known sources.

¹ A.Q.C. v., 108-110.

[PDF Page 53 = Journal Page 40] Discussion (continued)

Bro. Edward Armitage said:—

Bro. Tuckett has set himself no light task to establish his threefold theory, but toujours l'audace has evidently been his motto, and we are the gainers in a most interesting paper. Pt. III. would seem to be proved conclusively, and it is most useful to have the volume of evidence so handy for reference. As to Pt. I., I think, too, there may be general agreement, though up to the present no one has succeeded in identifying that portion of the Store of Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism which has contributed so markedly to the M.M. Degree. Pt. II. is the crux! I think Bro. Tuckett has made out a case which falls little short of proof that the Additional Degrees were founded by Britons, but I should prefer to call them English Masons.

Many of them were Scotchmen, some perhaps Irishmen, but we are dealing here with Masonry, and whether Scotchmen or Irishmen, it was as English Masons that they founded the Additional Degrees. The system of three Craft Degrees of E.A., F.C., and M.M. was first developed under the Grand Lodge of England, and the Additional Degrees were additional to these three.

True, we have them called Irish Masonry or Scots Masonry, but what other name would sound so attractive? Freemasonry had no history as such abroad, so that French, German, Dutch, etc., would have had no meaning, while English was barred as dealing only with the Craft Degrees. In Ireland, Freemasonry had a history, and in Scotland the Craft was widely spread and a power in the land. "Scots" was a most appropriate word, for Scotland was the home of Operative Masonry: our names of E.A., F.C., and M.M. were derived from Scotland, while in thirteen years of the early days of the Grand Lodge of England no less than six of the Grand Masters bore Scottish titles. The Royal Order of Scotland first found its home in England. Later, of course, we have the further development of the Ecossais degrees in France. No connection, however, so far as I know, has been shown between Scots Masonry and Scotland; and the men who founded these Additional Degrees were Masons holding under the Grand Lodge of England.

I am quite at one with Bro. Tuckett in including the R.A. in Pt. I. of his theory, for I cannot find any trace of a connection at any time between the R.A. and Irish or Scots Masonry, while the passage quoted by Bro. Tuckett from Dassigny's Serious and Impartial Enquiry, 1744, would point to the same conclusion. I have always thought the the Introduction to "Long Livers" by Samber smacked of the tenets of the Rosicrucians, and should be inclined to say the same of the "Masonic Formulæ," but in any case it would tend to show that the question of Additional Degrees was in the air.

Scots Masonry was a good name to conjure with, and Bro. Tuckett writes as an enthusiast of its supposed Jacobite connection. So best could he bring home to us what it meant if his theory were true. I do not for one moment believe that the Scots Masons were confined exclusively to Jacobites, for this would make them marked men; but I do hazard the opinion that any additional information gained will serve to strengthen the connection between Scots Masonry and the Jacobite cause.

Bro. Tuckett's earliest instance of Scots Masons being made in a Lodge is 1746, but, fortunately, the researches of Bro. Dr. Geo. Norman, P.A.G.D.C., on "The Masonic Lodges of Bath" (Transactions of the Somerset Masters Lodge, 1917), carry this back eleven years to 1735, i.e., during the existence of the Scots Masons Lodge held at the Devil Tavern in London. Bath was then at the height of its prosperity, and set the fashion even to London. The Lodge meeting at the Bear Inn, No. 113, was constituted 18th May, 1733, but the first Minute Book commences 28th December, 1732, and it has been suggested by Bro. Songhurst that it was really one with the Lodge No. 28 which was erased in 1736 (Quat. Cor. Antiq., vol. x., p. 225, note). To quote from the Minute Book:—

On Oct. 28th 1735 The Lodge met Extraordinary when our Worthy Brother Dr. Kinneir was admitted and made a Mason. Hugh Kennedy Mastr. P. Tempr. · Jacob Skinner Mastr. and S. Ward. P.T. St. John Smith J.W.P.Tempr.

[PDF Page 54 = Journal Page 41] Discussion (continued)

Masters Present. Johnson Robinson Senr. Wardn., James Vaughan, Richard Ford, John Morris.

Fellow Crafts. Luke Gervis, John Wiltshire, John Anstey, Richd. Carr, John Donne.

Visitants Present. The Right Honble. Lord Visct. Vane, Henry Balfour Esq., William Nisbett Esq., David Threipland Esq. Mr. Davidson, Isaac Thuret, James Leake, Doctr. Toy, Doctr. Theobald, Edward Pembridge.

Our Worthy Brothers Henry Balfour Esq. William Nisbett Esq. and Doctr. Theobald Pass'd Masters.

On the same date Lodge of Masters met Extraordinary and our following Worthy Broths were made and admitted Scots Mastr. Masons. Jacob Skinner Master, Johnson Robinson S.Wardn., Thos. Bragg J.W., John Morris, Richd. Ford, James Vaughan, Wm. Nisbett Esq. Henry Balfour Esq. Doctr. Toy, Edward Pembridge.

Present. Hugh Kennedy S.M., David Threipland S.S.W., David Dappe S.J.W.

Of these three Hugh Kennedy alone belonged to the Lodge of which he was Master when the Minutes commence, December, 1732, and when the Lodge was constituted into a regular Lodge May 18th, 1733, going out of Office on 27th December, 1733. I find David Threipland's name as a Member of the Lodge meeting at the Bear and Harrow in the Butcher Row in 1730.

Of those who took the degree the last four were not members of the Lodge; Doctr. Toy was D.M. of Wales, while Wm. Nisbett Esq. and Henry Balfour Esq. had the degree of Master conferred on them that day apparently to enable them to proceed to the Degree of Scots Master.

At the next meeting of the Lodge, November 17th, 1735, Hugh Kennedy, John Morris, R. Ford and David Threipland have the letters S.M. after their names.

It may be of interest to note that Charles de Labelye, first Master of the Lodge constituted in Madrid on 15th February, 1728, by the Duke of Wharton, was a valued member of the Lodge in Bath and warmly thanked for his services to the Lodge on 18th May, 1733 (his private Occasions requiring his presence in London for a considerable time). He was apparently in 1723 a member of the Lodge meeting at Solomon's Temple, Hemming Row (a French Lodge), and in 1750 of the Lodge meeting at the White Bear in King St., Golden Square (Quat. Cor. Antiq., vol. x.).

I extract still another instance from Records of Lodge of Antiquity, edited by W. H. Rylands, 1911, p. 105, under date 17th June, 1740:—

The following Members of this Lodge were this evening made Scotch Master Masons by Bro. [David] Humphry's of the Mourn'ng Bush Aldersgte

Bro. [John] Howes Mastr. Bro. [Thomas] Crisp Warden Senr. Bro. [Blunt] Rogers Bro. [Thomas] Hughes Bro. [Gera] Strong Bro. [William] Rand Bro. [Edward] Chapman Secy. Bro. [William] Freeman Bro. [William] Bird

It may be that Bro. Tuckett will be able to strengthen his case by finding known supporters of the Jacobite cause among the above names.

Put the following side by side:—

[PDF Page 55 = Journal Page 42] Discussion (continued)

Samber in 1723 describes a Freemasons' dinner as follows:—

However to do them justice I must own there was no mention made of politics or religion . . . and when the music began to play "Let the King enjoy his own again" they were immediately reprimanded by a person of great gravity and science. (Ebrietatis Encomium, 1723.)

The Lodge in Paris in 1725 was founded by adherents of the Jacobite cause. Lord Derwentwater (Charles Radcliffe) was Grand Master in Paris in 1736. Baron Scheffer received two Ecossois degrees in Paris in 1737, became a friend of Charles Radcliffe, from whom he received a 'Deputation' to constitute Symbolic Lodges in Sweden.

The letter from Jachin in 1737, which Bro. Tuckett quotes, might well show a disgruntled Mason who couldn't get or wouldn't ask for admission into some form of Masonry with Jacobite tendencies.

Bro. Yarker has a note (A.Q.C., vol. i., p. 150), "The standard of the Pretender James III., according to an old contemporary history of the rebellion of 1715, was as follows:—Of green silk with buff fringe, the device a pelican feeding her young. Motto, Tantum valet Amor Regis et Patriae."

Are these various items all coincidences? I think not.

Bro. Sydney T. Klein writes as follows:—

Bro. Tuckett has succeeded in giving us, not only an interesting paper, but one that will be a valuable contribution to our Transactions, owing to the great number of references collected by him from a wide range of sources. He has attacked a problem which has not hitherto been adequately dealt with, and which will probably require a good deal of further spade work to unravel.

On one point I think we must all agree, namely, that at the Revival in 1717 Masonry did comprise much more of Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism than was embodied in the three degrees authorized by the newly-instituted Grand Lodge.

Those who have passed the Chair of a Mark Mason's Lodge must surely have realized that they were taking part in a ceremony, the central feature of which could only have come through from very old operative times. This feeling was very strongly borne in upon me when investigating Masons' marks in the various old buildings to be found in Spain, the result of which I hope to lay before the Lodge at an early date. It must have been a wonderful experience in the life of every Operative Mason when he was first entrusted with a distinguishing mark of his own, by which henceforth his work would be recognized. When one examines the beautifully-designed and deep-cut marks of the true Gothic period, say circa A.D. 1150-1350, and compares them with the careless and roughly-executed marks, many of them mere scratches, of later periods, one realizes the conscientious work of those days and the pride with which those old Masons must have placed their marks on the work of their hands. One can picture them finally standing, as we do now, in wonderment at the marvellous beauty of the completed building which their own work had accomplished. It is in the use of Symbolism attached to such a Craft that Masonry appeals to everything that is best in humanity, by bringing home to us the great truth that by earnest and conscientious work in our daily life we can attain to a building, not made with hands, eternal in that heaven which is in the heart of every true Mason.

There is also much in the Ceremonies and Ritual of the different Degrees and Orders of Chivalry which points to their origin also having been derived from traditions handed down from the same period when Gothic architecture was at its zenith. The Knight Templars rose and fell with that wonderful development of Architecture, and Chivalry itself had its rise in those two centuries through the marvellous enthusiasm roused throughout Christendom by the Crusades.

[PDF Page 56 = Journal Page 43] Discussion (continued)

It is quite unaccountable why Grand Lodge in 1717 ignored the Royal Arch Degree, because, as I have already pointed out in my paper on Magister Mathesios (A.Q.C., vol. xxiii.), its symbol, the Equilateral triangle, came through from Gothic times, in conjunction with the Operative symbol, the Mason's Square, as may be seen on many old Brasses and illustrations, where two pillars are so often seen surmounted by these two symbols; and the combination of the Square and Compasses have the same significance. Indeed, the very name Royal Arch was derived from the true Gothic Arch, which, formed by the Vesica piscis, contained the equilateral triangle, the symbol of the Logos of St. John's Gospel, namely, that which was lost with the decay of true Gothic art.

Bro. Cecil Powell said:—

We are much indebted to Bro. Tuckett for this paper and the great trouble involved in its preparation. In it he has made some bold suggestions and attacked opinions that have been generally accepted. Whether we accept his theories, or not, as feasible, we have at least been led to a new point of view as regards the second of the Articles of Union. That Article has been usually taken as an axiom that was not to be questioned. Bro. Tuckett treats it as merely a more or less arbitrary statement of the opinion of those concerned in 1813, and, on consideration, I think we are bound to agree with him in this respect.

Bro. Tuckett maintains, and gives many contemporary references, that there were the germs of Masonic Chivalry existing as far back as, and indeed before, 1717, and that they were widely dispersed in Great Britain. He suggests the legend which was adopted by the Grand Lodge was selected from many then obtaining, and that it owes its importance to the powerful support it thus received. The Royal Arch, he likewise considers, was then existing in a similar form, and its remarkable popularity among the Antients being so soon apparent, points to an early knowledge of its idea. I cannot help thinking, as is implied in the paper, that there must have been an insistent demand in the minds of the Brethren for a more satisfactory completion to the legend than was afforded by the Third Degree, something to make up for a loss. The Royal Arch thus quickly became a valuable weapon in the hands of the Antients. Thus we have an instance of a whole "Modern" Lodge in Bristol (in 1768) transferring its allegiance to the rival jurisdiction because the Grand Secretary of the day had forbidden them to continue to practise the degree,—as they had done irregularly.

If we accept the theory that the Jacobites used, or intended to use, the Chivalric Degrees for furthering their political objects, it is conceivable that the Hanoverians in the "Modern" Grand Lodge for this reason resolutely set themselves against any extension of Masonry beyond the limits of the three "established" degrees. It would then be impossible for any secret propagandist agency to exist in some additional rites to which only selected persons would be admitted. The decision thus come to in the early days of the Grand Lodge of 1717 may easily have afterwards been accepted as a cherished tradition. This may then account for the reluctance of the "Moderns" to recognize the Royal Arch, and for the extraordinary arrangements made when the Grand Chapter was formed in 1767. The spirit of the old idea was evidently intended to be kept, although the members of the Modern Grand Lodge, in another capacity, were compelled by the force of circumstances to break it in practice, and its principal officers took part in the affairs of the Grand Chapter.

It is extraordinary that so little was done in this country in the Chivalric Orders until some thirty or forty years after the references Bro. Tuckett mentions were made. Probably this was due to a feeling of obedience to the decrees of the Masonic authorities. I cannot think that when those Additional Degrees were practised, probably about 1780, and rather before that time, they did not include many things imported from the Continent, and some which arose from the lively imagination of our French Brethren.

[PDF Page 57 = Journal Page 44] Discussion (continued)

Bro. Henry Lovegrove writes:—

I have perused this paper with a great deal of pleasure, and congratulate Bro. Tuckett on the way he has collected and marshalled his facts.

My chief object has been to try to find out the real facts as to the origin of the various Orders and Degrees outside Craft Masonry.

I think that it is pretty clear that the Royal Arch was made up of some legends and tradition not fully exemplified in the ritual of the three degrees, and I am of opinion that the ritual of the Royal Order of Scotland is very much on the lines of a very ancient ritual and may have been extended and improved when the three degree rituals were fixed up.

The connection between the Knights Templar of old and the modern seems vague and lacking proof, while the regalia is so cumbersome that it is surprising that so many take it up and continue to work it.

It would, I think, be difficult to prove an absolute connection between the Red Cross of Constantine and the Order founded in A.D. 315; the opinion of many, forty years since, was that the ritual was written and the Order pushed by the late Bro. Wentworth Little.

Bro. Tuckett's careful notes as to the Rose Croix or Scottish Rite are much to the point, but the origin is not fully explained and probably cannot be, and if we study the ritual of the various degrees there seems no system, no co-ordination. In the degrees from the third to the eighteenth many subjects are dealt with, and in the latter we are treated to a beautiful arrangement of words entirely Christian. When the degrees thirtieth and above are reached Christianity does not figure largely, and I am hoping that abler brethren than myself will be able to explain what is really the drift of the degrees of this Order taken as a whole.

The paper is a valuable addition to the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati.

Bro. W. B. Hextall writes:—

The reading of Bro. Tuckett's paper affords at least a literary pleasure; and hesitation to accept theories he propounds in no way lessens our obligation for the wealth of material he presents.

His conclusion III. appears to rest on two negative and one affirmative propositions: (1) That British Masonic writers do not assert importation from abroad of Additional Degrees; (2) that Foreign writers make no claim to such; but, on the contrary (3), assert any importation or transference to have been from Britain to the Continent of Europe; and passages referred to in the paper no doubt tend in that direction if taken as they stand.

Any qualified agreement I could express must be subject to the observation that I fail to see that some of the English references included in the Addendum to the paper support views there contended for. For instance, I read the context of both the Grand Lodge Resolutions of 28th August and 15th December, 1730, as showing that the precautions to be taken were directed—in August, against the printing of Masonic secrets, and in December against "one Pritchard," and his like; and not as applying to any separate organization cognate to the subject of the paper. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius.

Again, the extract from Chambers' Cyclopædia hardly represents the full passage, which I take literatim from Yarker's Notes on the Scientific and Religious Mysteries of Antiquity (1872), 118n.:—

Some, who are no friends to Free-masonry, make the present flourishing society of free-masons a branch of Rosicrucians, or rather the Rosicrucians themselves under a new name or relation, viz., as retainers to building. And it is certain there are some free-masons who have all the characters of Rosicrucians; but how the æra and original of Masonry as traced by Mr. Anderson, and that of Rosicrucianism here fixed from Naudæus, who has written expressly on the subject consist, we leave others to judge.

[PDF Page 58 = Journal Page 45] Discussion (continued)

If Yarker copied correctly, Chambers himself qualified, if he did not negative, the inference drawn in the paper.

Can equivalent statements be found in English Masonic works of Nos. 37 and 44 in the Addendum, where French writers in 1744 and 1747 attribute "Seven Degrees," or "seven grades," to Freemasonry?

I greatly doubt if when, ex. gr., the Grand Lodge of York in 1725 made its Rule that "An hour shall be set apart to talk Masonry," the members utilized that time in reading or reciting Legends of the Temple, Crusaders, or Knightly Masons with Sword and Trowel: both the Rules as a whole, and the probabilities, are against the idea, and render it more likely that domestic affairs of the Lodge supplied discussion, as the following year, 1726, a member was disqualified and for ever banished for forming a schismatic lodge and improperly making masons.¹ Other instances of "talking masonry" would be accounted for in far less exciting fashion, for we know that it was a recognized habit to read and discuss works on Architecture, or listen to "a Lecture on some Point of Geometry or Architecture."² See Addendum, Numbers 8 and 10.

Personally, I continue to regard any addition to the legend of the Third Degree as affording strong proof of its un-authenticity³; and should welcome an intimation from Bro. Tuckett as to when he surmises its first appearance took place; and whether such existed in English Masonry before the Revival of 1717? This opens the further question, In what consisted the "Store of Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism of wide extent," beyond what was drawn upon and utilized at the Revival; and later on, as is suggested, by Jacobite members of the Craft acting together for a defined purpose? A general proposition that such a "Store" existed is tantalising when details which would be so acceptable, and might even be conclusive, are at the same time withheld. However that may be, I think we should assume that any selection of material (if such were made) at the Revival would be deliberate and advised, as it may also have been exhaustive; but without more insight as to what Bro. Tuckett had in mind when he penned his Theory I. of the paper, one can do no more than mark time.

Let me say that I go far in agreement with the statement that the Third Degree Legend was already in 1717 a part of Masonic Tradition. Having written as long since as 1904 upon the Ashmolean Theory, I appreciate how tentative and theoretical suppositions on this and its kindred topics necessarily are, and can add nothing now which affects the special phase.

The "Templar Succession" has had a long line of advocates; perhaps one of the most insistent and one of the latest being J. Count De Brody Zabrocki, in a pamphlet, The Origin of Free-Masonry: its mission, and the epoch of its material institution, was published at Edinburgh in 1847. Yarker says, "Vicount Dundee, who was slain at Kiltiecrankie in 1689, bearing the Cross of the Order [of Templars], as we are informed by Calmet."⁴

In connexion with Scottish Masonry no mention is made in the paper of the visit of Dr. Desaguliers to Edinburgh in 1721, though to it has been ascribed Scotland's acquaintance with, and subsequent adoption of, English symbolical Masonry.⁵

As bearing on the prevalence of formulæ or emblems belonging to something outside the three Craft Degrees, reference might with more or less cogency have been made to the numerous examples of eighteenth and early nineteenth century Craft Aprons which have been exhibited and described at our Lodge meetings, some being illustrated in our Transactions. Bro. W. H. Rylands, in his essay on "The Masonic Apron" (A.Q.C. v., 172), described and figured specimens of these, the difficulty about them being the uncertainty of their date or origin; and wrote (page 179):—

¹ A.Q.C. xiii., 15, 17. ² Ibid. xxv., 111. ³ Ibid. xxx., 31-38. ⁴ Notes on the Scientific and Religious (etc.), 1872, 124. ⁵ Gould's Concise History, 1903, 270.

[PDF Page 59 = Journal Page 46] Discussion (continued)

I think an explanation may be found for the introduction of many symbols which cannot be said to legitimately belong to pure Freemasonry in the fact that the use of aprons was not confined to the Lodge alone, but was extended to other gatherings of Masons. . . . I am pretty certain that in early times there was no apron specially set apart for the Royal Arch, but that the ordinary apron of a Master Mason was used.

An apron displaying a great variety of emblems outside the Craft Degrees, and notably a Templar's Star with motto, "In hoc signo vinces," is described in Miscellanea Latomorum II., 69.

Bro. Tuckett's phrase, "entitled to recognition, as a part of pure and ancient Masonry," as applying to "Additional Degrees," might be read as implying more than he intended. A reference to Rule I. of the Constitutions will explain and excuse the hint.

With regard to some theories and suggestions in the paper, I fear that acquiescence in them must be accompanied by doubt whether post hoc and propter hoc arguments have been sufficiently discriminated.

Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella writes as follows:—

The origin of Additional Degrees is one of the most vexed problems in the history of Freemasonry, and Bro. Tuckett's valuable paper throws a good light on the subject. I quite agree with him that these Degrees (especially the oldest Scottish Degrees) did not originate on the Continent, but are a genuine product of British soil, and that, while they received their principal extensions after 1740 in France and Germany, their first appearance must be looked for, sometime earlier, among the British Lodges. Of course, Jacobites and Jesuits may have seized this opportunity to lay their hands on Freemasonry, and, in fact, we know that they tried it, but it is an exploded idea that they were the originators of the Additional Degrees. From 1721 we are confronted with references to certain organizations, working under Masonic denominations and connected in some mysterious way with Rosicrucianism, or even with some real or spurious Orders of Chivalry; while outside the British Isles there is no authentic mention of any Masonic meeting before the second quarter of the eighteenth century. There is even, as Bro. Tuckett reminds us, trace of such connection as early as 1638 in Adamson's Muses Threnodie, where the author openly claims to be at once a Freemason and a Brother of the Rosie Cross.¹

So far I am willing to concur with Bro. Tuckett's firmly established conclusions. But I should like to make a step further in trying to ascertain how and when was made this departure towards the institution of new Degrees. Until about the beginning of the seventeenth century there is no trace of a non-professional factor within the Craft. After the Reformation we notice the presence of an additional element: lairds and lords, landed gentry, clergymen, magistrates, officers. But they seem to have filled simply the rôle of Patrons, what we should call to-day honorary members, interfering neither with the professional business of the Lodges nor with their regulations, still less with their symbols, customs, and legends. Then, little by little, as the century proceeds, we see creeping in men of learning, Masters of Arts, medical doctors, antiquaries, alchemists, and, among this new lot, avowed Rosicrucians, like Henry Adamson, Sir Robert Moray, Thomas Vaughan, Elias Ashmole, etc.; thus nearing the time when, as alleged by Bro. Gould, in his Concise History, half the learned men of Europe distinctly called themselves Rosicrucians. Is it not quite natural that these new Brethren,

¹ I wonder why our learned Brother, in the elaborate list of references added to his paper, leaves out, in the fifteenth century, the Paston Letters, from which Bro. Gould brought out a curious mention of a certain Thomas Babyngton, addressed as "Maister and Sovereign of our Order by the common assent of Brethren": This Letter, supposed to be written "from the Temple of Syon," aims at reminding John Paston of his duties towards "the confreys of his Holy Order."

[PDF Page 60 = Journal Page 47] Discussion (continued)

familiar as they were with the use of symbols to express and often to conceal, under orthodox, or at least unobtrusive signs and legends, their hermetic researches and unorthodox speculations, attached to the symbols of the Craft a second interpretation, this time mystic and hermetic or cabalistic, in conformity with their own particular tenets? Even if they were not bound by an allegiance to some secret society, should not the identity of their views and methods induce them to meet together and organize inside, under the convenient cover of Masonic secrecy, a superstructure or a superbrotherhood, containing "the Mysteries which are hidden from the Unworthy and reserved to the higher Brethren"—to use the words of Robert Samber in his Memoir of 1722, dedicated to "The Grand Master, Masters, Wardens and Brethren of the Fraternity of Free Masons of Great Britain and Ireland."

I hold as exceedingly probable the two working hypotheses of Bro. Tuckett: (1) That the Third Degree was evolved by an influence of this kind; (2) that the Hiramic Legend was at first a portion only of a Craft lore containing still other similar legends, some stillborn, some doomed to perish in infancy, while some, like the Hiramic Legend and the Royal Arch, were destined to survive and to thrive. I see no fitter theory to explain the spread of the speculative views, which, during the first quarter of the eighteenth century, crept gradually into the Craft and finally remodelled its old aims and organization, crystallizing on one side in the institution of the Third Degree and in the adoption of the Royal Arch, on the other side in the working of the Additional Scottish and other similar Degrees. Thus, the "Pure and Ancient Free-Masonry" of 1813, consisting of "Three Degrees and no more," but "including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch," represents a compromise between two methods and two organizations which have since continued working apart, although imbued with the same spirit. And no wonder, if, in the Preface to the printed book, Secret History of the Free Masons (1724), it is alleged that "Rosicrucians and Adepts belong to the same Fraternity or Order as the Freemasons."

When, fourteen years ago, I brought out, in the New Age, these views, which I had already outlined in the proceedings of the International Conference of the Rose-Croix, held at Brussels in 1888, an American Brother denounced them as a Cuckoo Theory. In my eyes, this qualification has nothing offensive nor derogatory. The Cuckoo method is a very respectable one, as testify the histories of nearly all progressive, political, social, and even religious associations. It was St. Paul's method among the Jewish Synagogues. Whether or not the first Speculative Masons, who laid their esoteric eggs in the comfortable berth of the Operative Masonic Lodges, were Rosicrucians, they are to be congratulated for having started what Bro. Mackay, in his History of Free-Masonry, shows to have been a revolution of unprecedented magnitude, as it accomplished the transformation of a local, professsional, and sectarian society into a moral, philosophical, and universal Brotherhood, to which we are all proud to belong.

To sum up, I will not go so far as to pretend that Speculative Masonry, as we know it, is the direct child of Rosicrucianism, but I uphold that it is the legitimate offspring of a fruitful union between the professional guild of mediæval Masons and of a secret group of philosophical Adepts, the first having furnished the form, and the second the spirit. The first parent died a natural death shortly after the birth of the child—unless we see its survival in the Trades Unions of our time; the other is as lively and prosperous as ever, although confined for more than a century in the upper floors of the common mansion.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett writes in reply:—

The reception accorded to my Paper has been very gratifying, and I am deeply grateful for a vote of thanks, proposed and seconded in such kindly terms, and passed by the Brethren with such evident signs of cordial approval. The whole Paper was to a very great extent tentative and highly conjectural—an invitation to criticism and discussion—and I was very careful to disclaim any idea that the

[Page 61] Discussion (Reply) and New Paper: Vestiges of the Craft in Spain

(PDF pages 61–75 correspond to printed journal pages 48–62)

[PDF Page 61 = Journal Page 48] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

propositions contained in it were to be considered proved. The fact of the existence of these 'Additional' Degrees, the mystery of their origin, the darkness of the whole subject, and its very considerable interest and importance, justified the experiment of a hypothesis, even if mature judgment following on discussion required its rejection, and this fate has indeed, in my opinion, overtaken a part (and an important part) of the hypothesis actually proposed.

In my Reply the general theory of 'development' will be taken first, leaving the Stuart or Jacobite part to be dealt with separately.

The theory proposed was that the earliest Additional Degrees were derived from a 'Store' of Masonic Legend, Tradition and Symbolism already existing when the premier Grand Lodge was founded, and that the movement was due to our own countrymen. The Worshipful Master and Bros. Edward Armitage, Cecil Powell, S. T. Klein, Count Goblet d'Alviella, and Lovegrove are all in agreement with the Paper thus far. But Bro. Songhurst—whose opinions must necessarily command every attention and respect—is unable to believe in the existence of the alleged 'Store,' and he is not favourably impressed by the evidence contained in the Addendum. It is very important that there be no mistake as to the claim set up on behalf of the Addendum:—'. . . there exists a mass of evidence 'which shows that long before 1740 (and also long before 1717) Masonic Symbolism 'and Legend were undergoing a process of growth and development . . . 'paving the way for, and providing the material for, Ceremony or Ritual whenever 'the time should be ripe for its appearance. In an Addendum I have brought 'together a large number of pieces of evidence ranging from 1638 to about 1750, 'containing indications of something beyond . . . Craft . . . Degrees.' The Addendum does not claim to contain the 'Mass of evidence' in favour of the existence of the alleged 'Store' of Legend, Tradition, and Symbolism. For that the pages of innumerable Masonic books and papers must be searched, for example, the Papers by our Bro. S. T. Klein, to whom hearty thanks are due for his valuable contribution on this occasion. The very remarkable extract from the Paston Letters of the fifteenth century, with which the name of Thomas Babyngton is associated, to which our attention has been drawn by Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella, is worthy of careful consideration, but—dare we claim it as certainly Masonic?

The Addendum is a collection of pieces of evidence that portions of the 'Store' did actually develop into Ceremonial Degrees other than the Three Craft Degrees within the period considered. The evidential value of such a collection is not comparable to the strength of a chain which snaps when the strain becomes too great for the weakest link, for the value of the weaker items in the collection is increased by the strength of the stronger ones, to which strength they (the weaker ones) in turn contribute. That some of the items, taken alone, are weak is willingly conceded, but the cumulative effect is to convey the strong impression that Ceremonial-Degree making was in full swing by 1723 and the certainty that it was so between that date and 1740. The framing of such ceremonials was, in fact, a characteristic of the period, as is shown by the appearance of so many Degree-working Orders and Societies, both Masonic and non-Masonic. To the non-Masonic class must be assigned 'The Grand Khaibar' (1726) and 'The Society of Gregorians' (1736, or it may be 1730), and very possibly also Dr. Stukeley's 'Order of the Book or Roman Knighthood' (1722), but to me the last-mentioned looks more like a Masonic development resulting from Stukeley's effort to discover in Freemasonry some "remains of the mysterys of the antients" (A.Q.C. vi., p. 130). The exact time when certain Masonic Additional Degrees first made their appearance is unknown, and is one of the points now in question, and the period referred to is antecedently probable as the one in which to seek for traces of their origin.

Bro. Songhurst concludes with the statement that he is unable to accept ". . . a store of tradition in hand before 1717 . . . which was exclu-"sively in the hands of Freemasons and not obtainable from Biblical and other "well-known sources." But no such proposition has been advanced. Our ancient Brethren took Legends, Traditions, and Symbols accessible to anyone, dressed them in suitable Masonic verbiage, and absorbed them into the common Masonic

[PDF Page 62 = Journal Page 49] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

stock, and thus the 'Store' was built up. Two examples will suffice. The Legend of the Quatuor Coronati has never been the property of Freemasons exclusively, but is to be found in the eleventh century Sarum Missal and many other non-Masonic works, such as Service Books and the Arundel MS. at the B.M. Nevertheless, its appearance in the Regius MS. is alone sufficient to qualify it as a genuine Masonic Legend. Again, the Legend of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel is common property, for is it not duly set out in Book I., of Josephus Antiq: Jud.: of which chap. iv. is headed "Nembrod petit-fils de Noé bastit la 'tour de Babel, etc."? [French edition. Amsterdam, 1681, by Arnauld d'Andilly.] It appears in Masonic garb in Grand Lodge No. 1 MS. of 1583, and in many other of the 'Old Charges,' and is as well-established a Masonic Legend as any. The Legend of the Quatuor Coronati is a part of the 'Store' which has never developed into a Degree, but the Legend of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel has done so in more ways than one, e.g., Les Noachites ou Chevaliers Prussiens [see Bérage Les Plus Secrets Mysteres of 1768 (possibly 1747)] and the Degrees in Slade's Fremason Examin'd of 1754 [see A.Q.C., vol. xx., p. 95]. Bro. Le Tall asked for a definition of a Masonic Legend, and perhaps, in the absence of a formal definition, the above may make the meaning of the expression as used in the present discussion sufficiently clear.

All Masonic and quasi-Masonic Degrees other than E.A., F.C., and M.M. are counted in the Paper as 'Additional,' but the R.A. is only so counted before 1813. Our W.M. has mistaken the meaning of certain words which occur near the end of the Paper:—". . . the beginnings (i.e., of the Additional Degree 'movement) took place here. . . . And these beginnings I place as far back 'as 1717 and include therein the development of the Third Degree itself." What is meant is not that the Third Degree is included in the Additional Degrees, but that the development of the Third Degree under the auspices of the premier Grand Lodge gave the impetus to the framing of ceremonial Degrees from other portions of the Legendary Store, or, in other words, that the process by which the III° came into being was precisely the same as with the other Degrees, and that probably it was the III° which set the example. Bro. Gordon Hills has very clearly explained why no reliance can any longer be placed upon the alleged discoveries of Prof. Marks and Prof. Hayter-Lewis on the subject of H.A.B., but the point, though of very great interest, is, fortunately, not essential to the argument. Bro. E. H. Dring pointed out, firmly but very kindly, that the account of H.A.B. in the 1723 Book of Constitutions is no proof that: "the Legend of 'the III° was already (1723) a part of Masonic Tradition," and certainly the word 'proof' should not have been used. But substitute the word 'indication' for 'proof,' and the statement, thus amended, is justified.

The theory that it is the accident of selection by the premier Grand Lodge, and that only, which has put the E.A., F.C., M.M. and (ultimately) the R.A. within the pale of 'pure Ancient and Craft Freemasonry' and excluded all other Degrees therefrom, was put forward with some fear and trembling, and it was not expected that it would find favour. It turned out, however, that the theory met with considerable support as a reasonable hypothesis in accord with the scanty evidence available.

Bro. Cecil Powell's concluding remarks are undoubtedly true. After 1750 any number of 'Additional' Degrees and Rites were framed abroad, and some of these were introduced into this country. For such, and very possibly for some modifications of already existing Degrees, we are indebted to the lively imagination of our Continental Brethren. But, as Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella remarks, the first appearance must be looked for earlier and among British Lodges. Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella, indeed, puts the commencement of the movement still further back, and he has given us a deeply interesting account of the process by which Speculative Masonry as we know it may have resulted from the union of the mediæval guild of Operative Masons with a secret group or school of philosophical Adepts.

Bro. W. B. Hextall's work on the subject of Stuart Masonry is well known, and his contribution to this Discussion is most welcome and valuable. He may

[PDF Page 63 = Journal Page 50] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

rest assured of my loyalty to Rule I. (and every other Rule) in the Constitutions. All that was contended for was that some (not all) of the Additional Degrees are entitled to recognition by students and historians (not officially by Grand Lodge) as legitimate developments from the common stock of pure and ancient Masonry. The reference to the real separate rival body called 'The Honorary Masons' in the G.L. Resolutions of 1730 (Addendum 17) shows that those Resolutions were in part directed against separate organisations, and not only against irregular or clandestine makings. The extended quotation from Chambers given by Bro. Hextall does not cause me to modify the opinion already expressed concerning the Rosicrucian reference. Although no English Masonic writers of contemporary date make definite statements parallel to the 'seven grade' claims in certain French works of 1744 and 1747, still, Nos. 11, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 26, 29, 37, 38, and 39, taken together, establish beyond doubt that in Great Britain between 1725 and 1746, at any rate, more than three Degree ceremonies were in working. The expression 'talked Masonry' was intended to suggest that our Ancient Brethren long before 1717 probably recited or read and discussed in their Lodges the Traditional History and Legends of the Craft contained in the Old MS. Constitutions and added to the Stock from time to time by Legends relating to more modern times, such as, for example, the Crusades. No reference to the 1725 Rule of the York G.L. was intended. Bro. Hextall says that: "we should 'assume that any selection of material (if such were made) at the Revival would "be deliberate and advised, as it may also have been exhaustive." That it may have been exhaustive must, of course, be conceded, but that it was so is an assumption which does not convince me. No attempt is made in the Paper to uphold the truth of any 'Templar Succession Theory,' but the early appearance of such a Theory is recorded as it has an important bearing upon the question at issue. Bro. Songhurst drew attention, with marked success (as will be seen later), to the importance of the visit of Dr. Desaguliers to Edinburgh in 1721. That the Paper did to a certain extent err in the direction of post hoc and propter hoc argument will presently be freely admitted.

To turn now to the Jacobite part of the Paper. The theory proposed—it was a daring one—was that the Stuart Party (hoping to make something out of Freemasonry) and the Roman Church (having just signally failed to crush it out of existence) joined forces, and the result was the creation of a new Freemasonry-apart, to be made subservient to the twofold object of the Double Restoration. This theory is neither altogether old nor altogether new. Where it differs from the Stuart-Masonic theories usually put forward, is that it does not represent the alleged new Degrees as containing anything in the Ritual, either openly or under disguise, which could be interpreted as pro-Stuart or anti-Hanoverian propaganda. The idea in my mind was that of genuine and legitimate Masonic degrees founded upon pre-existing portions of Masonic Legend and Symbolism, entirely free from political bias or tendencies, but differing from the English G.L. Freemasonry by being definitely Christian and apparently Roman Catholic, the intention being to admit none but those whose sympathies, political and religious, were known to be favourable to the twofold Cause. Such a Freemasonry-apart would afford to Jacobites in England an excuse for, and an explanation of, association and intercourse and assembly, which, if not so accounted for, would appear to the Government Party highly suspicious. To these suspicions the answer would be:— Jacobites plotting! No such thing! Masons! Scots Masons with High Degrees coming from the time of Ascalon and Bannockburn and what not! If such communities of Jacobites were dotted about in different parts of the country, at home and abroad, the usefulness of such an organisation to the Cause seems to be sufficiently apparent to need no further demonstration. Friend would be distinguished from Foe, the Secret Agent of the English Government recognized, the Secret Agent of the Pretender helped upon his way, and so forth. This is the answer to the objections raised by Bro. Songhurst, who says: "Surely if they had "been Jacobites they would have sought to work in secret and avoid all suspicion "of disloyalty to the reigning House." The cloak of Freemasonry would have enabled them to work as Jacobites in secret, the cloak itself being politically harm-

[PDF Page 64 = Journal Page 51] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

less. To put it in another way, the effect would be not to 'brand its members as such' (i.e., as Jacobites), but to cover up that character with the disguise of a Masonry which in itself contained no political allusion. This part of Bro. Songhurst's criticism did not weaken my faith in the theory proposed, and his remarks upon the attitude of the Roman Church were equally unsuccessful. This Church was at this period itself a prey to internal discord and division, owing to the growing opposition within the Church to the Company of Jesus which was to end in the suppression of that Order by the Pope. Quite apart from the subject of Freemasonry, if historians generally are to be believed, it is in no way: "highly improbable that Roman Catholics would openly and deliberately put for-"ward" institutions and practices "which the heads of their Church had so "thoroughly condemned." Such action has even been represented as taken with the knowledge and consent and express approval of those very heads of the Church themselves. The opposition of the Roman Church to Freemasonry has been persistent openly, but it most certainly has not been consistent in actual fact.

But Bros. Gordon Hills and Songhurst have attacked the proposed theory in quite a different way and from quite a different point of view. That such a Freemasonry-apart would have been a valuable asset to the Stuart Cause is no proof that it ever existed in fact, and the two Brothers named, by showing that much of the evidence upon which I relied is capable of another and indeed a contrary interpretation, have given good reason for rejecting the theory as stated. And I very willingly and freely admit that the theory of a Freemasonry-apart founded with a deliberate political or political-religious intent has been tried, and tried fairly, and found wanting, and that such a superstructure of hypothesis is not justified by a sufficiency of foundation in incontrovertible fact. That the Jacobites did take a very warm interest in Masonry, and that they predominated in some Lodges and Degrees, and that some of the Degrees which came into existence during this period were the creations of our Jacobite fellow countrymen, either at home or abroad, I still believe. But (with one possible exception, to be mentioned later) I abandon the political-religious propagandist theory, and incline to the very striking suggestion made by Bro. Edward Armitage, that men of similar interests and opinions naturally gravitated together then as now, and that so it came about that certain Lodges and Degrees came practically to be assemblies of Jacobites, while the Masonic Labours of those Lodges and Degrees continued as they had commenced, legitimate developments of Masonic Legend, Tradition, and Symbol, innocent of the influences of faction and party. This explains satisfactorily all the phenomena, including the fact pointed out by Bro. Cecil Powell, that practically no progress was made in England in the Chivalric Orders until very much later.

That the activities of the Stuart partisans in connection with Masonry excited suspicion, is shown by the following extract from the London Journal of 16th June, 1722, about a year after the Duke of Wharton's initiation:—

A few Days ago, a select Body of the Society of Free Masons waited on the Right Honourable the Lord Viscount Townshend, one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, to Signify to his Lordship, that being obliged by their Constitutions, to hold a general meeting now at midsummer, according to annual Custom, they hoped the Administration would take no Umbrage at that Convocation, as they were all zealously affected to his Majesty's Person and Government. His Lordship received this Intimation in a very affable Manner; telling them, he believed they need not be apprehensive of any Molestation from the Government, so long as they went on doing nothing more dangerous than the ancient Secrets of the Society. (A.Q.C. xxii., p. 70.)

(His Lordship apparently laid no emphasis upon the word 'Ancient' in the last sentence). The Duke of Wharton's raid on the Grand Mastership, his opposition to Dr. Desaguliers, and his open Jacobite performances in connection with Bishop Atterbury and at the election of Sheriffs for the City of London, are well known.

[PDF Page 65 = Journal Page 52] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

And why did Robert Samber, in his description of the Feast on the occasion of the Duke of Wharton being chosen G.M., make that sly allusion to Let the King enjoy his own again (the Jacobite War Song), and why did the 'great man' (identity not stated) feel impelled to propose:—'Prosperity to Old England 'under the present Administration'? (Ebrietatis Encomium, 1723, chap. xv.). In 1772, when the Bill for Incorporating the Society of F. and A.M. was before Parliament, an opponent of the Bill said in the House of Commons:—

Granting the Free Masons a charter was in fact to pass a general bill of Naturalization for foreign Papists, and, in all probability, giving the Pretender himself the citizenship of a country where he was proscribed under the penalties of high treason. (A.Q.C. xxii., p. 79.)

It is only two years later than the Wharton incidents just noted—that is in 1725—that the first of those references to 'Rosicrucians' occurs, which suggest the possibility that a new Masonic Degree is thereby intended:—'Whimsical kinsmen 'of the Hod and Trowel' are said to be in possession of 'new light received from 'some worthy Rosicrucians.' That there were Masons calling themselves 'Rose 'Croix' in existence in 1728 is the most natural explanation of the remark in the Cyclopædia of Ephraim Chambers. If there were not, and if the picture of Freemasonry painted by Bro. Speth, and quoted by Bro. Songhurst, were a true representation of what it really then was, it is difficult to conceive any reason why Chambers should say:—"There are certain Freemasons who have all the char-'acteristics of Rosicrucians." The reserve shown in the sentence indicates that it was something separate from Ordinary Masonry. But if there were 'certain' Masons who were then making use of the title 'Rose Croix,' and who were so mysterious that his informants—Masons of the English G.L.—could tell him nothing about them, then his sentence is natural enough as well as his confusion with the mysterious Fratres R.C., especially if these Brethren hailed 'from 'abroad,' as would appear from the A.Z. Letter in the Daily Journal of 1730.

Throughout the Paper it was assumed that 'Scots Mason, 'Scots Master,' 'Scots Masonry,' are identical with 'Maçon Ecossois,' 'Maitre Ecossois,' 'Maçonnerie Ecossoise.' In England we have the 'Scott's Masons Lodge' at the Devil in 1733, 'Scots Master Masons' at Bath in 1735, 'Scotch Master Masons' at the Lodge of Antiquity in 1740. On the Continent we have the 'Grade of 'Ecossois' in Belgium in 1733, two Ecossois Degrees in Paris in 1737, a Scots Lodge at Perlin 1741, and others; these being the earliest notices which have been traced. If they are not identical, then the identity in names and dates is simply astounding. Bro. Songhurst traces the above developments to the visit of Dr. Desaguliers to the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1721, and considers that both the 'Scots Masters Lodge' and the 'Masters Lodges' are in some way, which he does not explain, evidence in support of the view that 'something very suggestive of 'what we now call the Royal Arch was known to Masons in the early years of 'Grand Lodge.' Bro. Gordon Hills does not 'think that it requires much 'research to gather what was the inducement to become a Scots Master, surely 'the knowledge to be gained in Royal Arch, Scots and Irish Masters Lodges and 'in the unexplained English Masters Lodges of early date, was very similar and 'the pretensions of Scots Masters were not without some foundation.' With these views I cannot agree, but I can, and do, admit that they offer an alternative solution to the one proposed by myself, and that, with a reasonable alternative in the field, the Stuart-political-religious-theory must go, until time or circumstances provide us with more definite evidence with which to support it.

The words Briton and British, which occur so often in the Paper, were used to describe the nationality of men so as to include Scots, Irish, and Welsh, as well as English men. The expression 'British Rite' does not occur.

The Bro. Lamarque l'Américain who signed Bro. Songhurst's certificate of 1774 as Registrar of the Chambre des Provinces under the Grand Orient was 'Député des loges de Saint-Domingue' at the great conference in Paris in 1773 when the Grande Loge Nationale became the Grand Orient de France. On the 12th July, 1773, this Brother was appointed 'nuitième expert' in the Chambre

[PDF Page 66 = Journal Page 53] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

des Provinces, and he is thus described (please notice the comma after La Marque):

François La Marque, l'Américain, négociant de Saint-Domingue, ancien vénérable de la Loge des Frères Réunis des Cayes, membre des Loges de la Parfaite Union du Port-au-Prince, de la Concorde de Saint-Marc, et de l'Amitié Indissoluble de Léogane, et député de ces Loges au Grand-Orient de France.

Monsieur Benjamin Fabre (in Eques a Capite Galeato) refers to him as La Marque (l'Américain). Probably he assumed 'l'Américain' as an addition to his original surname La Marque. The person who appears in the Apologie pour l'Ordre des Francs Maçons of 1742 as le Frere Ameriqvain or Américain or Americain may be the same, or of the same family, as the François La Marque or Lamarque who (to all appearances) took to himself the addition 'l'Américain,' but in that case would he not be correctly abbreviated as 'le Frère l'Americain,' and not 'le Frère Americain'?

It is a matter of very considerable interest and importance whether the reference in the Song of 1742 to 'Chevalier de l'Aigle' is to the Masonic Degree of that name or not. If it is so, then this is earlier by many years than any other reference previously noticed. The MS. Ritual of the Rose Croix—the same which says 'Cette nouvelle loy, qui est la foy Catholique'—commences thus:—

Le chevalier de l'aigle est le quatrième grade de la maçonnerie Ecossoise, et le septième et dernier que l'on connoisse sous le nom de parfait maçon. . . . le vray et unique nom de ce grade est le chevalier de l'aigle, sont [sic] antiquité rend ce nom autant preferable que respectable. . . . Le fils de l'homme est comparé simboliquement à la Suprème puissance du Père: l'aigle est l'image et l'égide de cette puissance suprème. Les maçons l'adoptant comme le titre primordial qui a produit la matière de ce grade sublime.

This MS. was written, no doubt, somewhat later than the year 1742 with which we are now dealing, but it shows the importance of the Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle in Maçonnerie Ecossoise from the beginning. My opinion is that the word 'Règle' in the Song means 'Regulation (or Prescribed) Toast List,' and that the word 'Point' means 'Item to be Observed.' [One of the Dictionary meanings of 'Point' is 'Degree,' but not in our sense.] The meaning (not simply translation) of the whole verse may, therefore, be taken to be:—

And now we add to the Regulation (or Prescribed) Toast List at our Banquets a new Item to be observed one which will be very pleasing to all of you. It is this, that, wherever a Brother in possession of the exalted Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle is present, his health is to be drunk with a Bumper filled to the brim.

The Regulation Toast List, according to L'Ordre trahi, 1745, was as follows:—

La première santé que l'on célèbre est celle du Roi. On boit ensuite celle du Très-Vénérable. A celle-ci succède celle du Vénérable. On boit après au prémier et au Second Surveillans; et enfin aux Frères de la Loge. Lorsqu'il y a des nouveaux-reçus, on boit à leur santé immédiatement après qu'on a bu aux Surveillans. On fait aussi le même honneur aux Frères Visiteurs.

The MS. Ritual already quoted says:—

Les dits chevaliers (de l'Aigle) ont le Droit de tenir le Maillet dans toutes les Loges qu'ils visitent, quand il ne s'y trouve pas de frère revetu de ce grade eminent.

Now, supposing that a Degree, possessing these unusual privileges, had lately come into existence, such an addition to the Regulation Toast List would naturally follow. The book in which the Song occurs is, however, dedicated thus:—

A Très-Haut, Très-Illustre, et Très-Vénérable Frère LE CHEVALIER DE L' * * * * * G.M. D.T.L.L.D.D.D.L.H.S.

[PDF Page 67 = Journal Page 54] Discussion — Tuckett's Reply (continued)

The letters AIGLE rather force themselves forward as candidates for the places marked by the five asterisks, and, assuming, as seems but natural, that the Dedication is to a real personage, then we are forced to admit the existence of an individual whose name and title were Le Chevalier de l'Aigle, and this certainly lends colour to Bro. Songhurst's contention that the reference in the Song is not to a Masonic Degree but to a highly respected Brother. There is a town called Laigle in France, and at p. 62 of Madame Waddington's deeply interesting My War Diary, recently published, she tells us that: 'In the eleventh century there was a fine château-fort 'built by the first Marquis de Laigle.' Our man might have been of this family—but of what was he G(rand) M(aitre) in 1742? Bro. Dring takes the view that the reference in the Song is to the "Hotel or Inn where the Brethren met," and that the meaning of the last two lines is simply:—

At the Knight of the Eagle Hotel it is the custom to drink in Bumpers filled to the brim,

the Hotel being presumably named after the illustrious personage to whom the book is dedicated. Bro. Songhurst's explanation seems preferable to Bro. Dring's, but I consider my own to be the best of the three, for there is no certainty that L' * * * * * is really L'AIGLE. The Book and its Author (Mr. N * * *), the Dedication, the Song and its Author (Le Frère Américain), are all exceedingly interesting, and the subject should repay further research. It may be pointed out that the titles 'Très-Haut' and 'Très-Illustre' are additional indications that Ecossois or other 'High' Grades (possibly, as Bro. Songhurst has suggested, those which developed into the Strict Observance) were already at work and recognised in 1742.

The view that the reference in the Song by Le Frère Américain is to the Masonic Degree of Chevalier de l'Aigle is, I think, confirmed by the version of the same Song in the scarce Recueil de Chansons des Francs-Maçons. Vers, Discours, Reglements, etc. Augmenté de plusieurs pièces qui n'ont point encore paru. La Musique mise a la Clef Italienne avec la Basse. Quatrième Edition. À Amsterdam. Chiz la Veuve Jean François Jolly. mmdcclxii (sic). (1762):—

Ajoutons à cette règle Un point qui nous plaira fort C'est qu-aux Chevaliers de l'Aigle Nous buvions un rouge bord Maître venerable etc.

The plural 'qu'aux Chevaliers de l'Aigle' does not fit either Bro. Songhurst's theory or that of Bro. Dring.

Bro. Edward Armitage's valuable suggestion that the names of those who conferred and those who received the Scots Degrees at London, Bath, and Salisbury should be carefully examined, with a view to discovering if any of them were known to be Jacobites, shall receive immediate attention. The Brother who acted as 'Scots Senior Warden' at Bath on the 28th October, 1735, David Threipland, Esq., was not a member but a visitor at the Lodge where the Degrees were conferred. In 1736 he was a member of the Lodge at the Bear and Harrow, Butchers Row, and I believe that I have identified him with the David Threipland who joined Prince Charles Edward's Expedition of 1745, and whose rash but heroic conduct after the Battle of Gladsmuir (Prestonpans) cost him his life, and makes one of the most thrilling stories of the '45. The adventure is related in all the histories of the rebellion, and suggested one of the incidents in Sir Walter Scott's Waverley. Threipland was the eldest son of Sir David Threipland, Bart., of Fingask, in Perthshire, whose family was devoted to the Stuart Cause, for which three successive Baronets of Fingask fought. David's younger brother, Stuart (afterwards Sir Stuart), was an intimate friend of Andrew Lumisden, Secretary to both the Pretenders, whose long exile after Culloden he shared. That Stuart adherents, travelling in the interests of the Cause they had so much at heart, were able to combine Jacobite with Masonic business, is likely enough, but the explanation is doubtless that which has been suggested by Bro. Armitage.

[PDF Page 68 = Journal Page 55] Discussion — End of Paper

In reply to the W.M., a footnote concerning the Templar Movement (that which developed into the Strict Observance) has been added to the Addendum, but this subject calls for further treatment on some future occasion. There seems reason to believe that originally it was Jacobite but was not Masonic, while later it ceased to be Jacobite and became Masonic. This is the 'exception' to which reference was made above.

That the Discussion has greatly increased our knowledge of an interesting subject, all will readily agree, and for myself the Paper has been the occasion of a most charming experience.

[Illustration: Decorative engraved tailpiece with allegorical figures at a table]

[PDF Page 69 = Journal Page 56] Friday, 7th March, 1919 — Meeting

FRIDAY, 7th MARCH, 1919.

[Illustration: Decorative initial letter "T" with ornamental border]

HE Lodge met at Freemasons' Hall at 5 p.m. Present:—Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M.; W. B. Hextall, as J.W.; Canon Horsley, P.G.Ch., Chaplain; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary; and Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, I.G.

Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle.—Bros. Gilbert B. Soddy, Chas. H. Bestow, Wm. C. Terry, A. C. Mead, Walter Dewes, L. G. Wearing, C. H. Lee, J. F. Wilson, Hugh C. Knowles, P.A.G.Reg., as S.W., G. W. Sutton, A. G. Boswell, Chas. Miller, F. W. le Tall, Percy H. Horley, Henry Hyde, Enrique Ferrer, G. Jules Petitpierre, L. Spencer Compton, A. C. Beal, S. P. Penwarden, J. A. Symmonds, Henry Harvey, J. F. H. Gilbard, C. Gonville, and Chas. Gough.

Also the following visitors:—Bros. James Grundy, of the Eleanor Lodge No. 1707; G. H. Perry, J.W., Sanctuary Lodge No. 3051; H. Rush, of the Borough Polytechnic Lodge No. 3540; P. C. J. Wood, Master of the Florence Nightingale Lodge No. 706; G. F. Ely, of St. Mary Abbott's Lodge No. 1974; Thos. Chetwin, of the Temperance in the East Lodge No. 898; Clifford J. W. Hoster, of the Savage Club Lodge No. 2190; and S. A. Koszelski, of the Waller Rodwell Wright Lodge No. 2755.

Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. F. J. W. Crowe, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; John T. Thorp, P.G.D., P.M.; Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.M.; H. F. Twiss; Edward Conder, P.M.; W. H. Rylands, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; Wm. Watson; Edward Macbean, P.M.; S. T. Klein, P.M.; F. H. Goldney, P.G.D., P.M.; G. Greiner, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; J. E. S. Tuckett; and R. H. Baxter.

One Lodge and thirty-one Brethren were admitted to membership of the Correspondence Circle.

The Secretary read the following paper by Bro. S. T. Klein:—

[PDF Page 70 = Journal Page 57] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain

VESTIGES OF THE CRAFT IN SPAIN.

BY BRO. SYDNEY T. KLEIN, P.M.

[Illustration: Decorative initial letter "I" with geometric/Masonic symbol]

N a former paper on "The Law of Dakhiel" (A.Q.C., vol. ix., 1898) I referred to certain curious old customs which I had witnessed among the lower classes of the inhabitants in central and northern Spain. There is nothing so fascinating as leaving the beaten track in that old-world country and living among and studying the country folk, who are the descendants of those ancient races which struggled for supremacy from the third century B.C., when the Carthaginians overran the peninsula, through the Roman occupation which gave way to the Visigoths in A.D. 414, who in their turn were ousted by the Moors in A.D. 711. The country then became the battle ground of the struggle between the Crescent and the Cross for the next 800 years; the last stronghold of the Moors, the Alhambra at Granada, only capitulating in A.D. 1492, to the Christians under Ferdinand and Isabella.

I had looked forward to making further investigation into these curious ritualistic customs on my next visit to that country; my visit was, however, postponed much longer than I anticipated, and, when I did get there once more, I was not alone, and could not, therefore, leave the track of civilization and get again into such intimate touch with the Basques and Gitanos as was necessary for a research into tenets which are certainly looked upon as family or tribal secrets. I was, however, contemplating an extensive tour to several of the most interesting and ancient Spanish towns, and I thought it might prove to be of interest if I collected some of the signs still to be found of the Masons' craft in that country. I give the result in the present paper.

Burgos. The Cathedral is one of the most beautiful examples of Gothic architecture in Spain. The Archiepiscopal See, founded at Oca, 25 miles distant, was removed to Burgos by Alfonso VI. in A.D. 1075, and the building of a cathedral was commenced in that year, on the site of a summer palace of Fernan Gonzalez which stood near the River Orlanzon, not far from where the fine bridge of Santa Maria now crosses. Unfortunately, a few years later there were great floods, and the Orlanzon, overflowing its banks, undermined the foundations and completely wrecked the building, the walls and roof falling with a terrible crash. No attempt was made to rebuild the Cathedral until A.D. 1221, when an Englishman, Bishop Maurice, laid the foundation stone of the present edifice in presence of the King of Castile.

Inside the Cathedral is a marvellous double staircase called the Golden staircase which led to the Puerta alta de la Coroneria, a gateway considerably above the interior floor of the Cathedral, and was approached from outside by a number of steps; this doorway has been built up and a new doorway called 'Puerta de la Pellejeria' has been opened at a lower level. At the sides of the Golden staircase are engraved, on marble slabs:—to the left, a large Mason's square, and to the right, a Mason's square and pair of compasses, both being associated with a Monk's flagellum or scourge.

[Illustration: Fig. 1 — Two drawings showing Mason's square and scourge emblems from the Golden Staircase, Burgos Cathedral]

[PDF Page 71 = Journal Page 58] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

I have been unable to get information respecting these designs, but they are interesting in connection with a pulpit in a neighbouring Church.

The following are the Masons' marks found on stones inside and outside of the Cathedral.

Burgos Cathedral. Inside:—

[Illustration: Multiple rows of Masons' marks found inside Burgos Cathedral — various geometric symbols including triangles, arrows, letters, and other marks]

" " " in chapel of Constable of Castile, fifteenth century:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from the Chapel of the Constable of Castile — various geometric symbols]

" " Outside:—

[Illustration: Multiple rows of Masons' marks found outside Burgos Cathedral — larger collection of varied geometric symbols]

We now come to an interesting find in the Church of San Lesmes.

At the time when the great flood wrecked the first Cathedral building, about A.D. 1080, there had arrived in the town and was living there a remarkable man, born in France, who became the Patron Saint of Burgos; he must have been a genius of no mean order, because, besides performing numerous miracles, curing the sick and executing works of utility for private people, it was he who designed and built embankments along the north bank of the River Orlanzon to protect the town from further inundations, and planned and constructed conduits for the water supply. His name was originally Adelelmo, which was later changed to San Lesmes, and a halo of romance and mystery has grown up round his memory. It was from one of his miracles that the electric lights seen at mastheads were called by sailors in the Mediterranean St. Elmo's lights. On the site of the present Church dedicated to this man formerly stood a Capilla hermita (hermitage chapel) dedicated to San Juan Evangelista. This chapel or church is first mentioned in the reign of Alfonso III. (A.D. 866-910) as having been enclosed within the wall which at that date was built round the fortress and town which is now the City of Burgos.

San Lesmes was a Frenchman, born early in the eleventh century of noble parents at Loudun in France, north of Poitiers. He was first a soldier, but, having

[PDF Page 72 = Journal Page 59] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

come across an old Abbé, he was converted from a soldier into a penitent, made a pilgrimage to Rome, and finally joined the ranks of the Benedictines, and came to Spain. He was summoned to the Court at Toledo by Dona Constancia de Borgona, also a native of France and the wife of Alfonso VI., King of Castile and Leon. He seems to have been in great favour at Toledo, and from there he came to Burgos, and by influence of the Queen was not only put in charge of the Hermitage Chapel, but also became Abbot of the Benedictines at the Monastery which stood in front of the chapel, and which is now called the hospital and prison of San Juan.

In A.D. 1085 Alfonso VI. endowed the Monastery with a large income, but in A.D. 1091, in recognition of the great benefits, both temporal and spiritual, which San Lesmes had brought to the town, he made over the whole property to the Hermitage Chapel, dedicated to San Juan Evangelista, which had been given in charge to San Lesmes at the instance of Dona Constancia some ten or fifteen years before.

The renown of San Lesmes had spread throughout all the country round, and it was at this time that his name of Adelelmo was changed into San Lesmes by the pilgrims who flocked to his services in vast numbers. San Lesmes died on January 30th, 1097, and at his special request was buried in the centre of the nave of his Church of San Juan. His renown for sanctity and miracle working was so great that his tomb became a centre for pilgrimages for many centuries afterwards, and in A.D. 1380, when Don Juan I. was reigning over Castile, the old Church or Hermitage Chapel of San Juan was pulled down and the present Church was built up in honour of San Lesmes. The present Church has three naves, and his tomb was carefully preserved and placed in the centre nave on the spot where it had stood in the Hermitage Chapel. The crowds visiting his tomb, especially on Feast days, were so great that a large doorway was opened in the side of the Church, opposite the main entrance, so that the procession of pilgrims could enter at one door and depart by another after visiting the tomb. This door has since been walled up, but the outline of the doorway still bears witness to the wonderful glamour which for centuries continued to be associated with San Lesmes.

In the Church of San Lesmes stands a remarkable relic from the original building in an old stone pulpit of which I am glad to say I succeeded in taking a photograph, and which I give in Fig. 2.

On the centre shield will be seen a large Mason's square and pair of compasses, and on either side is a Latin inscription:—

[Illustration: Fig. 2 — Photograph/drawing of the stone pulpit from San Lesmes Church, showing a central shield with Mason's square and compasses, flanked by two Latin inscriptions: "QVOMODO CANTABIMVS CANTICUM DNI INTER RA ALIENA" and "ESTOTE PARA TI QVIA QVAH ORA NON PV TATIS FLIVS H OMINIS VENET"]

The inscriptions are:—

"Quomodo cantabimus canticum DNI in terra aliena." How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land.

and

"Estote parati quia qua Hora non putatis Filius hominis venet." Be ye ready, for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man cometh.

The first inscription evidently refers pathetically to the fact that San Lesmes, who came from France, was living and giving his whole life to his Master's work in a strange land.

[PDF Page 73 = Journal Page 60] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

Nothing is known of the history of the pulpit except that the 'tornaroz' or cupola, suspended above it, is now of wood, but was originally of stone, which disappeared nobody knows how many years ago.

The Square and Compasses on this pulpit open up an interesting channel of thought when considered in connection with the same emblems, which we saw associated with a Monk's scourge, on the Golden Staircase leading to the Puerta alta in the Cathedral. San Lesmes was not only Abbot of the Benedictine Monastery, but also drew up the plans for and executed many important works of utility for the City of Burgos. His skill and energy must have had great influence in the Monastery, and he would naturally have educated and employed those who were capable of helping him to carry out his designs. He probably designed the pulpit himself, but the designs on the Golden Staircase were of later production, and we may see in them the shadow of his mantle, which had descended at his death upon his many devoted associates in the Monastery. Some of these monks would no doubt have tried to emulate his good works, and would have handed down to their successors the knowledge and skill which San Lesmes had taught them. As far as I could find out, it was at that time the only Monastery in Burgos, and the 'scourge,' associated with the Masons' emblems in the Cathedral, may have been introduced, not only to show connection with the Monastery and Saint, who was held in such high repute, but also as a sign of humbleness at being employed in building and decorating such an important edifice as the Cathedral. In a Chapel dedicated to San Juan, in the Cathedral, is a domed recess containing the much venerated figure of the 'Virgen de Oca,' brought from the original habitat of the Archiepiscopal See already referred to, and with this are a number of old 'Reliquaries,' among which is the shrine to 'Beato Lesmes,' the blessed Lesmes.

I made considerable search, and after I left, in 1900, was for some time in correspondence with a friend in Burgos, who continued the search; but the only authority from whom it was found possible to get any information concerning San Lesmes was the old Cura of the Church, who was noted as being the most learned man in Burgos, and his information was very scanty, though he had for many years been interesting himself in the subject. The following is a translation of the particulars I received from him:—

The remains of San Lesmes are interred in the central nave of the Church. Above the spot are erected an altar and sepulchre on which is his recumbent statue in the position that the Saint himself required.

His tomb was formerly surrounded by a large railing with columns, above which were placed other images, and in the centre the arms of the Municipality of Burgos which was responsible for the construction of same, but this was subsequently replaced by a gilded railing, part of which now encloses the baptismal font.

The body of San Lesmes is enclosed in the interior of the figure of the lamb which stands below the exterior sepulchre, all of which is of stone.

No epitaph of any description referring to San Lesmes exists, neither in the Church dedicated to him nor in the building in front (the hospital and prison which formerly was the Benedictine Monastery of which San Lesmes was Abbot). The citizens of Burgos held San Lesmes as their 'patrona' (patron saint) by reason of the many gifts, both spiritual and temporal, which he made to the City, and the Municipality of Burgos associated and identified itself with the citizens' vows for the same reason.

To the initiative of San Lesmes are owed the embankments of the River Arlanzon to the north of the City, as likewise the 'alcantarillas' or conduits. For these reasons the Municipality of Burgos always attends in full state on the occasion of the principal feasts dedicated to San Lesmes.

[PDF Page 74 = Journal Page 61] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

Legend:—The Queen of England, being very ill, begged San Lesmes to come and cure her, or at least to send her a piece of bread, by eating which she could be cured. San Lesmes sent her some bread, and on eating a piece of it, not only was she restored to health, but also all who partook of it were miraculously cured of their infirmities.

This is a curious legend to find in Spain in those early days, namely, 150 years before the crusades brought so many countries together. The Queen of England referred to could only have been Matilda of Flanders, the wife, or perhaps the widow, of William the Conqueror, because St. Lesmes died in 1097, and William II., who at the death of William the Conqueror became King of England in 1087, was never married.

The following are the Mason marks I collected from the present Church of San Lesmes:—

San Lesmes:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from San Lesmes Church — including a cross, anchor symbol, circle, heart, omega, triangle, and other geometric marks arranged in two rows]

It is interesting to remember that San Lesmes was contemporary with the most romantic warrior hero known to Spanish history, whose home was also in Burgos. I refer to Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar, known to fame as the Cid; he has been well called the King Arthur of Spain; he had a strange career, fighting sometimes for the Christians and sometimes for the Moors. He afterwards conquered Valencia, and died there; his body was embalmed, and two years later the body was brought, by his wife Ximena, sitting upon his favourite horse 'Babieca,' all the way to Burgos, looking, as is narrated, as terrible dead as when he was alive. His body sat upright for ten years beside the high altar in the Church of San Pedro de Cardena, near Burgos, and his bones are now in the Museum at Burgos.

The only other building I shall mention in this neighbourhood is the Convent of Las Huelgas, belonging to the Cistercian Order, situated some distance from Burgos. It was founded 1187 by Alfonso VIII., to expiate his sins and to gratify the wish of his Queen, Eleanor, daughter of our Henry II.; and is still a nunnery. The early Kings of Spain were buried here in a Chapel Royal, and various Kings of Castile were knighted here after performing their nocturnal vigil before the Altar. Here was knighted our own King Edward I. in 1254. The Nuns were all of noble families, and the Abbess was a princess-palatine inferior in dignity to no one but the Queen; she was mitred and had the power of 'life and death' over the inhabitants of surrounding districts. It is here that is still kept, though not visible, probably the most famous statue in Spain: it is that of Santiago (S' James); it is articulated in a marvellous manner and used to perform the ceremony of Knighthood and the placing of the Crown on the heads of monarchs. It is said to have been made by Nicodemus.

Only the transepts of the Church and the Cloisters are open to male visitors. The Cloisters, built in the year 1200, are beautiful early Gothic, and I found there only three different forms of Masons' marks, but these were all large and deeply cut in the stone arching:—

Las Huelgas:—

[Illustration: Three Masons' marks from Las Huelgas — a star/asterisk, a V-shape, and a triangle/tent shape]

Seville. The original Mosque was erected by Abu Yusup Jacob, Al Mansur in 1172; this included the eighth century wonderful Giralda Tower used at first as an astronomical observatory, the foundations of which were composed of destroyed Roman and Christian statuary. This Mosque continued to be used as a Cathedral after it was possessed by the Christians until the year 1401, when the present Cathedral was commenced. It took over 100 years to build, and covers the

[PDF Page 75 = Journal Page 62] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

same area as the original Mosque. The Giralda Tower then received its present upper structure.

The following are the Masons' marks:—

Seville Cathedral:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from Seville Cathedral — two rows of varied geometric symbols including arrows, crosses, anchors, stars, and other marks]

Granada. In the Moorish quarters of the town is an old building called 'Casa de Los Tiros,' or 'the house of mystery,' and nobody knows its history. It now belongs to an old Italian family, but formerly it was owned by the Architect of the Alhambra, who lived in the 'Generalife,' close to the Alhambra, in the thirteenth century. One of the rooms inside has a fine wooden ceiling with heads of Moorish Kings, and a museum of curiosities, including the sword of Boabdil (El Rey Chico), the last of the Mohammedan Sultans of Granada; but the most curious aspect of the building is that outside across the front are placed a Circle, Square, and Triangle, each surmounted by a heart and accompanied by a legend. In niches are statues of Mercury clothed as a herald, Hercules, Teseo (?Theseus), Jason, and Hector. Over the portal there is a sword piercing a heart with a handle pointing upwards towards the three geometrical figures with the legend, 'The heart commands':—

Casa de Los Tiros:—

[Illustration: Fig. 3 — Three geometric figures (triangle, square, octagon) each surmounted by a heart, with Spanish legends: "El (corazon) Manda / Gente de Gera / exercita las armas", "El (corazon) se guiebra hecho / aldava llamandamos / a la Batalla", "Aldabodas son que / las da Dios y las / siente el (corazon)"; below these, a vertical line with a heart symbol and the text "EL ♡ MANDA"]

On large stones of the unfinished Palace of Charles V. in the Alhambra I found the following Masons' marks:—

[Illustration: Three Masons' marks from the Alhambra — a circle-cross, an F-shape, and a double-cross]

[Page 76] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued) and Discussion

(PDF pages 76–90 correspond to printed journal pages 63–73)

[PDF Page 76 = Journal Page 63] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

Valencia del Cid, as it is called, is on the River Turia.

The Cathedral was commenced in 1262 and the Gothic octagonal Tower called El Miguelete was built in 1381. The Masons' marks on stones of the Cathedral are deeply cut and from two to three inches high. On the Tower El Miguelete the Masons' marks were still larger, and very numerous, mostly of two forms, an equilateral triangle and a rhombus:—

El Miguelete:—

[Illustration: Two Masons' marks from El Miguelete Tower — an equilateral triangle and a rhombus/parallelogram]

Most of the Stones had each a perfect equilateral triangle of three to four inches high and deeply cut, and these could be seen fifty feet up the Tower, there were so many that they could not have been the work of one Mason, and it would appear that either a contractor employed a number of Masons to work for him, or, what I think more probable, there was a Society of Masons, working under some form of co-operation, who used as their mark the symbol of the Logos, the "Maker of all things." Other Masons' marks on outside of Cathedral were the following:—

Valencia Cathedral:—

[Illustration: Multiple rows of Masons' marks from Valencia Cathedral — including pi-symbols, triangles, crosses, stars, compasses, and other geometric marks]

do. do. In Sala Capitular Antigua were:—

[Illustration: Two marks — an equilateral triangle and a cross-based mark, noted as "small 1 to 1½ inches, deeply cut, date A.D. 1358"]

In the Church of San Juan, built A.D. 1380, there are also a great number of large and perfect equilateral triangles cut on the stones, similar to those seen on the Cathedral Tower El Miguelete, carrying to the mind the same conviction of co-operative work in the Craft. The following are the Masons' marks:—

San Juan:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from San Juan Church, Valencia — about eleven marks including triangles, T-shapes, crosses, numbers, and letters]

Opposite to San Juan is the Longa de Seda, the Silk Hall, a beautiful Gothic building of A.D. 1482, which had the following carefully cut marks on the five or six lower tiers of stone; the upper tiers were defaced by picking:—

Longa de Seda:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from the Silk Hall (Longa de Seda), Valencia — seven marks including crosses, arrows, and other geometric symbols]

[PDF Page 77 = Journal Page 64] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

I also collected the following marks from an interesting old Church built A.D. 1400:—

San Martin:—

[Illustration: Masons' marks from San Martin Church — twelve marks in two rows including arrows, squares, Z-shapes, K-shapes, bowtie shapes, and a cross]

Tarragona. This is probably the most interesting City in Spain for Roman remains and early Gothic architecture.

The Cathedral was built A.D. 1089-1131.

Inside on the main round pillars were the following nine Masons' marks, six inches to nine inches high, very deeply cut, one visible on almost every stone, right up to the capitals, quite disfiguring them:—

[Illustration: Nine large Masons' marks from the main pillars of Tarragona Cathedral — square, W-shape, T-shape, compass-mark, E, N, M, triangle, and arrow mark]

On the large base stones of columns was:— S

Inside on walls were the following:—

[Illustration: Eight Masons' marks from interior walls of Tarragona Cathedral — asterisk, triangle, X-circle, arrow, cross, double-cross, asterisk, and cross-mark]

Outside on walls were found:—

[Illustration: Three rows of Masons' marks from exterior walls of Tarragona Cathedral — including E, S, triangles, arrows, K-shapes, compass shapes, circular marks, M, cross-marks, S, T, as well as mountain/W shapes, X, cross, and other geometric symbols]

Many of the above marks were cut a quarter-of-an-inch deep and appeared on stones with Roman inscriptions placed upside down.

In Fig. 4 I give a photograph of a curious and mysterious little Church called San Pablo, which has been preserved and is now enclosed in a court of the new Seminario; it is built up all round by other buildings; only the front being left free, with a pillar on either side. Its dimensions inside are 26 feet by 13 feet and 13 feet high, the ceiling is arched to two centres dividing it into a perfect double cube, and, to complete the mystery, we see placed over the altar close to the ceiling the symbol

[Illustration: The All-Seeing Eye within a triangle with radiating rays — the Eye of Providence]

Its early history is quite unknown, and nobody knows its age, but I have been able, I think, to determine the age of the

[PDF Page 78 = Journal Page — Plate] Illustration: Fig. 2. Stone Pulpit in Church of San Lesmes, Burgos.

[Full-page photograph of the stone pulpit in the Church of San Lesmes, Burgos, showing carved stonework with the Mason's square and compasses on the shield]

[PDF Page 79 = Journal Page — Plate] Illustration: Fig. 4. Tarragona. Doorway of Church of San Pablo.

[Full-page photograph showing the front facade of the small Church of San Pablo in Tarragona, enclosed between taller buildings, with a circular window above the doorway]

[PDF Page 80 = Journal Page — Plate] Illustration: Fig. 5. Tarragona. Doorway in City Wall.

[Full-page photograph showing a cyclopean doorway through the ancient Roman city wall of Tarragona, with a person sitting in the foreground among rubble]

[PDF Page 81 = Journal Page — Plate] Illustration: Fig. 6. Tarragona. The City Wall.

[Full-page photograph showing the massive Cyclopean city wall of Tarragona, with courses of large Roman squared stones visible above the prehistoric cyclopean foundation blocks]

[PDF Page 82 = Journal Page 65] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

doorway from the three Masons' marks found on the facade, though the pillars on either side may be much older. They are the following:—

San Pablo:—

[Illustration: Three Masons' marks from San Pablo Church facade — two L/U-shaped marks and a T-cross mark]

It will be seen that these, on the facade, are identical with marks on the outside walls of the Cathedral, and were probably, therefore, the work of the same Masons, which would place its (the facade's) building in A.D. 1089-1131, but the interior would seem to be much older and may be of Gnostic origin.

Close to the South Transept doorway of the Cathedral is the disused and very ancient little Church of Santa Tecla la Vieja, the Patron Saint of Tarragona, with interesting Romanesque carvings, which would appear to be also of the same age, as it will be seen that two of the Masons' marks in this little Church are the same as found on the main pillars and the other two are found on the walls of the Cathedral. The following are the four marks I found:—

San Tecla la Vieja:—

[Illustration: Four Masons' marks from Santa Tecla la Vieja — X-shape, H, N, M]

One of the most imposing sights in this wonderful city is the Cyclopean Wall, of which about a mile of length still stands as a monument of prehistoric Masons' work and the immense size of the old fortified town, which is said to have contained a million inhabitants; the lower five or six courses consist of enormous blocks of rough stones without cement; above these are built twelve courses of large squared stones of Roman work, and on the top of these are many courses of Moorish masonry. In Fig. 5 I give a photograph of one of the old cyclopean doorways situated to the east of Puerta del Rosario, and on the courses of Roman squared stones in Bajodo de Rosario I found the following marks cut one inch deep, some of which may be seen in Fig. 6:—

Roman marks:—

[Illustration: Seven Roman-era Masons' marks — N, N, X, bowtie/hourglass, K, and horizontal line]

Barcelona. The Cathedral was consecrated about A.D. 1058, and was built on the site of a Pagan Temple; it was converted by the Moors in the twelfth century into a Mosque, and used by them till the thirteenth century. The following are the Masons' marks:—

Outside:—

[Illustration: Two rows of Masons' marks from the exterior of Barcelona Cathedral — including X, cross, T, XX, pentagon, L, triangle, plus-sign, and many other geometric symbols]

There were a number of U marks but only on edges of stone, thus [small sketch of a U-mark on a stone edge]

The beautiful doorway Puerta Santa Eulalia was evidently only two men's work because almost every stone is marked in moulding thus [two marks shown] about 1½ inches high and deeply and carefully cut.

[PDF Page 83 = Journal Page 66] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain (continued)

Inside:—

[Illustration: Two rows of Masons' marks from the interior of Barcelona Cathedral — various complex marks including cross-anchors, triangles, compass shapes, Jewish stars, and other geometric symbols]

The following on round Pillars deeply cut 1½ inches high:—

[Illustration: Six Masons' marks on round pillars — including cross-with-loop, arrow-with-cross, rectangular mark, T, triangle, and asterisk]

Cloisters. Numerous symbols are engraved on the flagstones, a number of contiguous flagstones have 'shoes' upon them covering the large vault of the Guild of Shoemakers, others have scissors, etc., etc., for other Guilds.

Gerona. The Cathedral was founded by Charlemagne A.D. 786, re-built in 1016, and consecrated in 1038. It was altered in 1416, and has the widest Gothic vaulted nave in Christendom, its span being 73 feet. The Masons' marks are as follows:—

Outside:—

[Illustration: Two rows of Masons' marks from the exterior of Gerona Cathedral — including N, cross, U, P, V, O, W, I, triangle, 3-shape, Z, less-than sign, arch shapes, and cross-in-box]

Inside:— [Illustration: Three marks — diamond, arrow, and pentagon/shield]

The Bell Tower.—Inside the winding staircase on concave surfaces were:—

[Illustration: Eight Masons' marks from the Bell Tower staircase — H, 4, circle, 3, X-2, 4, T-arrow, N]

and on the large stone slabs on floor of upper storey of tower were also the numerals in place of Masons' marks, but the stones were not placed according to the numbers.

[Illustration: Numerals used as marks: 1, 2, 3, 4]

In conclusion I would like to point out that there is quite a marked difference in style in Masons' marks for each epoch. The earlier marks are of a much simpler character, deeply cut but roughly executed; such as those found in the Cyclopean Wall, on Roman squared stones of the third to fifth centuries, and, later on, those in the Cathedral at Gerona, where numerals were employed, and again at Tarragona, especially those of San Pablo. But with the introduction of pure Gothic in the twelfth century there appear Masons' marks of singular beauty, deeply cut and artistically executed. Then, with the decline of pure Gothic in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the marks also deteriorate; they are not deeply cut, do not keep to exact forms, and later on become little more than scratches, and are poorly executed.

In examining a collection of Masons' marks from a number of important buildings one cannot help recognizing the importance these 'vestiges' may have for gaining a true knowledge, not only of the age of the fabric itself, but of the lives, industry, education, and movements from one centre to another, or even from one country to another, of those forerunners of our Craft, who have left for

[PDF Page 84 = Journal Page 67] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — End; Discussion begins

our wonder and admiration those marvellous architectural works which, as stated in our oldest manuscripts, must ever place Masonry at the head of all the Sciences.

Bro. Gordon Hills said:—

I have much pleasure in proposing a vote of thanks to Bro. Klein for the interesting paper we have just heard. We much regret that he could not be here to read it himself, but we may congratulate him and ourselves too that it lost nothing in the reading in the hands of our worthy Secretary, to whom our thanks are also due for his usual kind offices in reading the paper in our Brother's absence.

The paper is not one that easily lends itself to criticism; it introduces us to a country with a history of many races and arts of the full significance of which, as regards our special researches, we have yet very much to learn. In this present contribution we have, above all, a valuable addition to the many illustrations of Masons Marks and other kindred methods of identification contained in our Transactions. From the cursory glance I have had at the original paper the marks appear to be of the character usual elsewhere, and some of them have been published in Mr. Street's well-known Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain, so long the standard book on that subject. Many of these marks, dating back to the earliest times, are to be found persistently in use down to the present day, and of this I am able to give an interesting illustration in a series of modern Masons' banker marks, which was given me by the late Bro. John Allan, Clerk of Works at Lincoln Cathedral, who had collected them from those in use on works there and elsewhere which had come under his superintendence. I take the present opportunity to ask Bro. Songhurst to publish this collection in the Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, so that they may be available for comparison with those in this paper.

The use of marks resembling Arabic numerals seems easily explained in Spain, where that system of notation might be well known through those who would probably be its earliest practitioners in Europe. There would not necessarily be any idea of numeration attached to the numbers employed as Masons' marks; they would be used simply as a welcome variation from other marks already in use and which the user did not want his mark to be confused with.

Bro. Gould, in his History, calls attention to the U mark mentioned by Bro. Klein, and says that it is of frequent occurrence in Spain. It resembles a Hindu caste symbol, and appears as a mark on stone at Ispahan.

With regard to the dates which Bro. Klein assigns to various buildings, I would venture a word of warning as to generalizations with regard to work which has passed through so many changes and re-buildings. When one attempts to attach definite dates to special portions of the buildings, and to draw inferences from marks which are common to so many periods, one can only safely do so backed by a very intimate knowledge of the structure and its history.

I do not gather that there is any very sure foundation for connecting the pulpit which Bro. Klein mentions at the Church of San Lesmes with the Saint of that name, and I altogether doubt the special application of the text from the Psalms to the Saint's own particular history—its application being so usual and general to all as "strangers and pilgrims on the earth" desiring "a better country, that is, an heavenly," of which our Brother himself, as we know from his writings, has perhaps almost caught a glimpse from his Watch Tower of Spiritual Discernment. The emblems on the stairs and pulpit suggest that these works were the gift of some local guild of artificers. We have ascribed to this venerated Saint and local benefactor not only the patronage and promotion of many important works of building, but also, as so often occurs in similar cases, he is claimed as actually designing and carrying out the improvements; but it is doubtful whether his share was really so intimate as is suggested by Bro. Klein's informants—whether Saint Adelelmo really did more than initiate the projects which pass under his name. In so many similar cases mistaken ideas as to the

[PDF Page 85 = Journal Page 68] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — Discussion (continued)

actual parts that promoters of great works have played have credited them with shares in the design and execution for which there is no real foundation.

The identification of Adelelmo and St. Lesmes with St. Elmo, the well-known patron Saint of Sailors launches us into a series of confused identities, and notwithstanding what is probably the popular idea on the spot, I think it is exceedingly doubtful if they are the same individual. I do not find that Adelelmo is a Canonized Saint, which probably starts the confusion with others who have been generally commemorated in the calendar. One can see how the name Adelelmo might easily be shortened to that of St. Elmo, yet the alternative Lesmes seems very unlike the original and much more suggests the name of another Saint—St. Erasmus—who is usually identified with St. Elmo. This Saint was a bishop martyred in Italy in the persecutions under Diocletian, and, as St. Elmo, is famous on the shores of the Mediterranean, in Calabria, Sicily, and Spain, as the protector of mariners against storms and tempests; a taper in his hand or on his head distinguishes his representations and refers to the lights which play about the rigging and to which his name has been given. This Saint, commemorated in the calendar on June 2nd, was done to death by a particularly cruel method of disembowelment, which led to his being invoked in affections of particular parts of the human frame, as an old writer tersely puts it: "Erasmus heales the collike and the griping of the guttes."¹ That our forefathers in mediæval times were no more immune from such maladies than their descendants we may deduce from the fact that St. Erasmus seems to have been quite a popular Saint in those days, and his effigy appeared in many of our parish churches. The tradition at Burgos, it would appear, has confused the well-known local benefactor and the more widely renowned Sailors' Saint; but this does not exhaust the confusion about the latter. Another Saint arose in Spain, who is also claimed as St. Elmo, Patron of Mariners,—St. Peter Gonzales, a Dominican,—who flourished from 1190-1246. This Saint accompanied Ferdinand III. in his campaigns against the Moors, and is invoked against storms, he having by his prayers averted a tempest with thunder and lightning which threatened a congregation to which he was preaching in the open. He was also specially distinguished by his ministrations to sailors, not only on shore, but seeking to benefit them by visiting them in their vessels. This Spanish Saint, commemorated on April 15th, like the earlier St. Erasmus, might also as St. Elmo be confused with the local Saint of Burgos.

This series of Masons' Marks was given to Bro. Gordon Hills by the late Bro. John Allan, then Clerk of Works at Lincoln Cathedral, in October, 1913. The marks were examples only of many which had been recorded by Masons employed on works in various parts of England under his superintendence. He wrote: "You will notice that there are no curved lines, all straight, and every line made by two strokes of the chisel and mallet, that is understood by the Workmen." The numbers attached to the marks refer to the information Bro. Allan noted as to the names and peculiarities of some of the makers of the marks, as follows:—

No.	Name	No.	Name
1.	T. Thompson.	9.	Fred Robey.
2.	Andrew Vail.	10.	Crosthwaite—a northern man.
3.	Andrew Cross.	11.	King—a left-handed mason.
4.	Bolt.	12.	Block—a German.
5.	Harry Harrison.	13.	Fred Frost.
6.	Nobel—a Swede.	14.	John Hand.
7.	Farr—a left-handed mason.	15.	Jenney—a Frenchman.
8.	Quayle.	16.	Andrew Penney.

¹ Naogeorgus' Popish Kingdom, translated by Barnabe Googe, London, 1570. Effigies of St. Erasmus are recorded to have been in existence in churches at Buckenham, St. Nicholas, Norfolk; Lullingstone, Kent; Cirencester, etc. British Archæological Journal, xxi., 195.

[PDF Page 86 = Journal Page 69] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — Modern Masons' Banker Marks; Discussion

MODERN MASONS' BANKER MARKS.

[Illustration: A large plate showing numbered Modern Masons' Banker Marks — approximately 80–90 marks arranged in rows, with numbers 1–16 marking groups corresponding to the named masons listed above. The marks are all geometric, composed entirely of straight lines, including arrows, triangles, crosses, zigzags, letter-forms, and various combinations thereof.]

Comments were also made by Bros. Canon Horsley and J. A. Symmonds.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett writes:—

Some years ago, when the subject of Masons' Marks first began to attract the attention of students, great hopes were entertained that very important results would follow from a careful examination and comparison of the examples to be found in such profusion in various parts of our own and other countries. A large number of Marks have been collected and reproduced in the pages of our Transactions, and elsewhere, but practically nothing further has been done. In his concluding paragraph, Bro. Klein has indicated several ways in which these Marks may be found valuable as a source of information about the Craftsmen who left them as records upon their handiwork, and it does certainly seem due to the possible importance of the subject that some competent and painstaking student with sufficient leisure time should devote himself to it. It would be very interesting indeed if such an enquiry were to lead to the discovery that some definite system was followed in making the choice of a Mark, and that the Marks themselves possess a Symbolic meaning, besides simply serving as identification signs.

In the Capilla del Constable in the Cathedral at Burgos near by the Tombs there is (or was) preserved an imposing Column of Jasper of immense mass. The guide books assert that nothing is known about the origin or purpose of this great monolith. Does Bro. Klein attach any Masonic importance to this relic?

[PDF Page 87 = Journal Page 70] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — Discussion (continued)

The mention of the Convent of Las Huelgas reminds one of the immense importance formerly attaching to this institution, as is shown by the overwhelming catalogue of titles and dignities enjoyed by the Lady Abbess and the immense powers she possessed, including lordship over numerous separate religious houses, thirteen towns, and upwards of fifty villages, con jurisdiccion omnimoda, privativa, cuasi Episcopal, nullius Diocesis. The word Huelga means 'rest,' 'relaxation,' 'repose,' and the Convent is erected upon the site of a Château-de-Plaisance where the ancient Kings of Castile were wont to refresh themselves after the toils of war and the tribulations of government. The Convent was founded by Alfonso VIII. in expiation of those particular sins which he supposed had called down upon him the Divine displeasure which showed itself in the defeat at Alarcos, near Badajoz, in 1195. His Queen Eleanor joined him in the pious work which is supposed to have averted God's wrath and secured the victory of Las Navas to the Christian Arms in 1212.

The occurrence of Masons' Marks is perhaps not so very significant, for it must always be remembered that these may after all be no more than tally-marks or recognition signs. But to have found groups of Working Tools and Emblems, such as Bro. Klein describes, is another matter, and I think that our Brother would have been fully justified had he used a stronger term than 'Vestiges' when selecting a title for his very interesting paper.

One of the most striking 'finds' is that remarkable building in the Moorish quarter of the ancient town of Granada, which Bro. Klein tells us is known as the Casa de Los Tiros. The Spanish word Tiro has many meanings not all of them very closely allied. One meaning is 'trickery' or 'imposition': another is 'trial': and another is the one given by Bro. Klein 'mystery.' Now it is, I believe, a fact that Orientals to this day are wont to describe a Masonic Lodge by phrases which translated convey one or other of these meanings, and they sometimes go a little further and speak of it as the 'House of the Devil,' which may be taken to be a combination of the first and third. The Casa de Los Tiros, now the property of the Grimaldi family, formerly belonged to the Architect of the Alhambra, and was presumably used by that eminent personage, but not as a dwelling place—for, as Bro. Klein remarks, he lived in the 'Generalife' hard by the Palace. The Emblems on the front of the building are very suggestive, and so also is its traditional name. It seems quite probable that the Casa de Los Tiros was originally the meeting-place of a Building Corporation or Society of Masons like to that one at Valencia del Cid, which employed the Logos Emblem as its corporate Mark. And does it not seem that we have here very distinct vestiges of a Speculative Symbolism accompanying the Operative Art? The curious and mysterious little Church of San Pablo, at Tarragona, may be another example, but Bro. Klein apparently considers a Gnostic origin more likely.

We are greatly indebted to Bro. Klein for a most valuable and instructive and at the same time deeply interesting account of his discoveries in a region where few if any Masonic students have previously laboured.

Bro. H. G. McLachlan writes:—

There is a danger of Bro. Klein misleading some as to the date for the introduction of Gothic (so-called) architecture into Spain; though I believe he is under no misconception thereto, neither does he wish to mislead. But, with the exception of Tarragona Cathedral, he does not refer to Romanesque, and his other references to Gothic might lead some to believe all the other buildings he referred to were either Gothic or Moorish.

The earliest known work which can be so described is to be seen in the oldest part of the Abbey of St. Denis, near Paris, and Noyon Cathedral, not far distant from that, dates 1140 and 1150 A.D. England next followed France, for William of Sens, the Frenchman, introduced the new style at Canterbury in 1171, and shortly after it was used at Wells Cathedral and elsewhere. It is doubtful whether the style was used in Spain before 1221, when an English bishop

[PDF Page 88 = Journal Page 71] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — Discussion (continued)

introduced it at Burgos, as mentioned by Bro. Klein. All the work of San Lesmes, and that earlier than the thirteenth century in Spain referred to by Bro. Klein when not Moorish, was Romanesque.

Is not Bro. Klein in error when he writes of the Patron Saint of Burgos: "His name was originally Adelelmo, which was later changed to San Lesmes"? San forms no part of the name; and the same may be said of Adel, which latter means noble: it is the same as the prefixes Athel and Ethel of our English Saxon Kings. Adel is likewise used in German names of the earlier Christian period. Thus you have the name Elmo, hence "St. Elmo's lights." The name of Lesmes is probably a local variant of the name; the term San was probably first used, as suggested by Bro. Klein, and afterwards approved by the Romish Church. Possibly Elmo discarded the prefix of Adel.

Can Bro. Klein give the date of the Golden Staircase at Burgos Cathedral? It follows that it is of a much earlier period than the 'Puerta de la Pellejeria.' The West front of the Cathedral I find given as being between 1456-87, and the Central tower as nearly 100 years later.

The lecturer says, "Seville Cathedral took over 100 years to build." Can the time be fairly reckoned? It is often stated the mediæval cathedrals took 100, 200, or even 300 years to build; but the truth is that, in the first place, five to ten years, in some cases even a lesser time, saw the whole work begun and finished. Yet scarcely was this done, when an extension was desired, a portion of the former building was pulled down, and something quite different built or commenced. This happened time after time; works also were stopped for various causes, and the period of stoppage and re-building was counted in as the period of the actual building. The recent war has given us an instance of this in the cases of the London County Hall and Southwark Bridge; two only of thousands of cases. Cologne Cathedral was commenced 1248 A.D., and the choir dedicated 1322 A.D.; it so remained for over 500 years, even falling into decay, and has only been completed in our time. But during the 74 years was steady progress made? I doubt it. The truth is, we rarely have sufficient data to give facts. Anyway, Seville Cathedral, owing to its immense size, must have taken a considerable time for its erection, and I believe more rapid progress was made in the thirteenth century than in the fifteenth.

It might be noted that Valencia Cathedral has a splendid rose window, the tracery of which within the circle is formed by two intersecting equilateral triangles, the points of which touch the circle, thus forming a hexagon in the centre, surrounded by six smaller equilateral triangles. The equilateral triangle played an important part in middle Gothic work.

An interesting point as to Gerona Cathedral is mentioned by M. Viollet le Duc in his Dictionnaire raisonné de l'architecture Française du II° au 16° siècle, t. I., p. 112. It relates to the employment of a French architect thereon, and is extracted from a Latin register "ab anno 1320 ad 1322." I give the French translation of the extract:—

Le chapitre de la cathédrale de Gérone se décide, en 1312, à remplacer la vielle église romane par une nouvelle, plus grande et plus digne. Les travaux ne commencent pas immédiatement, et l'on nomme les administrateurs d'l'œuvre (obreros), Raymond de Vilaric et Arnauld de Montredon. En 1316, les travaux, sont en activité, et l'on voit apparaître, en fevrier 1320, sur les registres capitulaires, un architecte désigné sous le nom de maitre Henry de Narbonne. Maitre Henry meurt, et sa place est occupée par un autre architecte son compatriote, nommé Jacques de Favarüs; celui ci s'engage a venir de Narbonne six fois l'an, et le chapitre lui assure un traitement de deux cent cinquante sous par trimestre.

It is mentioned that a woman was then paid a day's wage of "a denier," or one twelfth of a sou.

Bro. Klein refers to certain marks in the cloisters of Barcelona Cathedral as "shoes." It might be noted that J. T. Perry, in his Chronology of Mediæval and Renaissance Architecture, published 1893, illustrates some Masons' Marks

[PDF Page 89 = Journal Page 72] Vestiges of the Craft in Spain — Discussion (continued)

from the N.W. Portal of Rheims Cathedral, which might also be considered as "shoes" or "key-holes."

In conclusion, if any Brother wishes to learn more on the subject, I would refer him to the excellent work by the late G. E. Street, R.A., the architect of the Law Courts in London, published 1865. It is entitled Some account of Gothic architecture in Spain; it is to be noted that Mr. Street illustrated it with many Masons' Marks, and named the buildings in which they are found.

Bro. Sydney T. Klein writes as follows in reply:—

It was with great regret that, owing to my increasing infirmity, I was unable to be present at the reading of my Paper; but it has been very gratifying to see, from the kind remarks of those who took part in the discussion, and from letters received from others who were present, that my Paper was so favourably received.

Bro. Gordon Hills calls attention to the danger of stating exact dates for the building of Cathedrals. It may indeed be said that the construction of many of these old edifices extended over even centuries; they were continually being added to or even re-built in parts, but I would point out that such warning does not apply to this Paper, as I have confined my statements to the date when the building was actually commenced and when it was consecrated, the latter being the date when the original design may be said to have been completed.

I cannot add any further information concerning the old pulpit of San Lesmes and the many interesting and useful works attributed to that wonderful man, but I suggest that the facts I have given as to the renown in which he was held for so many centuries after his death, culminating in the building of one of the largest and finest churches to his memory, and also that the Municipality of Burgos not only accepted him as their Patron Saint, but, even 800 years after his death, still attend in full state, on the occasions of the principal feasts dedicated to him, as an acknowledgment that he did those works, go a long way to prove what an extraordinary man he must have been. The Texts also on the pulpit with the Masonic designs on centre shield, are so applicable to his foreign origin and architectural skill, and, as far as I have seen in my travels, so unique, that I cannot accept the suggestion that we have not strong evidence in all these facts for gaining a delightful insight into the life and doings of a wonderful old forerunner of our Craft, so far back as the eleventh century.

Bro. Tuckett contributes many interesting details to the subject, and I believe with him that some day, when the great number of Masons' Marks collected from so many old buildings, have been carefully collected, important information may be forthcoming concerning the lives and aspirations of that wonderful band of Masons who have left for our enlightenment such beautiful examples of their skill in every phase of architectural design. I did not see the column of jasper, to which he refers, in one of the chapels of Burgos Cathedral, and cannot, therefore, express an opinion on it.

I cannot understand why Bro. McLachlan should think that readers of my Paper may conclude that I confined my investigations solely to buildings in the Gothic style. Most people interested in the subject are aware that Gothic architecture had its beginning in Europe about the middle of the twelfth century, and it first appeared in Spain towards the end of that century or the beginning of the thirteenth; before that date any building would naturally be either of Romanesque or Moorish character.

The most interesting aspect of architecture in Spain is the fact that the war between Cross and Crescent was carried on between Christian and Moorish builders in as ruthless a manner as between the combatants. The two styles of architecture are seen existing alongside for the whole period of over 700 years without influencing each other. Even when building contemporaneously in the same district, they confined themselves rigidly to their own particular style. We have in this an extraordinary proof of the antagonism which existed between the Cross and the Crescent, root and branch, and which may still be seen in the East even at the present day.

[PDF Page 90 = Journal Page 73] Notes and Queries

NOTES AND QUERIES.

[Illustration: Decorative initial letter "C" with an hourglass or sundial motif]

Church of the Four Crowned Martyrs at Canterbury.—The first church mentioned in Canterbury, except St. Martin's, is that of the Four Crowned Martyrs. The site cannot now be marked out, but from Bede's description of the fire it was not far from the Archbishop's Palace, and not improbably just where St. Alphege's Church now stands, whereof the first Rector given by Haxted was Robert Islip, 1405. The registers of St. Alphege date from 1558; and its tower had pre-Norman masonry, but was ruined by "restoration" about 1884. In the north, or newer Saxon part of the city, says Dr. Cox, stood a church dedicated to St. Alphege, which is supposed to have disappeared as the Cathedral churchyard advanced. Possibly then its dedication was transferred to the Church of the Four Crowned Martyrs whose claim to remembrance paled before that of the more recently martyred Saxon Archbishop Alphege. Could not Canterbury brethren of the Craft find out more in the Cathedral Library?

J. W. Horsley.

Mellitus, Archbishop of Canterbury (619-624), and the Quatuor Coronati.—The following extract is from Chapters in the History of Old St. Paul's, W. Sparrow Simpson, D.D., F.S.A., London, 1881, p. 12:—

On the 2nd of February, 619, Archbishop Laurence died, and Mellitus succeeded him in the Archiepiscopal throne of Canterbury. . . . We will follow the guidance of the Venerable Bede. . . . There was a terrible conflagration in Canterbury; the whole city was in danger of being consumed by fire; water was thrown upon the flames, but all in vain; they continued to spread with terrific power; the Church of the Four Crowned Martyrs, martyrs who had fallen in the persecution of Diocletian, stood in the place where the fire raged most fiercely: thither the Prelate, though weighed down by his infirmities and the pains of sickness, bade his servants to carry him. Strong men had laboured to no purpose to put out the flames—he would show them the efficacy of prayer. He prayed fervently, and the wind which had been blowing from the south now turned to the north; the flames were beaten back, and presently, the wind ceasing altogether, were entirely extinguished, and the city was saved. This is the last recorded act of Mellitus. He ruled over the Church of Canterbury for five years, and departed to his rest on the 24th day of April, 624: a day long observed with honour in the Church of London, as may be seen in its ancient Calendar.

Bro. Sparrow Simpson, at p. 9, tells that Mellitus came to England in 601 and was consecrated Bishop of London by St. Augustine himself in 604.

J. E. S. Tuckett.

Square.—It is interesting to try and trace the usage of symbolic language based, if not on Freemasonry, at least on its operations. I have not seen the following example cited by our brethren.

In January, 1668, Sir William Temple, speaking of his negotiations with De Witt, in his despatches writes:—"I must add these words, to do Mr. De Witt right, that I found him as plain, as direct and square, in the course of his business, as any man could be." It is quoted in Macaulay's Essay on Rt. Hon. F. P. Courtenay's "Memoirs of the Life Works and Correspondence of Sir William Temple," in October, 1838.

T. J. Westropp.

Pages 091-105

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 91–105

(PDF pages 91–105 = journal pages 74–88 approx.)

Notes and Queries (continued)

"Free Mason" in 1599.

The following entry occurs in the parish register of Holy Trinity, Much Wenlock, co. Salop:—

"1599. Buried the 28th September. Walter Hancox, free mason."

Contributed by Bro. W. Harry Rylands, F.S.A.

Society of Moonkification.

In a MS. volume in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, containing "Captain Stewart's MSS.," is a document headed "Moore Papers," which contains the following:—

"Don Edward Moore, his Majesties Agent at Tangier, was admitted a Member of the Society of Moonkification the 29th of October 1657 in the Presence of (certain names follow)."

This curious name "Moonkification" seems almost certainly a play upon "Monkification," or admission to a monastic order, and may be a jest or mock ceremony. Whether it has any Masonic significance is doubtful.

Contributed by Bro. Rodk. H. Baxter.

Obituary

The Lodge records with deep regret the death of the following Correspondence Circle members during the past year:—

Louis Leroy Baker. Initiated in the Lodge of the Transvaal, No. 2706. Died 1918.

Major Frank Bird Carter. Died on active service, 1918.

Charles William Cole. A member for many years, distinguished for his contributions on Masonic symbolism.

Elias Martin Guddon. Long a Correspondence Circle member; died after a prolonged illness.

Captain B. J. Friend. Died on service overseas, 1918.

John Glass. A Scottish Mason of long standing.

William Hibberdine. Member of several lodges in the Midland district.

Thorp Buttolph Jennings. A zealous student of Masonic history and a regular contributor to these Transactions.

Dr. Kristian Semb. Kielland. A distinguished Norwegian Mason; corresponding member of several learned societies.

Robert Moffat Marples. For many years a devoted Correspondence Circle member.

William Bennett Maye. A well-known figure in London Masonry.

Major Alfred Ralph Nethersole. Died on service, 1918.

Lieut. Edwin B. B. Newton. Killed in action, 1918.

Rowland Plumbe, F.R.I.B.A. A noted architect and Masonic student; contributed several papers on architectural history to the Lodge.

George Ridout. A member of long standing in the Southern district.

George Lamb Scott. Died after a brief illness.

Robert Lee Sebastian. A Colonial Mason distinguished for antiquarian research.

Henry Simons. A well-known figure in London Masonry.

James R. Smith. A valued member for upwards of twenty years.

James Speedy. Killed in action, 1918. A young and promising student of Masonic history.

Edgar Tangye. Of the distinguished Cornish family; a generous benefactor to Masonic charities.

Frank Irving Whitney. An American member; died in the United States.

Proceedings — Friday, 7th May, 1919

The Lodge was opened at 5.30 p.m.

Present: Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills (W.M.); E. H. Dring (as S.W.); W. B. Hextall (as J.W.); Cecil Powell; W. J. Songhurst (Secretary); Herbert Bradley; J. P. Simpson; and a number of Correspondence Circle members and visitors.

The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed.

Memorial to Lieut.-Col. Sisson Cooper Pratt

The W.M. called attention to the death of Lieut.-Col. Sisson Cooper Pratt, one of the founders of the Lodge. The Secretary read the following tribute, which was unanimously adopted and ordered to be recorded on the minutes:—

Lieut.-Col. Sisson Cooper Pratt was born in 1844. He was initiated in Bayard Lodge No. 1615 in 1876, and subsequently became a member of Kaiser-i-Hind Lodge No. 1724 and Moira Lodge No. 92. He was one of the original founders of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 in 1886, occupied the Chair of K. S. in 1889–90, and throughout his long association with the Lodge was a faithful friend and generous supporter of its work. He died in 1918, mourned by all who knew him.

It was resolved that a letter of condolence be sent to Lieut.-Col. Pratt's family.

"Three Masonic Novels"

By Bro. Henry Lovegrove, P.Asst. Grand Supt. of Works.

(Read 7th May, 1919.)

In the early days of my Masonic career I remember being struck by frequent allusions in general literature to mysteries resembling those of Freemasonry. The Fehm-Gerichte of mediaeval Germany seemed to promise a rich field, and I was equally intrigued by the romantic associations of the Rosicrucians. When, later, I discovered that novels dealing directly with Freemasonry existed, I sought them out with some eagerness; and the three works I propose to consider to-night are, I think, representative of the class.

I. Amy Lawrence, the Freemason's Daughter

By F. J. Smith.

This is a novel of the early Victorian period and belongs to the school of domestic fiction popular at that time. The heroine, Amy Lawrence, is the daughter of a worthy Freemason, and much of the plot turns upon the honour and secrecy which her father's Masonic obligations impose. The author displays a superficial acquaintance with the external forms of Masonry, and the Craft is presented throughout in an entirely favourable light as a bond of brotherhood and mutual aid. The writing is competent rather than inspired, and the novel now possesses interest chiefly as a document of mid-Victorian attitudes towards the institution. So far as I can ascertain, it was never widely circulated outside the fraternity.

II. The Freemasons

By L. S. Gibson. London: Chatto and Windus, 1905.

This work, of more recent date, is a novel of adventure and romance with Freemasonry forming an important element of the plot. The Lodge scenes, though inevitably imprecise for obvious reasons, are drawn with more confidence than in the earlier work, and the author shows some genuine sympathy with Masonic ideals. The villain of the piece misuses his Masonic membership for sordid ends, and his exposure and downfall constitute the moral centre of the story. The book was reviewed sympathetically in the Masonic press at the time of its publication.

III. Love and the Freemason

By Guy Thorne. London, 1905.

Of the three works under review, this is the most ambitious and the most interesting from a literary standpoint. Guy Thorne (the pseudonym of C. Ranger Gull) was a prolific and popular novelist who brought considerable narrative skill to his subject. The plot revolves about a young man, newly made a Freemason, whose membership becomes entangled with the love story in ways both credible and dramatic. The Masonic scenes are handled with discretion; the author neither reveals nor pretends to reveal anything of genuine esoteric import, but uses the atmosphere of secrecy and brotherhood effectively as a narrative device. The climax of the novel turns upon a Mason's obligation to aid a brother in distress, and the resolution is ingeniously contrived. Of the three novels, this is the one most likely to engage the modern reader.

I should also mention in passing Sandoval, or the Freemason, a Spanish tale by the author of Don Esteban, which I have not myself read, and Tobin's comedy The Honeymoon, in which Masonic references play a minor rôle.

Discussion

The W.M. (Bro. Gordon P. G. Hills) proposed a vote of thanks to Bro. Lovegrove for a most entertaining and instructive paper. The subject of Freemasonry in fiction was one which, when surveyed broadly, would doubtless yield a very considerable harvest of references. He invited brethren to add to the list from their own knowledge.

The vote of thanks was carried with acclamation.

Bro. W. B. Hextall said he could add a number of titles to those mentioned by Bro. Lovegrove. The earliest work he could call to mind that treated of Masonry in a fictional or semi-fictional form was The Grand Mystery of Free-Masons discover'd (1724), which, while primarily a mock-exposure, had many of the characteristics of a roman à clef. Jachin and Boaz (1762) similarly occupied a borderland between fiction and purported revelation. In the realm of recognised fiction, The Spiritual Quixote by Richard Graves (1772) contained a well-known chapter satirising the Lodge. Later in the century, Wilkie Collins' The Woman in White employed the atmosphere of secret society, and though not specifically Masonic, drew on similar material. Mrs. Lynn Linton's The One too Many (1894) dealt directly with Masonry and was notable for its hostile treatment of the institution. Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu's The House by the Churchyard contained Masonic references of some interest. He would also mention The Broken Seal by Samuel D. Greene (Boston, 1870), a sensational American novel connected with the Morgan affair.

Bro. Rodk. H. Baxter said that he had read with great pleasure Basillisa: the Free of a Secret Craft by Compton Reade, which was known to few brethren. The author prefixed to the tale the following quatrain:—

Free of the Craft whose passwords none may know, Whose signs are sealed from all who stand without, She walked the Lodge where mystic torches glow, And bore the Word that leaves the world in doubt.

The novel itself, he thought, deserved to be better known among Masonic students.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett (written contribution): He would venture to draw attention to several works of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries which had a bearing on the subject, though they were not in the strict sense Masonic novels. Sethos by the Abbé Jean Terrasson (1731; English translation 1732) depicted initiation ceremonies closely paralleling those of Masonry and had been used by Mozart as a source for The Magic Flute. Chrysal, or The Adventures of a Guinea by Charles Johnston (1760) contained a vivid satirical picture of a Masonic Lodge meeting. St. Leon by William Godwin (1799) was concerned with Rosicrucianism, a kindred subject. Melmoth the Wanderer by the Rev. Charles Robert Maturin was another work in the Gothic tradition with analogous secret-society themes. St. Irvyne, or The Rosicrucian by Percy Bysshe Shelley (a youthful work, 1811) similarly deserved mention. Salathiel the Immortal by the Rev. George Croly was a somewhat neglected romance touching upon mysteries of initiation. Finally, he would cite Cecil Merryville; or The Female Freemasons (1844), a curiosity in the literature of the subject.

He thought that a systematic bibliography of Masonic fiction, were any brother to undertake it, would constitute a valuable contribution to the literature of the Craft.

The W.M. thanked all who had contributed to the discussion and expressed the hope that the subject might be pursued further in the pages of Ars Quatuor Coronatorum.

(continued in pages-106-120.md)

Pages 106-120

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 106–120

(PDF pages 106–120 = journal pages 89–103 approx.)

Discussion — "Three Masonic Novels" (continued)

(Journal page 89)

Another anonymous production is On the Square. A Novel. "I will strive to live with ease and care, upon the Level by the Square." Dublin: Hodges, Figgis and Co., Grafton Street; London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co.; Edinburgh: Andrew Elliott. 1885.

Our own Lodge thinly disguised as 'The Lodge of the Four Kings' figures prominently in one of the stories by Mr. H. G. Wells. It is the one called The Story of the Inexperienced Ghost and it occurs in a volume bearing the title Twelve Stories and a Dream. The idea is as follows: A certain Sanderson is:—

"a Freemason, a member of the Lodge of the Four Kings, which devotes itself so ably to the study and elucidation of all the mysteries of Masonry past and present."

He is 'by no means the least' of the Lodge Members and has knowledge of a 'certain branch of esoteric Masonry' which enables him to supply one Clayton with information which the latter seeks on behalf of a Ghost with whom he has become acquainted. This unhappy Spectre is dreadfully bored with the haunting business and wants to cut the whole thing but cannot remember the final 'passes' necessary to enable him to disappear permanently. Sanderson of Our Lodge gives Clayton the requisite tuition at the Golf Club House before a numerous audience, and Clayton rashly goes through the entire series of 'passes.' As a result Clayton does not vanish, but he goes out (as a light is extinguished), in other words, he drops dead before the horrified golfers. But what about Bro. Sanderson's Obligation in that 'certain branch of esoteric Masonry'? And was it not hard luck for the Ghost?—Unless, of course, Clayton was able to tell him all about it over there!

Mr. Frank Richardson, the novelist, in one of his wilder stories, tells how a young lady and her fiancé somehow get mixed up in their identities so that he inhabits her body and she his. She attends a Lodge of which he is a member and signs the book with her own name, to the great amusement of the Tyler, who imagines that it is a case of a Lover whose mind is so constantly running on the subject of his Lass that he even writes her name where he ought to sign his own. 'Never happened before in all the thirty years I've been a Tyler,' says the Tyler, or words to that effect.

I cannot remember the title of a very thrilling romance in which the English Hero, having fallen into the clutches of the Spanish Inquisition, and being about to receive treatment with the thumbscrew preparatory to being burnt alive, experiments upon the Inquisitor with the Masonic Grip. By a lucky chance the Inquisitor is a Brother Mason, and all ends very happily.

A work of a very different stamp is:— The Lost Word. By Evelyn Underhill, Author of 'The Grey World,' 'The Miracles of Our Lady S. Mary,' etc. 'What means this Mystery?' 'The loss of the Word of a Mason, which is lost indeed; but may, we hope, by our aid be recovered.' Ceremonies of the Knights of the White Eagle. London. William Heinemann. 1907. 1 vol. 8°. pp. 316. Any of the Brethren who have not read this are recommended to do so as there is every reason to suppose that both idea and treatment will be found to be interesting: Paul Vickery, the son of a Cathedral Dean, possesses as a boy 'that old ecstasy of building—the dreamer's soul and the craftsman's will.' He loves the Cathedral which for him represents 'the home of every mystery.' He can 'give no reason for the passion which filled his life. As the years went by it taught him to look out from the house built with hands to the other, so that he saw in the sky and the forest the column and arch of the world.' A kindred spirit is Rogers, a Verger and 'a Freemason of the more imaginative kind,' who 'sought craft symbolism in every detail of Gothic ornament,' and who felt that 'a Freemason is the proper guardian of a building that Freemasons once built.' There's a powerful fascination . . . in the knowledge of being . . . a brother of the builders of the past.' The two become great chums and together they make important discoveries, including a wonderful sculptured fourteenth century frieze and a Mason's Mark. Paul is intended by his parents for Oxford

(Journal page 90)

and the Church, and to Oxford he goes in due course. There he meets Hugh Feltham, 'rich, slow-minded, and devout,' and Paul and Hugh become 'comrades of the indulgent master and trusty dog type.' But Paul takes to Natural Science and passes through a phase of Agnosticism, during which his old interests and enthusiasms seem to have deserted him, and the minds of the Dean and Hugh are troubled. Rogers, however, is confident that the cathedral will 'have him back by-and-by.'

'a power you'll never shake off. It was a Freemason's mark, sure enough; the signature, so to speak, of a cathedral builder, that all other masons could read and recognise, as you would very well know if you were a member of the Craft. . . . being a mason, I feel more a part of the cathedral than what others can possibly do—more understanding of her moods, as you used to call them—as is natural enough in a member of the craft that built her.'

Paul's interest is renewed, and:—

'He wanted his old love again . . . Rogers' vague, picturesque language, his suggestion of a secret connection between craft masonry and that Gothic building which still owned half his heart, came back again and again . . .'

and he decides to become a Mason. Chapter iv., 'The First Degree' which describes Paul's Initiation and the mental experience which accompanied it, is worthy of the close attention of Masonic students. The following 'Author's Note':—

'Lest any be offended I think it well to state that the account of a Masonic ceremony contained in Chapter IV. of this book has been obtained in no unlawful manner, but from published sources which are easily accessible to any student of speculative masonry. E.U.'

was not necessary—none will be offended. Paul has found his vocation.

'The search for that Word . . . He held the secret of the quest, but the Word was yet to be found . . . He vowed himself at that hour to its discovery . . . it was in building that the Word must be sought for. In the discovery of the secret of right building—the secret of the old masters—the purpose of his existence would be fulfilled.'

Paul decides to become an Architect, Feltham decides to become his Grand Patron, and together they will build the Church of Quatuor Coronati when the years of training are done.

'It would be a life-work,' said Paul slowly. He felt awed, almost frightened; like a pilgrim who sees his bourne, scarcely hoped for, start abruptly from the horizon.'

The Brethren must go to the book itself to discover how the Quest fared, and to know the curious people who took part therein, and to learn how Catherine entered into Paul's life and how she affected the Quest. And finally how Paul found not the Word but a Substituted Word and what that Substituted Word was.

Bro. C. Gough said:—

In venturing a few observations on the interesting paper to which we have had the pleasure of listening, I am confident I shall receive a full measure of indulgence usually extended to any maiden effort.

The subject of Masonic novels, or, speaking more generally, of allusions to Freemasonry by Novelists, is one spread over such a vast area that it would be well nigh impossible to make a comprehensive survey of it. Throughout the range of the old Freemasons' Magazine and the longer series of Masonic periodicals which followed in more modern times will be found an abundance of fiction and light literature into which Freemasonry is introduced to assist the particular

(Journal page 91)

objects of the writers. And whilst, possibly, it would not be classed as a Masonic novel, to rank with those named by Bro. Lovegrove, there are a number of short stories written by the Rev. Erskine Neale and published under the title of Stray Leaves from a Freemason's Note Book as an afterthought to and improvement on that of A Home for the Lonely or Why falter in the erection of a Masonic Temple? which was originally proposed as its name. Although possessing little literary merit, the stories enabled the author to propound his favourite theories on class distinctions and social amenities.

There are two other books, scarcely to be designated Masonic Novels, to which reference may be made. One is called Hill Rise, written by W. B. Maxwell. Put very briefly, it treats of the development of a building estate at Medford some twenty-five miles from London. It mentions that the White Hart was the best, the only real Hotel in Medford, and derived some of its profit from the large room upstairs, which was always used by the Medford Ancient Lodge of Freemasons No. 8215—the high number probably alluding to the rapid growth in the creation of Lodges. Prominent characters are Mr. Crunden, "the most prosperous solidly respectable builder in Medford," who was known as Hedgehog Crunden; Jack Vincent, the son of Sir John Vincent, and Mr. Dowling, an Architect. They were all Masons. Bro. Crunden is first introduced in that capacity, "as carrying up some of the Masonic furniture to the Lodge room—it's Lodge night." Mrs. Price is the Cook-housekeeper to Bro. Crunden. On an occasion when she was about to retire to her kitchen she remembered she had an important question to ask Crunden. "Is it the Freemasons' dinner to-morrow or the day after, because I want to air your dress clothes and you'll want them for the hospital reception?" Crunden replies there is no question about the day after to-morrow. "It's our installation banquet. Always dress clothes for that. We shall be busy in Lodge till six o'clock, putting the new Master in the Chair, appointing his Officers, raising two fellow craft to the third degree——" Mrs. Price wagged her head in sly pleasantry. "You musn't," she said, "because I haven't been in the clock case. I'm not the Lady Freemason." Jack Vincent, being urged by his mother to take an interest in life, "Be something more in the world than our son," replies, "I am. I am an ex-Militia Officer, Vice-President of the Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, Past Master of the Lodge 8215 of Freemasons. Also a Buffalo." Jack Vincent appears to have borrowed money of Bro. Crunden, and tells his mother that he is bound to stick up for old Crunden. We are Brothers—Masons, to begin with—and he lent me £50. He afterwards appeals to Crunden. "I say, Crunden—Masonic—that money you lent me. You won't get it out of me, except one way. Take me on, give me work. Let me work out my debt with just enough for my grub, Masonic." After well thinking it over and discussing it with Bro. Dowling, Crunden says "Yes," and gets from Vincent, "Thank you, Sir, you're a trump and a good Mason." Vincent acts the part of a good Mason, too. He repays the financial debt with interest and evinces his gratitude by rendering services to Crunden when the latter was in less prosperous circumstances, earning from him the satisfactory remark "That's very handsome of you Bro. Vincent. I'll not forget it. No, I'll never forget that as long as I live."

Another book to which I would like to draw attention bears the title David and Bathsheba. A Royal Romance, stated to be based on Rabbinical tradition with materials drawn from the Talmud and other Hebrew sources. The book was published by Geo. Routledge & Sons in 1887, the authors' names being given as Conzae Dick and James Cresswell. Who they were, I have not been able to learn, and I understand the publishers themselves can give no information. The book has long been out of print, and, I fancy, is somewhat scarce.

The story opens with simultaneous dreams by the respective fathers of David and Bathsheba. These are several times interpreted with the same result that the one father should have a son who should be called David, and the other a daughter who should be Bathsheba, and that these two were predestined from all eternity to be husband and wife and to be King and Queen in Jerusalem. The romance unfolds the realisation of these dreams, and, needless to say,

(Journal page 92)

materially differs from the Scriptural story. The Masonic interest in the book is probably confined to a few passages which in themselves are somewhat remarkable. After the wedding ceremony which made David and Bathsheba man and wife, there followed a royal banquet. Jesse, conducting Eliam, the father of Bathsheba, to the banqueting hall, remarked to him "Thou hast never been in this hall, my friend? Of course not! It is a glorious building, for my son, David the King, is a Royal Arch." "What is that?" "Oh, thou art not one of the initiated brethren. I may therefore not say more on that part of the subject. He understands architecture." Eliam admiring the glorious pillars, and Jesse, still acting as the Guide, says: "First notice that the floor is divided into three different sections; the second section one step higher than the third, and the first, where we stand, one higher than the second." Then Eliam observing three thrones, Jesse explains: "Those three thrones are not alike; the centre one of gold is emblematical of supreme Authority, and is for the King; the right hand one is of ivory emblematical of absolution from sin and is for the High Priest, while the third is of ebony betokening the dark mysteries of the wise, and is for the Chief Rabbi. Now notice behind the throne in the Eastern wall that immense circular window—and in the centre there is the double triangle of the Magen David—the Shield of David in blue with the name of Jehovah therein in flaming red." Did we fail to realize that we were reading a work in which fiction played an important part, the statement that King David was a Royal Arch would be most startling and would greatly disturb the various theories which learned brethren have formed as to the date when that degree originated.

Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins writes:—

Bro. Lovegrove is extremely charitable to the failings of both The Freemasons and Love and the Freemason. The former has a decidedly strong scene of temptation, while the latter presents a night-bathing episode, which scarcely makes for edification. There is this, however, to be said for The Freemasons: while the author was clearly not a member of the Craft, he had obtained, from sources we can well understand, information of an external nature concerning it of which he made effective use, not only in the essential portion of his plot, but in certain of its salient details. This is more than can be said of Love and the Freemason, which was published with an elaborate preliminary puff as to what it would relate concerning Freemasonry; and yet the author tripped again and again on Masonic matters of the most ordinary nature, his description of Grand Deacons as "a kind of Bishop" being a sample of that kind.

Though Bro. Lovegrove's paper is confined to "Three Masonic Novels," it suggests a field for wide research; not only as to novels, but poems and plays. Respecting the first-named, Bro. Rudyard Kipling has touched upon Masonry in more than one of his stories. The latest was a specifically Masonic tale, In the Interests of the Brethren, which appeared in the issue for December, 1918, of the Story Teller, a monthly magazine. This dealt with a purely imaginary Lodge of Instruction, Faith and Works, No. 5837, E.C., meeting in London, and specially concerned with assisting Freemasons wounded in the War. "I wonder," exclaims the narrator, as he is leaving one of its gatherings, "what would happen if Grand Lodge knew about all this: a Lodge of Instruction open three nights and two afternoons a week, and running a lodging-house as well? It's all very nice, but it doesn't strike me as regular." The narrator was right in his suspicion; but if Bro. Kipling had any choice in the matter, he should have selected a better Masonically-informed illustrator for the highly-coloured picture on the cover, which represents members of the supposed Lodge of Instruction sitting down to a frugal meal, with a Provincial Grand Officer and a Past Provincial Grand Steward in regulation Masonic clothing. The picture is even less convincing than the tale.

It would be a task for the diligent literary student to compile an anthology of practical allusions to the Craft. Probably the earliest of these was in the

(Journal page 93)

fourth book of the Dunciad, when Pope's Queen of Dulness "confers her Titles and Degrees," and among

Her children first of more distinguished sort,

. . . . . . . . . .

Some, deep Free-Masons, join the silent race Worthy to fill Pythagoras' place.

About a century afterwards, Crabbe, in the Tenth Letter of The Borough, dealing specifically with 'Clubs and Social Meetings,' devoted 46 lines to the Craft, beginning with his usual shrewd common-sense, by declaring his ignorance of the Craft in the lines:—

Masons are ours, Freemasons—but alas! To their own bards I leave the mystic class; In vain shall one, and not a gifted man, Attempt to sing of this enlighten'd clan. I know no word, boast no directing sign, And not one token of the race is mine.

If all the ignorant who have written about Masonry, whether in prose, poetry or plays, had been similarly frank and honest, we should have been spared many travesties, especially on the stage.

From The Generous Freemason, which dates from 1730, until to-day, these have been abundant, and some it would be specially interesting to trace. One wonders, for example, what was the style of The Freemason or The Secret of the Lodge Room, a two-act domestic drama, by J. P. Hart, produced in London at the Queen's Theatre, on 3rd June, 1839. In our own time we have seen in the Metropolis Are You a Mason? a three-act farcical comedy adapted from the German of C. Logenbrüder. The original was produced at the Residenz Theater, Berlin, on December 4th, 1897; and the English adaptation having been given a 'trial trip' at the Theatre Royal, Woking, on September 9th, 1901, was presented at the Shaftesbury Theatre, London, three days later. This had a fair amount of success, having been since revived in the Metropolis, as well as having been on various provincial tours. There must be others, and especially in the United States, of which Freemasons generally would be glad to hear. Bro. Lovegrove deserves their thanks for having opened up a quest which is bound to lead to interesting results.

Bro. W. J. Songhurst said:—

It is only fair to Bro. Lovegrove to mention that the title of his paper as printed is not the one originally chosen by him. An alteration was made at the suggestion of members of the Lodge Committee, to whom Freemasonry in Fiction seemed to cover a wider field than that with which Bro. Lovegrove had dealt. Four alternative titles were therefore submitted to him, and from these he selected Three Masonic Novels as forming a better description of the paper.

Bro. Baxter has mentioned the collection made by the late Bro. S. R. Baskett of references to Freemasonry in non-Masonic books, and from my own knowledge of this collection I should be inclined to say that it included hundreds, if not thousands, of such references. Freemasonry in Fiction is certainly a very big subject, perhaps only slightly less than Fiction in Freemasonry, which might be considered as including the great majority of books which have ever been written in connexion with the Craft.

A Masonic Novel may be described as a tale of domestic life, based wholly or in part upon what the Author considers to be Masonic teaching or practice. We should therefore, I think, have to include Joseph Balsamo, or the Memoirs

(Journal page 94)

of a Physician,¹ by Alexandre Dumas; and with it might be bracketted Godwin's Travels of St. Leon, and Bulwer Lytton's Zanoni, both of which have been mentioned by Bro. Tuckett. From several brethren we have had references to John H. Edge's An Irish Utopia (Two Editions, 1906 and 1910); to Evelyn Underhill's The Lost Word; and to W. B. Maxwell's Hill Rise; and we may also note Gerald Maxwell's The Fear of Life (Blackwood & Son, Edinburgh and London, 1908), containing a description of initiation into the Illuminati; John Strange Winter's A Regimental Lodge, or how Jack Hartog was made a Freemason, published in "Cavalry Life" (Chatto and Windus, London, 1885); and Guy Thorne's later work Black Honey (Lloyd's News Home Novels No. 52, 4d. net), which describes the extermination of a supposed Society of Rosicrucians having headquarters in Malta. Reference must also be made to the short stories by Emra Holmes, which originally appeared in "The Freemason" (London) and its off-shoot "The Masonic Magazine," in the early seventies of last century. They were collected and reprinted in two small volumes under the titles of Tales, Poems and Masonic Papers (Stokesley, 1877), and Amabel Vaughan and other Tales (Truro, 1878). In Cuthbert Bede's Adventures of Mr. Verdant Green (Blackwood, London, 1857) is an account of the hero's admission into the Order of Cemented Bricks, while Douglas Jerrold, in Mrs. Caudle's Curtain Lectures (commenced anonymously in "Punch," 1845), gives us two 'Lectures' dealing with our subject:—viii. Caudle has been made a Mason: Mrs. Caudle indignant and curious.—xx. 'Brother' Caudle has been to a Masonic Charitable Dinner: Mrs. Caudle has hidden the 'Brother's' Cheque Book.

A paper by Bro. W. B. Hextall, A Masonic Pantomime and some other Plays, in A.Q.C. xxi. (1908), pp. 138-160, adequately dealt with the dramatic side of the subject.

Of American Novels mention may be made of Etidorhpa (=Aphrodite transposed), which purports to relate the adventures of the man William Morgan whose mysterious disappearance early last century was made the pretext for an attack upon Masonry in the U.S.; of The Signet of King Solomon, or the Freemason's Daughter, by A. C. L. Arnold (Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company, New York. New Edition, revised and enlarged, 1868); and of The Secret Directory. A Romance of hidden history, by Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren (Philadelphia, 1896).

I remember reading a three volume French Masonic Novel some years ago, but, unfortunately, I did not take a note of it; and I have not been able to trace Adèle initiée from which Ragon quotes in his Maçonnerie d'Adoption.² We may, however, note La Franc-Maçon de la Vierge, by Fl. Bouhours, published in Paris, 1888; and Le Compagnon du Tour de France, written by George Sand in 1851 (Third Edition, Paris, 1869). This last is of indirect interest to Masons, as it deals with what may be termed the parallel organization of the Compagnonnage. An earlier work than any yet mentioned is Le Prince Francmaçon, et la Princesse Zelbine, Où l'on voit l'origine de les progrès de la Maçonnerie, which was published at the Hague. A copy in the Q.C. Library has on the title-page the date MDCCXLVIII., but this edition is not mentioned by Wolfsteig, who gives those of 1745, 1746, and 1747, without apparently having seen either of them. I am inclined to think that there was really only one print (1745) and that the date on the title-page was altered in the three succeeding years. The actual date of publication is not important, unless, as I suspect, the little work was really a political skit.

Bro. Henry Lovegrove writes as follows in reply:—

I am pleased to think that my paper has called forth such interesting notes.

I have not read David and Bathsheba, but personally I have little doubt that the Royal Arch is of comparatively modern invention.

¹ An English edition (undated) was published by Ward, Locke & Co., London. ² Manuel complet de la Maçonnerie d'Adoption, pp. 4-9. Ragon quotes from a manuscript which perhaps was never published.

(Journal page 95)

V.W.Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins sends a very concise and excellent summary which one would expect from such an expert with the pen.

Bro. W. B. Hextall quotes Charles Knight's rather severe condemnation. The novels in question certainly supplied a want, for all people could not purchase the three-volume novels of the time; and if such works were not in the best literary style, at least they gave amusement to many in their hours of recreation.

The other books quoted did not, I think, pretend to be novels, and are certainly a curious collection.

I did not put forward Amy Lawrence as a high literary work, but simply as the earliest work of the kind known to me.

Referring to the late Bro. S. R. Baskett, I had several discussions with him, and regret that he was not spared to give us the benefit of his notes.

It is quite difficult to sever the truth from fiction in the case of the notorious William Morgan.

Bro. Gordon Hills is very pleasant and flattering in his remarks. I have heard of The Lost Word.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett travels outside the other speakers, and his remarks are interesting and deserving of more than a passing remark.

Bro. Songhurst's able summary leaves me but little on which to comment, but he deserves my gratitude for securing so much attention to my feeble efforts.

[Illustration: Decorative tail-piece — ornamental cartouche with rococo scrollwork]

St. John's Day in Harvest

TUESDAY, 24th JUNE, 1919

(Journal page 96)

The Lodge met at Freemasons' Hall, at 5 o'clock. Present:— Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M.; W. B. Hextall, P.M., as S.W.; Lionel Vibert, as J.W.; Canon Horsley, P.G.Ch., Chaplain; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary; Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, I.G.; R. H. Baxter, Steward; Dr. Wynn Westcott, P.G.D., P.M.; E. H. Dring, P.G.D., P.M.; and J. H. McNaughton, Tyler.

Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle:— Bros. Henry Harvey, E. G. Dru-Drury, Arthur Heiron, George Robson, C. F. Sykes, S. P. Penwarden, F. J. Asbury, John Church, Hugh C. Knowles, P.A.G.R., Thomas Sykes, F. C. Bickell, George Carter, Edward T. Pryor, R. Wheatley, Rev. H. G. Rosedale, D.D., P.G.Ch., A. R. Upjohn, P.G.Stew., A. Rischgitz, F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C., Walter Dewes, W. A. Tharp, P.A.G.Pt., F. G. Carpenter, J. A. S. Bullock, G. W. Sutton, J. Walter Hobbs, Charles H. Scarlett, L. Hemens, F. W. Le Tall, Fred. Armitage, J. Russell McLaren, J. E. Boggild, J. R. Culley, jun., Frank A. Williams, W. J. Greer, Rev. H. Saumarez Smith, Percy H. Horley, L. G. Wearing, Walter H. Brown, P.G.Stew., G. J. Petitpierre, W. Stonhold, Rev. H. G. Meserve, Wm. C. Terry, Chas. J. Laker, C. Gough, W. Archbald, C. Gordon Bonser, G. Derrick, Digby G. Cropper, H. Johnson, James Powell, P.A.G.R., and S. W. Rodgers.

Also the following Visitors:— Bros. Dugald H. McLachlan, Lodge R.A. St. John's No. 320 (S.C.); Percy F. Kensett, W.M. London Rifle Brigade Lodge No. 1962; Rev. Alfred W. Batchelor, D.D., W.M. Grenfell Lodge No. 3077; Thomas F. Griggs, Fitzroy Lodge No. 569; H. N. Sichell, P.M. St. Dunstan's Lodge No. 1589; P. H. Fox, Carnarvon Lodge No. 708; J. M. Dickson, Scone Lodge No. 183 (N.S.W.C.); and Ramsden Walker, P.M. United Northern Counties Lodge No. 2128.

Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. Edward Conder, P.M.; Edward Macbean, P.M.; Sydney T. Klein, P.M.; F. J. W. Crowe, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; G. Greiner, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.M.; Thos. J. Westropp; H. F. Twiss, I.S.O.; Sir Alfred Robbins, P.res.B.G.P.; William Watson; W. Wonnacott, P.A.G.Sup.W., P.M.; and J. E. Shum Tuckett.

On Ballot taken:

V.W.Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins, residing at 32, FitzGeorge Avenue, Baron's Court, London, W.14. Knight Bachelor; Journalist. P.M. Gallery Lodge No. 1928, and Jubilee Masters' Lodge No. 2712; Past Grand Deacon; President of the Board of General Purposes. Has contributed to A.Q.C.: The earliest years of English Organized Freemasonry (xxii., 16); A newly discovered print of the 'Roberts MS.' (xxii., 186); Dr. Anderson of the 'Constitutions' (xxiii., 6); Frederick, Prince of Wales, as a Freemason (xxix., 326); and other shorter articles and notes; was regularly elected a joining member of the Lodge.

One Lodge and thirty-one Brethren were elected to membership of the Correspondence Circle.

By request of the Grand Lodge of Scotland a M.M. Certificate was presented to Bro. Dugald McLachlan, as a member of R.A. Lodge of St. John No. 320, Saltcoats and Ardrossan.

Bro. R. H. Baxter read the following paper:—

Peculiarities of the Book of Constitutions

By Bro. Rodk. H. Baxter, P.Pr.G.W., East Lancs.

(Journal page 97)

(The figures in square brackets refer to the numbers of the regulations or rules.)

Our custom, in the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, of celebrating the Festival of St. John the Baptist brings us together this year on a date very nearly coinciding with the Especial Meeting of Grand Lodge to celebrate the great peace, when representatives from every English-speaking jurisdiction have invitations to be present. Some of them, being members of our Correspondence Circle, will, no doubt, avail themselves of the opportunity of being with us this evening, so that the paper which I am now about to read, although hardly of the kind usually contributed to our Lodge, may not be altogether inappropriate on this occasion, giving as it does, not indeed a comprehensive view, but at least some slight idea of our code of laws, which may enable over-seas visitors to estimate and appreciate the difference between our and their rules of procedure.

But to come to my subject:—

Our Book of Constitutions has undergone a wonderful evolution since the first edition appeared in 1723, which contained a simple code of laws, stated to have been compiled in 1720, when George Payne was Grand Master. But even now, with such a wealth of detail enveloping our regulations as almost to justify the assertion made to the Master of each Lodge that there is scarcely a case of difficulty that can arise in his Lodge that the book will not enable him satisfactorily to deal with, there are still many peculiar points remaining, which it may not be unprofitable to discuss.

The first peculiarity to which I would draw your attention is the title of the work itself—"The Book of Constitutions." How does it come about that we have adopted and retained this plural noun? Other societies have a Constitution and Laws, and even other Grand Lodges than the Grand Lodge of England have not fallen into the error; if error indeed it be. I asked this question in Miscellanea Latomorum III., 1, and it elicited the reply that the name was traditional, as our oldest Craft document (the Regius MS. of 1390c.) as well as some of our Old Charges made use of the words; but another replier, "W.B.H.," in whom I think we shall have no difficulty in recognising one of our own esteemed Past Masters, seemed to see a special significance in the query and answered it accordingly.

Whatever, then, may be our opinion as to the original correctness of the appellation I do not think there is much likelihood of any change being made now in a name which has stood the test of time and so gained acceptance by long usage.

Turning to the actual contents of the book we find them well arranged in a series of sections under different headings. I have no intention of trying to trace the processes through which the various alterations have passed to arrive at this fairly comprehensive and well arranged order—that, I think, has already been well done, on more than one occasion, by our late Bro. Hughan—but shall at once proceed with the examination of the peculiarities of some of the sections as they now stand. For this purpose I shall pass over the preliminary or introductory chapters and commence with the clauses regulating the

Grand Lodge.

This august body manages the public interests of the Fraternity, and is composed of a general representation of all private Lodges on record, together with the Grand Stewards of the year, and the present and past Grand Officers, with the Grand Master at their head.

(Journal page 98)

"All private Lodges on record" does not necessarily mean only private Lodges under the Constitution of the United Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of England, but as there are many private Lodges whose constitution is not recognised, ambiguity might have been avoided by phrasing the clause differently.

So far as the Grand Officers, present and past (which latter term may be assumed to include brethren upon whom past Grand Rank has been conferred), are concerned there are very few restrictions to limit their appointment, or perhaps it would be better to say only very slight services from a strictly Masonic standpoint are required to render them eligible for appointment. True, the Grand Registrar must be an Installed Master [18] and the Grand Tyler [22] and the Grand Stewards [40] must be Master Masons, but no other Grand Officers need have attained these distinctions. They do not seem to be required to be subscribing members of any Lodge, and there does not even seem to be any rule that they must be Freemasons at all; although it is hardly likely that anyone could possibly be appointed who had not previously gone through the ceremony of initiation. The Grand Secretary himself need not be a Master Mason, although the clerks in his office must have attained that rank [34]. (This requirement was waived during the continuance of the great war, notwithstanding that there must have been many brethren, not only well qualified, but anxious to earn a livelihood in such a capacity.)

Scrutineers—who, like the clerks (as such) in the Grand Secretary's office, are not Grand Officers—appointed to assist the Grand Pursuivant must be Installed Masters [59] and yet that officer himself need have no special qualification so far as degrees are concerned.

The Grand Master is elected by the members of Grand Lodge who are absolutely unfettered in their choice, no rule being provided that the candidates must be selected even from amongst the ranks of the Entered Apprentices. And although, after election, he has to be installed in the chair of Grand Lodge, this is a very different thing from being in possession of the secrets of an Installed Master. The Pro and Deputy Grand Masters are on the same footing.

To digress for a minute, we often hear it argued that there is no such thing as a chair degree, and are told that Installation is only a ceremony. But surely Initiation, Passing and Raising are also ceremonies, and it would be quite useless to suggest they are not degrees. My own point of view is that whenever esoteric secrets are conferred a degree is established, and I can see no reason why a short form of opening a Board of Installed Masters to prove the qualification of all present—as in all other degrees—should have met with opposition from some of our officials. This raises the far more important question of how far any official, no matter how highly placed, has a right to interfere with the ceremonial working of a Lodge. If we only knew what actually met with approbation in Grand Lodge in 1816, when the ceremonies of the first three degrees were rehearsed, and afterwards in 1827, when the Lodge or Board of Installed Masters defined the ceremony of Installation, we would be on safe ground. Unfortunately, the knowledge has not been handed down to us.

Upon the annual installation of the Grand Master he shall appoint the Grand Officers (except the one afterwards mentioned and the Grand Treasurer, who is elected in March) who are thereupon to be installed or invested in antient form [18]. Installed and invested are, I presume, not intended for synonymous terms, but imply probably that the Pro and Deputy Grand Masters are to be installed and the other officers invested. No provision is made for investing officers who may be unable to attend on the regular day, so that it would seem appointment alone entitles a brother to his rank and afterwards to be regarded as a past Grand Officer.

The exception amongst the Grand Officers to appointment and investiture at the Grand Festival is the President of the Board of Benevolence, who has these honours reserved for him at the Grand Lodge in December [21A]. It is strange that this appointment has not long since been brought into line with the others.

(Journal page 99)

In the event of the death or resignation of the Grand Master the Pro Grand Master, or in his absence the Deputy Grand Master, or in his absence the Grand Wardens shall summon the Grand Lodge immediately to record the event and to take certain steps for temporarily filling the vacancy, but if there be no Pro Grand Master or Past Grand Master willing to step into the breach, then the Grand Wardens shall fix a day for Grand Lodge being summoned to elect a Grand Master for the remainder of the year [16]. Why should this duty devolve on the Grand Wardens instead of the Deputy Grand Master?

Grand Wardens and Deacons are never mentioned as Senior and Junior, and except for the description of the distinguishing jewels and emblems of the Wardens there would not be anything in the rules to indicate that it was allowable to differentiate between the two. They are, however, named separately in the "Ceremony of Laying a Foundation Stone." I have noticed lately that the reports of the Quarterly Communications only refer to Grand Wardens but enumerate Senior and Junior Grand Deacons, which is precisely the reverse of what we would expect. Indeed, I do not know that there is anything in our laws to authorise such descriptions.

Are Provincial and District Grand Masters Grand Officers? Rule 56 would suggest that the reply is in the affirmative. I remember at one of the Festivals of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution a Provincial Grand Master, when proposing the toast of the Grand Officers, said he had asked the Grand Secretary whether he was not a Grand Officer himself, and that Sir Edward Letchworth, with his usual courtesy and tact, had replied that he was not sure whether he was a Grand Officer or not, but he was quite sure he was something very much better. As business papers are to be sent to all present and past Grand Officers as well as to Deputy Provincial Grand Masters, Provincial Grand Secretaries, Masters of Lodges, and members of the Board of General Purposes, it may fairly be assumed that Provincial Grand Masters are included in the first category, unless, indeed, the papers sent to Provincial Grand Secretaries are intended for their chiefs.

Voting is to be conducted by holding up one hand [75]. There is no mention of it being the right hand, and it is difficult to ascertain how the present method of voting in what is called "the customary manner among Masons" has crept in.

The Grand Stewards are to be nominated from nineteen different Lodges [40], which would seem to indicate that any nineteen Lodges might make recommendations. Clause 46, however, makes it clear that only certain Lodges are so privileged, but which they are, or why they have been singled out, are points left in complete darkness.

The position of the Grand Stewards is peculiar, in so far that after their year of office they cease to be members of Grand Lodge, unless otherwise qualified. This surely disposes of their claim to rank as past Grand Officers, as all past Grand Officers are members of Grand Lodge.

It is frequently assumed that no brother is entitled to the appellation of Worshipful until he has attained the chair of a Lodge. The foot-note to Rule 6 makes it quite clear that this is not the case.

The most recently instituted of our Masonic distinctions, known as

London Rank,

enables the Grand Master to confer this honour on Past Masters of London Lodges during his pleasure, but the holders are not Grand Officers and are never invested, so that their position is indeed peculiar. Once appointed they hold their rank indefinitely, as there is no rule to insist on continuance of membership of either a London or any other Lodge.

When we come to the laws governing

Provincial and District Grand Lodges

we are on surer ground.

(Journal page 100)

Provincial and District Grand Masters are appointed by the Grand Master [82], who is not hampered in his selection by an enactment in the book. These Right Worshipful Brethren must be installed before they can perform the functions of their office, but installation here again does not entail being in possession of the secrets of the Master's Chair. Provincial Grand Masters must serve five years and District Grand Masters three years to qualify them for past rank [83], so that here, at least, they are in less favoured positions than ordinary Grand Officers.

It is, however, when we come to the rules regulating the appointment of the Minor Lights in Provincial and District Grand Lodges that we find some clear attempt at definiteness. Thus Deputy Provincial and District Grand Masters must be Past Masters of regular Lodges [86], but there is no mention of them being installed in their offices, nor is there even any provision for their investiture as in the case of all other officers. Wardens must be actual or past Masters, and Deacons must be serving or have served the office of Warden in a Lodge [90]. All members must be subscribers to a Lodge in their Province or District [81], and all officers must be actually resident [89]. This last rule may be evaded by a dispensation from the Grand Master, but in actual practice I think it is more frequently broken than observed. Discontinuance of subscription to a Private Lodge automatically determines membership of the Provincial or District Grand Lodge in these particular areas, but there is no rule to take away a Brother's past rank, under such circumstances, nor to prevent him wearing his regalia in other Lodges.

District Grand Lodges have an advantage over Provincial Grand Lodges in so far that should a Prince of the Blood Royal be appointed as ruler, he may appoint a Pro District Grand Master [87]. I fail to see why this rule should not have been equally applicable to Provinces. Another advantage which District Grand Lodges enjoy, under the same rule, is that they may have a District Board of General Purposes, with a President, who ranks as a District Grand Officer. Not only so, but degrees may be conferred on candidates at intervals of one week [115], instead of four weeks as is the case at home. This rule is to bring English Lodges into line with Irish, Scottish, and other Lodges, which may be located in their territories.

Different procedure is provided for in case of the death of a Provincial Grand Master to that of a District Grand Master [80 & 81], but they are quite in accordance with the necessities which different circumstances require, and so can hardly be regarded as peculiarities.

As in the case of Grand Lodge, Wardens and Deacons are never referred to as senior and junior.

Provincial and District Grand Masters may summon Lodges and Brethren in their jurisdictions to appear before them at any time or place they may select, in order that irregularities may be avoided and complaints investigated [91]. This is not a mere question of meeting in Provincial or District Grand Lodge, but a kind of court of Masonic inquiry. The decision to suspend any Lodge or brother resulting from this procedure must be notified to the Grand Lodge or the Grand Master. The word "or" here makes a wonderful difference so far as publicity is concerned.

The next rule on the list [92] seems to be an extension of its predecessor. It enables Provincial and District Grand Masters to hear and determine all subjects of Masonic complaint and to proceed to admonition, fine, or suspension. Minutes of these investigations must be kept and transmitted to the Grand Master. There is no alternative in this case of notifying the Grand Lodge.

Presumably Deputy Provincial and District Grand Masters may assume the functions of their chiefs if invested by patent under hand and seal [84], but in no case has any other officer or official the right to interfere.

Provincial and District Grand Masters shall correspond with the Grand Lodge and transmit to the Grand Secretary a report of their proceedings [95]. It would be interesting to know what becomes of this correspondence. I have no recollection of ever having seen any record of such matter being brought to the

(Journal page 101)

notice of Grand Lodge. It may possibly reach the Grand Secretary's office, which is quite another thing, only, however, too often confused in the minds of many brethren.

Provincial and District Grand Officers take no rank out of their own Province or District [96], but as they are allowed to wear the clothing of their rank in all Masonic meetings the rule is difficult to understand. What privilege does Provincial or District Rank confer inside their own regions beyond the right to wear a distinguishing regalia? The Provincial and District Grand Masters do not come within the purview of this rule, which is another argument in favour of their being regarded as Grand Lodge Officers.

There seems no special reason why the word "in" preceding "form" in the last line of Rule 100 should be printed in italics, so far as I can see.

"Great advantage having been experienced from the establishment of a local fund for charitable and other Masonic purposes, each Provincial Grand Lodge may direct payments to be made by the Provincial Grand Officers and the Lodges in the Province for this desirable purpose" [104]. My object is not so much to criticise the doubtful grammatical construction of this paragraph as to say that in many large and influential Provinces the fund is almost entirely devoted to the payment of a salary to the Provincial Grand Secretary and the liquidation of other necessary administrative expenses. Many local benevolent institutions, however, exist for which voluntary subscriptions are readily forthcoming.

Provincial and District Grand Treasurers are to be elected, as in the case of the same officer in Grand Lodge, but a more healthy rivalry exists for this, the only elective office, than in Grand Lodge itself, where of late years at all events, a caucus has undertaken the nomination of a London and a Provincial Brother alternately without any challenge from the general body. Advantageous as this arrangement may be in time of war, I cannot help thinking that in ordinary times a more full opportunity might be taken of the privilege of electing the Treasurer. Many Brethren are eligible, and election would be a greater honour from a number of nominations.

District Grand Lodges, by delegation from Grand Lodge, have the power of investigating, regulating, and deciding on all matters relating to Lodges and individual Masons within their respective districts [106], and here again have an advantage over Provincial Grand Lodges. Doubtless, distance from headquarters, and difficulties of communication, have been taken into consideration in framing this rule. And although Districts may levy higher fees than Provinces [110], they are, on the other hand, free from certain payments to the supreme governing power.

In the matter of issuing certificates under Rules 111 and 112, Districts are privileged, the reasons and the procedure being fully explained, so that, although a peculiarity in one sense, there is really nothing extraordinary in this indulgence.

To turn now to the chapter on

Private Lodges,

we find that the first rule [116] makes provision for applying for warrants of new Lodges. Petitioners must be registered Masons under the English Constitution, even in Districts, which must, to some extent, hamper the progress or extension of our own special jurisdiction, although, it is obvious, there would be difficulties in the way of removing this restriction. One advantage which brethren abroad do enjoy is that the Grand Master may authorise District Grand Masters to issue provisional warrants, so that delays may be avoided [117].

According to the marginal note of Rule 118, provisional warrants are to be exchanged for regular warrants, although there is no mention in the rule itself of an actual exchange, but only of an application for the extra warrant being necessary.

The Master-designate of a new Lodge in England must previously have served the office of Warden, but in the case of Lodges abroad no such qualification is insisted on. Bro. E. Lord, in his "Freemasonry in Pontefract," records that

(Journal page 102)

the late Bro. T. W. Tew (afterwards R.W. Provincial Grand Master of West Yorkshire) was the first Master of a new Lodge in that town, although he had not previously filled a Warden's Chair; but perhaps the rule was not then in force.

As the founders of new Lodges must be Master Masons and the Master and Wardens must be selected from their number, there can be no question of any but Brethren who have attained the Third Degree occupying the Chairs in a new Lodge, but there does not seem to be anything to prevent even an Entered Apprentice being elected to the Chair of an old Lodge, and all the other offices being filled by Brethren of the same degree.

It is the fashion to speak of new Lodges being "consecrated," but the Book of Constitutions never uses this word. New Lodges must be "constituted" and "registered" before they can enjoy their full privileges [120].

Every Lodge must be in possession of a regular warrant, without which it cannot act, except Lodges Nos. 2 and 4, which work under immemorial constitutions [125]. The questions naturally arise, how does the Master address initiates at that stage in the ceremony where we say, "As during the course of the evening you have been called on for certain fees, &c."? and how does the Installing Master get over the difficulty of having no warrant to entrust to the new occupant of the Chair? These difficulties must surely give pause to those brethren who clamour for absolute uniformity of ritual!

There are in all nine regular officers in a Lodge and six others whose status is not defined, but who may be classified as non-regular, besides an unlimited number of Stewards [129]. It is stated that no brother can hold more than one regular office at a time, but Rule 172 would seem to indicate that a Master could also act as Secretary. As seven Master Masons can form a new Lodge, all the regular offices need not necessarily be filled, although the difficulty could be got over by the Master acting as his own Secretary and the appointment of a serving brother as Tyler, who need not be a member of the Lodge. There is nothing to prohibit a brother from filling more than one of the non-regular offices, nor combining a regular with non-regular offices.

Wardens and Deacons are properly described as "Senior" and "Junior" [129 and 130]. This is perhaps the most satisfactory way and might equally well be adopted in Provincial and District and Grand Lodges, only dropping the adjectives when past rank is described.

Clause 130 raises a very difficult point. In most Lodges Minutes are not put for confirmation, but are simply voted on as to the correctness of their record. This, of course, is not right, for the rule makes it evident that the election of Master is not complete until the Minutes have been confirmed. Conversely non-confirmation renders the election void. How far is confirmation necessary to legalise other matters of business which may have been transacted? It would obviously be absurd to non-confirm the initiating of a candidate, but assuming that a brother had been irregularly advanced to a higher degree, as by, e.g., too short a space of time having elapsed between the ceremonies, would non-confirmation be of any use? Most money grants are voted only after notice of motion. Is confirmation necessary to legalise payment? The whole subject is a big one, and bristles with difficulties. Some clearly defined ruling is essential.

Before leaving this question of the election of Master requiring confirmation we find that there are other two rules which may confuse the issue [131 and 134]. A Prince of the Blood Royal, on accepting the Chair of a Lodge, may appoint a Deputy Master. That is to say, the brother who actually rules the Lodge does not need to be elected to the Chair, and yet at the end of a year he is entitled to all the privileges of a Past Master!

The Master-elect, before installation, shall solemnly pledge himself to preserve the landmarks [132]. This is undertaking a duty, the nature of which he surely does not fully appreciate, for, so far as I am aware, they have never been pointed out. We do know that Installation itself is one of the Landmarks, but what of the other or others?

(Journal page 103)

Proprietors or managers of taverns are not allowed to hold office in Lodges meeting in their own houses, except by dispensation [138], but, fortunately, this is no slur on their character, as they are not debarred from holding office in Lodges meeting elsewhere. I hope that Freemasons in England will always be tolerant, and not resort to what the late Bro. Speth described as the intemperate temperance legislation of our American Brethren.

In the event of no Installed Master being present, how does the Senior or Junior Warden rule the Lodge as provided for in Rule 141? The Master's Chair must apparently be vacant, so that it would seem at least some modification in the form of ritual of opening and closing would be required. If any kind of Installed Master be present he may occupy the Chair, and degrees may be conferred by anyone who is capable of doing so, but no explicit instructions are given as to how the ceremony is to be modified. I remember, when quite a young Mason, passing two candidates. Only one Past Master was present, and he had never done a ceremony in his life. The method I adopted was to stand on the right hand of the presiding officer and do the work from that position.

Although, as already seen, the Grand Wardens need not be of any special degree, yet when the Grand Master presides in a Private Lodge he may appoint the Warden of the Lodge, or any other two brethren to act as his Wardens, pro tempore, but if the latter they must be Master Masons [142]. A similar rule applies to the case of a Provincial or District Grand Master visiting in his own territory [144], although actual Provincial or District Grand Wardens must be Installed Masters.

The Masters and Wardens of Private Lodges are enjoined to visit other Lodges as often as possible, in order that the same usages and customs may be observed throughout the Craft [149], but it is hard to see why this question of visiting should be restricted to chief officers only. The next rule [150] makes it clear that visitors from other constitutions should present their certificates, but this is apparently not necessary for English visitors. The possession of such a document is a precaution which is likely to reduce the risk of unqualified visitors being admitted to our assemblies, but, even when combined with an ability to pass an examination, is not necessarily a perfect safeguard. Some more definite pronouncement of the credentials required from unknown visitors is desirable.

What is really meant by "known bad character" in Rule 151? I apprehend it would require a very bold Master to exercise his privilege under this clause, for I am not at all sure that even all those brethren who have attained to the highest dignities of the Craft can always be looked upon as exemplars of the highest ethics of Masonic teaching.

Honorary or non-subscribing members are recognised for the first time by an addendum to Rule 152, but their right of attending any Lodge more than once is limited to the particular Lodges of which they may have been elected honorary members, and this notwithstanding the fact that they need not ever have been actual subscribing members of such Lodges.

According to Rule 154, all Lodges held at a greater distance than ten miles from Freemasons' Hall are Provincial or District Lodges, and are under the immediate superintendence of the Provincial or District Grand Masters within whose jurisdiction they meet. But what about those Lodges which are not under the rule of a Provincial or District Grand Master? The Lodges in Bermuda, to pick but one example, have no District Grand Lodge to supervise their proceedings.

The "mode of working" in Lodges of Instruction must have received the sanction of Grand Lodge [158]. What precisely is meant by this phrase? To assume that it means the ceremonial working opens up again the question of what was decided on in Grand Lodge after the Lodge of Reconciliation had completed its labours, for since then Grand Lodge has not dealt with the ceremonies, and no man now knows the exact procedure then adopted.

The rules relating to the keeping of Minutes establish the fact that it is necessary to record the names of all members and visitors present [160 and 172].

(continued in pages-121-135.md)

Pages 121-135

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 121–135

(PDF pages 121–135 = journal pages 104–118 approx.)

"Peculiarities of the Book of Constitutions" (continued)

(Journal page 104)

The custom which is becoming common of recording that brethren were present "as per attendance book" is to be deprecated.

Should the regular day of meeting fall on Christmas Day, Good Friday, or a public holiday the Lodge may be held the day before or the day after at the discretion of the Master [165]. This rule has been re-cast more than once within my own recollection, and the addition made to it, in quite recent times, that its provisions shall not over-ride Rule 195, simply cancels, for some purposes, the value of the altered date being deemed the regular day of meeting for all purposes.

Why should it be necessary to have a special meeting to consider the question of the removal of a Lodge? [167]. Could the matter not be discussed and settled at a regular or emergency meeting when other items of business could be undertaken?

Rule 183 is certainly one which requires some revision or explanation. The question of character is always likely to be one of difficulty unless a definite standard is laid down, whilst as regards due instruction, I am afraid, in most cases, it is simply non-existent.

The names of proposers and seconders must appear on the summons [184], so that it is not sufficient to say proposed by the Senior Warden and seconded by the Junior Deacon, for example, as is so frequently done.

It is surely in accordance with common sense that a candidate, who has been proposed and seconded at a regular meeting, could be elected and initiated at an emergency meeting, and yet Rule 185 leaves us in doubt on the subject. Candidates who have been proposed by letter can certainly be so elected and initiated, and it would be giving them an unfair advantage to enable them to take precedence, over those who had prior claims. This is really what would happen, however, by a strict interpretation of Rule 184.

The procedure to be adopted for the admission of candidates under the age of twenty-one years as described in Rule 186 is decidedly vague. Has the dispensation to be secured before an actual election takes place, or is it only the ceremony of initiation that has to be deferred until the requisite authority has been procured?

The declaration which every candidate is required to sign [187] would need to be modified in the case of a minor, and yet no provision is made for this contingency.

Clearance certificates can only be granted to members who have resigned or been excluded according to Rule 213, so that no brother can demand such a document at any other time, and yet Rules 189 and 203 insist on such a testimonial being produced before a brother can join another Lodge even whilst he still continues to subscribe to his present Lodge.

The interval of four weeks which must elapse before a higher degree can be conferred [195] (except in the case of Lodges in Districts and Colonies where there is no District Grand Lodge) does away with the special benefit granted under Rule 165, as already mentioned. The examination under this rule [195], which every candidate must pass, is of a very perfunctory nature, and in practice often resolves itself into a mere prompting of the correct answers by the Deacons.

Duplicate certificates can only be granted on proof of the originals having been lost or destroyed [197]. What particular proof of loss is required? A thing may fairly be said to be lost if its whereabouts are unknown, and yet it may afterwards turn up. Some provision ought to be insisted on for the return of the duplicate under such circumstances. The certificate here referred to is the one which every brother is entitled to on his name being registered in the books of Grand Lodge, which is usually only granted after he has been raised to the degree of a Master Mason; although Rule 200 indicates that on initiation and passing certificates may be issued, which, however, have to be surrendered before a certificate of having obtained the Third Degree can be granted.

The printing and publishing of proceedings of Lodges is prohibited, unless by the consent of the Grand Master or the Provincial or District Grand Master [205], but, in spite of this, there is never any lack of news of the doings of all kinds of work in the Masonic press, nor of the issue of Lodge Histories recounting

(Journal page 105)

the progress of old Lodges in all parts of the country, without which indeed we in the Quatuor Coronati Lodge would be deprived of the best fruits of our endeavours, and our labours would be considerably hampered.

Rules 218A and 219B deal with the procedure to be observed by Lodges abroad wishing to form Sovereign Grand Lodges, but as the consent of the District Grand Master is necessary before any preliminary meetings for discussion can be held, certain Lodges in the Colonies would be awkwardly fixed where there is no such official. Not only so, but there is no method for establishing District Grand Lodges, though, doubtless, a memorial to the Grand Master would always receive sympathetic consideration.

What may fairly be regarded as another peculiarity of the book is that the numbers of the rules, which have been expunged, still remain, and that fresh rules instead of being re-numbered have alphabetical indices added to old numbers. There are, of course, good reasons for these proceedings so long as the stock of the current volume holds out, but new editions are so frequent that a general closing up of numbers would be a simple matter.

It would hardly be thought that in the section dealing with

Regalia

there could be much room for comment, but actually peculiarities are even here existent.

For instance, there is no regulation in the case of Grand Lodge officers for the words "deputy" or "assistant" to appear on the jewels or gauntlets of deputy and assistant officers, but only above the emblems on the aprons; and in the case of Provincial and District deputy and assistant officers the same rule holds good, except that in framing it it has evidently been forgotten that the Deputy Provincial and District Grand Masters have a distinctive emblem and regalia entirely different from that of their chiefs, and yet the regulations require that they should have the word "deputy" embroidered on their aprons.

I am afraid that I have dealt more with inconsistencies and defects than with peculiarities of the Book of Constitutions, but however that may be, I hope you will agree that there is a growing necessity for a thorough revision of the whole work. Now that we have a reformed Board of General Purposes, it may not be long before such a task is undertaken. Should such a thing come about, my own plea would be for a simplification of the rules and a relaxation of many of the restrictions now hampering us, which sometimes lead us to wonder if we are really "free" Masons; for it must be remembered that to most of us Masonry is, after all, only a relaxation, and there is no reason why it should be made tedious or irksome.

A vote of thanks to Bro. Baxter was unanimously passed, and comments on the paper were made by Bros. Gordon Hills, W. B. Hextall, Lionel Vibert, J. H. Stirling, W. J. Songhurst, A. R. Upjohn, Frederick Armitage, Walter H. Brown, Herbert Bradley, and J. Walter Hobbs.

Bro. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M., said:—

It gives me much pleasure to propose a hearty vote of thanks to Bro. Baxter for his interesting and suggestive paper.

It is a paper which will repay more careful and detailed study than we can bestow on it to-night.

Some of the questions mooted may on the surface appear easy of solution, but when one comes to look into them one finds that they are bound up with the history of the development of the Order, and the evolution of the Rules in our Book of Constitutions as they have been built up "precept upon precept and line upon line." In this connection a reference to Bro. Levander's Comparison of the Regulations 1723-1819, in volume xxx. of the Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, will be found to throw light on several minor points which Bro. Baxter has

(Journal page 106)

touched on. Other subjects for discussion which are mentioned, such as the Grand Steward, question of Degrees, Landmarks, "mode of Working," raise the consideration of points on which much has been written and still much remains to be done to arrive at clear decisions.

With regard to the title "Book of Constitutions" I certainly support the established usage, not only because it is a case in which

Antiquity's Pride We have on our side,

but because I venture to think that the plural is an entirely correct use in this connection.

The word Constitution has a good many different significations, and in those two cases with which we are chiefly concerned we speak either of Constitution in the singular or Constitutions in the plural. In the former case the word is used in a rather abstract sense when we speak of the Constitution or theory of government of a country or jurisdiction, in the latter sense we refer definitely to the several laws and regulations of such a Constitution, as each of them being constitutions, that is rules constituted by authority to realize the theoretical constitution. The Book of Constitutions does not claim to be the Constitution of our Order, it contains the "General Charges" with which this paper does not deal, and the "Laws and Regulations"—only part of our Constitution—which like the British Constitution largely remains unwritten, and includes Landmarks, Ceremonies, and established Customs of the Craft.

The use of the word Constitution may be noted in the index to the present regulations referring to Rules 2, 49, 81, 223 and 254, and also in the marginal notes to Rules 223 and 254. Bro. Baxter refers to the expression of a Lodge being "constituted" (Rule 120), and gives another example of the word as applied to foreign Constitutions, visitors from which have to produce their certificates. His enquiries in Miscellanea Latomorum elicited the information that old copies of the books in the eighteenth century were commonly called Constitution Books, but, as was then pointed out, that phrase has no more significance than that it is a convenient description, like Prayer Book or Hymn Book.

Some of the anomalies to which attention is directed certainly point to a need for re-draughting some of the rules to bring them into accord with established custom, but it can hardly be supposed that it is really open to one outside the Craft to be elected G.M. at the present day; there are very obvious difficulties in a Lodge being administered by mere Entered Apprentices sufficient to prevent such an occurrence; and, coming to a more modern requirement, I cannot see that there is any just objection to be taken to proposers and seconders being described by their offices as S. and J. Wardens and not by their names—the point would be purely a quibble.

The position about the confirmation of minutes is excellently stated by Bro. Hawkins in his Concise Cyclopædia, where he explains the double purpose that confirmation carries in our Masonic procedure, in Grand Lodge, and in private Lodges, not only as a confirmation of correctness, but as a re-endorsement of action agreed upon as to a money grant, alteration of By-laws, or election of Master. He points out that the Scotch Constitutions expressly provide that confirmation applies to the record alone, and questions agreed to at one meeting cannot be opened up and discussed afresh on the subsequent reading of the Minutes, exactly the opposite case to the usage of our jurisdiction.

I should like to support Bro. Baxter's plea for a revision of the Laws and Regulations in the Book of Constitutions; doubtful points and anachronisms might well be cleared away and the regulations simplified without yielding any of the principles involved, but it would be a bigger task than appears at first glance, so intimate is the connection of the whole system and the dependency of its many rules.

We do not want to be hampered by unnecessary restrictions, we do not want the Craft to fall into the lines of organisation in the nurseries of the last century, when the idea was whatever children did, to tell them not to; but there must be rules and regulations to be intelligently obeyed. I quite agree that we

(Journal page 107)

do not want to make our relaxation tedious or irksome by red tapeism or following of precedents in a blind adherence to the letter; the spirit of fraternity is the main-spring of our Craft, and so long as our aspirations and actions re-act to that touch-stone, we want our laws to forward and not to fetter our action within the wise limits that our Landmarks prescribe and long custom has established.

Bro. W. B. Hextall, seconding the vote of thanks, said:—

Bro. Baxter's paper on the Book of Constitutions as we have it at the present day is an acceptable sequel to what proved to be, unhappily, the last contribution of our late Bro. F. W. Levander, his Inaugural Address, printed in A.Q.C. xxix., 376, and his Comparison of the Regulations, 1723 to 1819, xxx., 56. A continuation of the latter from 1819, showing successive alterations to date, would now be welcomed.

One or two of Bro. Baxter's criticisms strike me (if he will forgive my saying so) as a little microscopic; application of a useful principle, that "the greater contains the less," affording sufficient answer. True, there is no specific requirement that every officer of the Craft shall be a member of the Craft, but the title, headings, and purview of the Constitutions surely suffice for this, remembering that our Regulations were framed by Masons for Masons, and not for the information of the world at large.

Quite apart from anything relating to a Board of Installed Masters (as to which reference may be made to A.Q.C. xxiii., 44, 65, 66, 70, and to Misc. Lat. II., 123-126), and on the general question only, nothing ought to be more widely known than that no individual—be he who he may—has right or power to "interfere with the ceremonial working of a Lodge" of which he is not himself a member. All complaints are to be made to the Board of General Purposes under Rules 214 and 272, or to a Provincial or District Grand Master under Rules 92 and 214; and it would sometimes have been better if this had been more clearly understood. Any attempted officiousness of the kind referred to is but an impertinence, and as such to be ignored.

The answer to "What privilege does Provincial or District Rank confer inside their own regions beyond the right to wear a distinguishing regalia?" may be found in what in Rules 87 and 88 furnish a Provincial table of precedence. Again, can it be correct to imply the possibility of "an Entered Apprentice being elected to the Chair of an old [i.e., an already existing] Lodge," when Rule 130 expressly requires the Master to be elected from members who "shall have served for one year . . . the office of Master, or Senior or Junior Warden"? Such an implication supposes appointment by the Master of an E.A. as one of his Wardens—a contingency I am frankly unable to imagine, even though there be no prohibition in terms.

Bro. Baxter's reference to the Consecration of a Lodge is a reminder that until in 1884 the Constitutions ordered (Rule 120) that certain consequences and disabilities should follow on default, there was a good deal of laxity in obeying the injunction which before then read, "Every new Lodge should be solemnly constituted"; the word "should" being in 1884 altered to "shall." For instance, a certain Lodge, warranted in December, 1865, was only consecrated and dedicated in November, 1873, twenty-eight initiates having been admitted in the intervening years. The ante-1884 Constitutions gave, "The manner of constituting a new Lodge, according to the ancient usage of Masons," describing part of it by the words, "The lodge is then consecrated according to ceremonies proper and usual on those occasions, but not proper to be written." Dr. George Oliver in his Masonic Jurisprudence, 1859, 12-13; 1874, ibid. applies "constituting" and "consecration" to the Lodge, and "dedication" to the building in which meetings of a Lodge are held: and in The Book of the Lodge, 3rd edit., 1864, 96-110, gives, "The ceremony of dedication and consecration" at length, but only as applying to a new Masonic Hall. It would be interesting if we could learn why "The manner of constituting a new Lodge," and all mention of "con-

(Journal page 108)

secration" have been deleted from the Constitutions since 1884, whilst the "Ceremony of laying a Foundation-Stone, &c.," is still retained.

Confirmation of Minutes, so far as ordinary business is concerned, was dealt with in A.Q.C. xxv., 336-7; but I know opinions on the subject differ. For myself, I think there is authority showing that a Lodge has full power to retrace its steps in matters of substance as well as of form, even though an awkward position might result. This last would have to be considered when the occasion arose.

In these days, the ruling of a Lodge by a Warden is so infrequent as to make its etiquette almost academical. The view of a past generation is given in The Freemasons' Magazine of May 26th, 1858, page 1,008, where the Editor wrote: "When a Warden, from the absence of the W.M. is called upon to rule the Lodge, he should take his seat either on one side or in front of the Chair, as may be most convenient." The 1884 Constitutions added words to Rule 141 which preclude a Warden from occupying the Master's Chair when ruling the Lodge, and also forbid the conferring of degrees by any but actual Masters or Past Masters.

I do not follow Bro. Baxter in his reading that Rule 150 does not (as an alternative) require production of his G.L. certificate by an English visiting brother. The words are, "the certificate of the Grand Lodge under which he claims" [to enter and be present, on the axiom that 'A Mason's Lodge is a Mason's Church'], and the Rule makes no distinction between any of the recognised Constitutions.

Confirming the view at which Bro. Baxter hints in his reference to the requirement that a Lodge which sanctions a Lodge of Instruction "shall be . . . responsible that the mode of working adopted has received the sanction of the Grand Lodge," it may be mentioned that the late Bro. William James Hughan wrote in November, 1902, "Rule 158 contains an impossible condition." For some reason, the words "every deviation from the established mode of working is highly improper, and cannot be justified or countenanced," which were in the editions down to 1873, ceased to appear after the revision of 1884, and this is the more noticeable as Rule 158 (above) was retained without alterations. Is it possible this last was per incuriam?

Should not "qualification" in the last sentence of Rule 180 read "disqualification"?

Has not Bro. Baxter overlooked the words, "or whenever at a subsequent time, he may require it," in his criticism of Rule 213, as to Clearance Certificates?

There is perhaps unintentional difference in the inscriptions on two jewels figured in the Constitutions. That on the jewel of the Grand Stewards, also given in Rule 284, being "United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of England"; whilst that on the Grand Tyler's jewel is "Grand Lodge of England," only. There are in existence jewels of Past Grand Officers after the Union of 1813, inscribed "Grand Lodge of England," which seem to have been worn earlier than the first appearance of illustrations in the Constitutions of 1841.

We must all feel much indebted to Bro. Baxter for his useful and suggestive paper.

Bro. Lionel Vibert said:—

Almost the last person to whom I said good-bye in Madras was the Deputy District Grand Master, W.Bro. Schmidt, and in the course of conversation he observed that one of the great needs of the Craft to-day was a handbook to the Constitutions, a simple text-book for the plain man who has no legal training, but who wants to know at a glance whether, e.g., a particular resolution of one meeting needs confirmation at the next; and who wants to be able to give a ruling then and there in Lodge without, as usually happens, first holding a lengthy conference with brethren on the dais; the index to the Constitutions having previously been drawn blank.

(Journal page 109)

It is a remarkable coincidence that two days after landing, the proof of to-night's paper was put in my hands.

I cordially agree with Bro. Baxter's final paragraph, and in the paper itself he has brought together a remarkable list of peculiarities, some due to the history of the book itself, but some really seem due to nothing else than bad drafting, or, rather, bad emendation.

I feel sure that the Quatuor Coronati Lodge would gladly co-operate in any attempt towards a revision or simplification of the Rules and Regulations, as was recently suggested at one of our meetings by the President of the Board of General Purposes.

R.W. Bro. J. H. Stirling (Prov.Dep.G.M., Antrim) writes:—

There are some notable points of difference between the constitution and government of English Masonry and of Irish, to which attention may fittingly be drawn as a complement to Bro. Baxter's paper.

At the outset the author deals with the composition of the governing bodies of the Craft in England and the qualifications—or absence of them—for office therein. Every officer in the G.L. of Ireland must be a subscribing Past Master of a subordinate Lodge, and of at least five years' standing as a Master Mason. The largest Prov.G.L. in Ireland (Antrim, 147 Lodges) carries this further, and requires five years' standing as a Past Master before being eligible for office in that Prov.G.L.

In referring to the status of a Past Master, Bro. Baxter raises the question of whether there is or is not a "Chair degree." I shall only say that in our Irish Ritual the Installation is expressly referred to at one point as "this, the Chair degree."

Perhaps the most noteworthy difference between English and Irish Masonry is that under the E.C. practically all offices are nominative, while under the I.C. they are elective. Beginning with the subordinate Lodge, under the E.C. the W.M. is elected and he then appoints his officers. Under the I.C. all officers are elected by the Lodge at the same time as the W.M. himself. When we reach 'Grand' rank, the Grand Master appoints the Prov. Grand Master, and he in his turn appoints his Deputy. So far both Constitutions agree. But then under the I.C. all officers in Prov.G.Lodge are elected by vote of the members of that Prov.G.L., and neither the Prov.G.M. nor his Deputy has anything to say in the matter. Similarly in Grand Lodge, the Grand Master is appointed by open vote, and he appoints his Deputy, but there his power of selection stops. All other offices are filled by open election. I content myself with stating the difference between the English system and the Irish. There is no doubt a good deal to be said for both.

Under the I.C., both Wardens and Deacons are in all ranks always distinguished as "Senior" and "Junior." The I.C. provide definite rank and precedence for all present and past Prov. Grand officers, both in Grand Lodge and in Prov. Grand Lodges other than their own.

Under the I.C. all subordinate Lodges situated in Ireland must elect their officers prior to 30th November in each year, which means, in practical working, that they are elected at the Stated Communication of the Lodge in November. They must then be submitted to Grand Lodge for confirmation and must not be installed until so confirmed, nor prior to St. John's Day, 27th December.

In the absence of the Master, a Warden cannot take the Chair in an Irish Lodge. For a temporary absence the Master has the right to nominate a substitute from among the Past Masters of the Lodge. If he fails to do so, or in the case of the death of the Master, the Immediate Past Master would rule the Lodge, and in his absence the Senior P.M., and so on down in order of Seniority. If no P.M. of the Lodge present felt equal to the duties of the Chair, an actual or Past Master of another Lodge might be invited to take the Chair.

Bro. Baxter deprecates the practice of recording that brethren were present "as per Attendance Book." I have been in a Lodge where over two hundred

(Journal page 110)

subscribing members were present. Does Bro. Baxter suggest seriously that the unfortunate Secretary should copy all these names laboriously into his Minutes?

The question of confirmation of Minutes raises a very interesting point of difference between English and Irish practice. The usual custom of deliberative and executive bodies is that minutes cannot be challenged at the next subsequent meeting except on a question of absolute correctness of record. The practice at many 'boards' and 'bodies' is for the Chairman to initial a rough draft of the minutes at the close of the actual meeting. The practice in English Masonry of altering what has been done at one meeting by refusing to confirm at the next meeting the minute dealing with that matter has no counterpart in Irish Masonry. It is only the correctness of the record which is submitted to the vote of an Irish Lodge, and if the facts are admitted, the minutes must stand. If the Lodge wishes to reverse its action on some point, it can only do so after due notice of motion, and this cannot be discussed until the lapse of six months from the date of the original decision. Perhaps I may quote from a letter received in 1913 from our late learned and lamented Bro. Chetwode Crawley, whose death was almost as great a loss to English as it was to Irish Masonry. He wrote:— "Your letter has a chastening influence on me; it makes me feel so old. Thirty years ago, or so, it fell to me to demonstrate to the G.L. of England that our practice was then, and had always been, different from that of the G.L. of England in regard to Confirmation of Minutes. The matter excited some controversy at the time, though it ended in our sustaining our position with better logic and sounder law than our opponents. A curious point of heredity crops up in the fact that the Irish practice obtains in many English Lodges. On investigation I found that such of these dissentient Lodges as I could trace had origin in the Irish-born G.L. of the Antients: the only G.L. of England recognised by the G.L. of Ireland during the latter part of the eighteenth century." The present practice of English Lodges in this respect would appear to have crept in as a result of several decisions of the G.L. of England during the nineteenth century, i.e., subsequent to the Union of 1813. As the G.L. of Ireland is the Senior Grand Lodge having an unbroken record and tradition, and has never had to make any compromise with any rival body in respect of either its ritual or its jurisprudence, its views on this question can at least claim the sanction of more ancient custom than those of the G.L. of England. The bi-centenary of the G.L. of Ireland in 1925 will be a real bi-centenary.

Bro. W. J. Songhurst said:—

I am entirely in sympathy with Bro. Baxter when he pleads for a simplified Book of Constitutions. There seems to be a tendency in these days towards over-legislation, and a desire rather to 'uphold the Majesty of the Law' than to consider what is really the best in the interest of the Craft and its members.

The average Master is a man of business, and quite capable of ruling his Lodge in accordance with ordinary business procedure. It is, however, doubtful if he has the time or opportunity to make such a careful study of the complicated rules laid down in our present Book of Constitutions as to enable him to escape the many traps and pitfalls therein contained. That the rules are not fully understood even by those who have had a direct share in their compilation and amendment, was brought home to me only a few days ago by a member of the 'reformed' Board of General Purposes, who seriously assured me that the Master of a Lodge could not legally call an Emergency Meeting without first obtaining a dispensation for the purpose! And although the free gift, recently sanctioned by Grand Lodge, of a copy of the Book of Constitutions to every Lodge on the English Register, may technically prevent a plea of ignorance being sustained in the event of a complaint of breach of the rules, it must be admitted that in these days any Edition of the Book is practically obsolete even before it leaves the printer's hands.

Many of the 'peculiarities' mentioned by Bro. Baxter derive their greatest interest from a consideration of the history of the Book of Constitutions during

(Journal page 111)

the past couple of hundred years; and that they are 'peculiarities' at all is mainly due to the fact that in many cases where alterations have been made in one rule, no thought has been given to their effect elsewhere.

It seems quite clear that in the present day a Provincial (or District) Grand Master is not a Grand Officer. If he were so he would be unable (under Rule 23) to hold another office in Grand Lodge at one and the same time, and a reference to the lists will shew that some Provincial Grand Masters do hold other such offices. This, however, was not the case formerly, as the records of Grand Lodge shew that on one occasion a Provincial Grand Master who had been appointed to the office of Grand Warden, was declared ineligible, and he renounced the Wardenship.

In my opinion it would be a very good thing if Mastership of a private Lodge were made a qualification for office in all Provincial and District Grand Lodges as well as in Grand Lodge, more especially now that Provincial Grand Officers (if otherwise qualified) are permitted to attend Grand Lodge without wearing the light blue collar. I well remember a Grand Chaplain who was not installed as Master of a Lodge for many years after his appointment in Grand Lodge.

Bro. Baxter refers to the case of Bro. T. W. Tew (afterwards Provincial Grand Master of West Yorkshire), who was installed Master of a Lodge without having served as Warden. I have in my mind a brother in London who used to boast that the only office he ever held in a Craft Lodge was that of Master. There must be many other similar cases.

One or two points in some of the rules recently amended seem worthy of note. No. 185, which deals with initiations on emergency, directs that the Master shall state in open Lodge the cause of the emergency, before the ballot is taken. In the case of emergency arising after the election of a Candidate it would thus be necessary to ballot for him a second time. No. 189 enacts that if a Brother who has been elected a joining member does not present himself for membership within one year after his election the election shall be void. The reason for such a condition is not apparent, and its effect may cause complications. The voiding of the election would necessarily entail the return to the Brother of subscription and joining fees paid, and the return by Grand Lodge of registration fees and quartetrages, while the Brother himself might under certain circumstances lose his membership of Grand Lodge, and be compelled to qualify again by service as Master of a Lodge.

The requirement that a candidate for joining (and we may presume for re-joining as well as for founding a new Lodge) shall produce a clearance Certificate from every Lodge of which he is or has been a Member is in my opinion quite right and proper, but I fail to see why the Certificates should be returned to the brother after his admission, for unless they are actually 'demits' they will be of no possible use to him at a later date, and I think they should more properly be filed by the Lodge which has required their production.

Bro. J. Walter Hobbs writes:—

There are a good many points upon which observations could be made to clear up some of Bro. R. H. Baxter's difficulties, but as this would lead to a discursive explanation on matters foreign to the apparent object of the paper it seems hardly necessary to go into them.

The apparent object is to lead to a consideration and revision of the Book of Constitutions, with the view of clearing away doubts and difficulties and the filling up of omissions and otherwise co-ordinating its provisions.

One point occurs to me as peculiar which has not been referred to in the paper or the verbal remarks made upon it. I refer to the question of "removal" of the Master of a Lodge. I need not dilate upon the improbability of such a case arising, or the undesirability of legislating for it, but as such a contingency is recognised by Rule 141 the procedure may well be considered.

(Journal page 112)

R. 141 "If the Master shall die, be removed, or be rendered incapable of discharging the duties of his office," &c., &c., the Wardens shall act in summoning the Lodge as specified.

So far as I can see no procedure is provided for the removal by any Masonic jurisdiction or authority. How can it be done—by whom—or in what circumstances?

Some cases of removal are provided for, i.e., Rule 136. The Tyler "may at any time be removed for cause deemed sufficient by a majority of the Brethren present at a regular meeting of the Lodge," which suggests that no prior notice is necessary in such a case presumably because the Tyler would be detected in flagrante delicto and tried immediately.

Rule 24 refers to the "removal" of Grand Officers, but continues: "But no Grand Officer can be removed without the approbation of Grand Lodge" which suggests that being "removed" is a different penalty to being "displaced" as in the case of an officer of a Private Lodge but at the same time leaves the removal of a Grand Officer in the same doubtful state as the removal of a Master.

Rule 140 provides that "should the Master be dissatisfied with the conduct of any of the officers he may lay the cause of complaint before the Lodge," &c., &c., and if well founded "the Master shall have power to displace such officer and appoint another." This is clearly within the discretion of the Master (the Lodge being satisfied the complaint is proved) but does not apply to himself.

Rule 209 provides for the exclusion of a member for the meeting, and in this case the Master is the person to enforce it.

Rule 210 provides for the permanent "exclusion" of a member from the Lodge. If this procedure is put in motion successfully against a Master (he might however prove obstructive by refusing to call a meeting, or to have the subject put on the agenda and so on) he would no doubt be "incapable of discharging the duties of his office," but it would appear that Rule 141 is directed to incapacity from illness, mental derangement, or imprisonment, because if he should die, which is provided for, he would equally be incapable of acting.

Rule 214, which provides for appeals to Grand Lodge, seems hardly to meet the case, because when a complaint has been investigated "such order and adjudication shall be made as the laws and regulations of Masonry authorise," but these laws and regulations (so far as the Book of Constitutions is concerned) authorise nothing on this subject. Of course, by parity of reasoning, if a Grand Officer may be "removed" by Grand Lodge (Rule 24) a Master might well be subject to the same penalty.

The rules relating to the Board of General Purposes throw little, or no, light on the point.

Rule 272 gives the Board power to "hear and determine all subjects of Masonic complaint," &c., &c., and "generally to take cognizance of all matters relating to the Craft."

Rule 273 authorises the Board to proceed "to admonition, fine or suspension according to the laws;" but in a case of a flagrant nature requiring the "expulsion of a Brother from the Craft" a report to Grand Lodge is necessary, presumably beforehand.

Rule 274 gives the Board a power of "suspension" of a Lodge or Brother for certain specified defaults, but this does not help on the subject of our enquiry.

Whatever view is taken upon the subject it would seem at least desirable to bear it in mind if, and when, any revision of the Book of Constitutions is under consideration.

Bro. Rodk. H. Baxter writes in reply:—

It is naturally gratifying to me that my paper has called forth such a useful discussion, and my only regret is that some of the Brethren who spoke have not committed their remarks to writing.

The task of replying is, fortunately, easy, as most of the participants in the discussion have expressed general agreement with me in my appeal for a simplification of the rules in our Book of Constitutions, or have called attention to peculiarities not embodied in my paper.

Our W.M.'s definition of the meaning of the words "Constitution" and "Constitutions" will perhaps enable Brethren to settle the point at issue.

Bro. Hextall seems to be the only commentator who really questions any of the points raised by me, and even so there could have been no cross-purposes between us, in several instances, had we both consulted the same edition of the Book of Constitutions, for, as our Secretary points out, any edition is practically obsolete before it leaves the printer's hands. Rule 150 in the 1917 edition is not at all as quoted by Bro. Hextall, and the error pointed out by him in Rule 180 has been corrected in that edition, which is the one I used during the preparation of my paper. After my paper had gone to the printer a new edition appeared and several alterations had to be made before I could read it in Lodge.

I, of course, readily forgive our Brother for saying one or two of my criticisms struck him as being a little microscopic, for no doubt he was quite right, but may not a microscopic examination be advantageous at times?

For the most part, Bro. Hextall's notes are a valuable addition to my paper, and as such are much appreciated. The only paragraph I cannot follow our Brother in is the one in which he asks if I have not overlooked the words "or whenever at a subsequent time he may require it" in my criticism of Rule 213, as to clearance certificates. So far as I can see these words do not affect my statement. The omission of the word "subsequent" would put the whole matter in order.

Bro. Hextall's desire for a completion of Bro. Levander's examination to date of successive alterations in the rules is opportune. I know of no Brother better qualified to undertake the task than Bro. Hextall himself.

The comments of Bros. Vibert, Stirling, Hobbs, and Songhurst are all useful adjuncts to my paper and hardly call for any reply, although I may say, in reply to Bro. Stirling, that I still think it the duty of the Secretary to record the names of all the Brethren present in his Minutes. Rule 172 is certainly quite clear on this point.

The information vouched for by Bro. Herbert Bradley and others, that some Provincial and District Grand Masters designate, not being already in possession of the secrets of an Installed Master, have been privately instructed in them before being installed in their Provincial or District Grand Lodges, is interesting. The question arises whether the Brethren revealing such secrets are not violating the obligation they took at their own installation.

I have to acknowledge my indebtedness to Bro. F. W. Golby for pointing out some errors in the rough proof of my paper which enabled me to make corrections before reading it in Lodge.

I return sincere thanks for the vote accorded to me, and to all those Brethren who have contributed to the discussion.

Lodge No. 20, Antients

(Journal page 114)

In his History of the Neptune Lodge (London, 1910), Bro. F. W. Golby says, "our first Minute Book contains the Minutes of another Lodge which was constituted, existed for three years, and became extinct before our Lodge was established, and which apparently never had any connection therewith."

This Lodge was No. 20 on the Register of the Grand Lodge of the Antients, and it appears to have met throughout its career at the Hampshire Hog, Goswell Street, London. The Book in which its Minutes and those of the Neptune Lodge are recorded has had its binding carefully repaired at a comparatively recent date, and I judge that before this was done it was in a very dilapidated condition. Some leaves seem to have been quite loose, and unfortunately they have not been re-inserted at their proper places, the consequence being that it is not easy without careful examination to ascertain to which Lodge the Records really belong. The confusion is worse confounded by the fact that the Book was started at both ends as well as at various other places, so as to enable it to be used for the Minutes proper, Lists of Members and of Visitors, By Laws, Cash accounts, &c., while to cap all a former Secretary, apparently with a desire to carry the career of the Neptune Lodge to an earlier date than could legitimately be claimed for it, has in several places altered No. 20 into No. 13, which was Neptune's number some years after No. 20 had gone out of existence.

Bro. Golby has explained fully the means he adopted—unfortunately without success—to ascertain how the Book came into the possession of the Neptune Lodge, and thanks are due to him for kindly giving facilities for a transcript of the records of No. 20 to be made for publication in our Transactions. These records shew its complete history for the three years of its existence, and they have not heretofore been printed. The various particulars have been brought together into a regular order, and so far as type will permit the peculiarities of the various Secretaries have been retained.

The book was prepared for the use of the Lodge by Laurence Dermott; and the By-Laws, the preliminary headings and the Minutes of the first two Meetings are in his handwriting. This explains the entry of 8s. "for this Book and Writting." The By-Laws may profitably be compared with those later issued by the Grand Lodge of the Antients and recommended for the use of all Lodges under its jurisdiction. It would have been more interesting if they had proved to be a copy of the earlier Rules which on 4th March, 1752, were superseded and ordered to be cut out of the Book of the Records of Grand Lodge.

Dermott held the office of Grand Secretary from 1752 to 1771. Samuel Galbraith the first S.W. of No. 20 was appointed Junior Grand Warden in 1755 having been Master of No. 3. The Tyler Gough was probably Richard Gough who was Grand Tyler 1752-6 and Grand Pursuivant 1756-63.

Dermott was a member of No. 16 the Master of which, Hugh Horan, constituted No. 20 on 9th July, 1753. It seems evident that the Lodge had been meeting at an earlier date, for the accounts include cash received from John Hosier "for making" and apparently he was one of the members at the Constitution.

L. McIntosh of No. 3 was a frequent Visitor. He may be identified as Lachlan McIntosh the Junior Grand Warden of 1753-4.

The Lodge was never very strong, and I think we may fairly assume that Galbraith was its mainspring. The "affectionate love" which induced him to advance Three pounds for the expenses of its formation seems also shewn by his proposition of new members and the frequent presence, as Visitors, of members of his Lodge No. 3. In March, 1756, it is noted that he went to Ireland, and after his departure there is record of only one ceremony being worked, and that apparently without the usual Lecture. An alteration in the days of meeting

(Journal page 115)

evidently failed to keep the members together, and the Records cease with the meeting of 22nd September, 1756, when the Lodge was closed "with the most agreeable harmony."

W.J.S.

[Title-Page.]

Number 20 Constituted July the 9th 1753

John M^cCormick — Mast^r.

Sam^l. Galbraith — Ward^s. Ja^s. Bedford

[On the back of this page is the following:—]

A Prayer to be Repeated at the Making of a New Brother.

O God the auther and giver of every good and perfect gift and the Grand Architect of the Universe, we thy servants truely sensible of our own unworthinefs, approach thy Divine Majesty humbly Beseeching thee to blefs and protect us, and all those who with the Secrets of Masonry Endeavour to Unfould and practise the Mysteries of Godlinefs and Christianity, grant us Thy Presence in this and all our Undertakeings. Confirm our choice of this thy servant, and that he may in all things live, as becomes A Mason, give him the spirit of Wisdom to avoid the Evil, and to Chuse the good the spirit of Meeknefs and forbearance, and of Brotherly love and charity. Strengthen him against all Temptation that he may Ever be able to Subdue his pafsions, and Adorn us all with the spirit of Zeal for thy Glory, and fervency in thy Worship, that we may not use our Freedom in Christ as A Cloke of Maliciousnefs, but in all our thoughts Words & Actions, so Square our lives within the Compafs of thy Comandments, as becomes the Servants of Christ thy Son our Lord.

Amen.

[This prayer seems to have been written by Noblet O'Keefe the Secretary.]

THAT a Lodge of Free & Accepted Antient Masons be held at the Hampshire Hog in Gofswell St^r. London (or elsewhere) on the 1 & 3 Monday of each Month And that Such Lodge Consist of One Master, Two Wardens, Two Deacons, and A Tyler with as many Members as the Master and Majority Shall think proper, that all the Brethren do appear in decent Apparrel with proper Cloathing, and obey the Mast^r. and Observe a good decorum while the Lodge is Engaged in what is Serious and Solemn, otherwise the Transgrefsor Shall not Sit in the Lodge with the Consent of the Mast^r. and Majority.

THAT the Lodge meet at the Hours hereafter Mention'd Viz. from the 25^th of March to the 10^th of Sept^r. at 7 o'Clock in the Evening and sit until ten. and from the 10^th of Sept^r. aforest. to the 25^th of March following, from 6 until 9 o'Clock and if any mem^r. be absent one hour after the time of meeting Shall be Fin'd 1^d penny, and if Absent the whole Night or time of Bufinefs Shall be fin'd 2 pence. Except such Absentee be Sick, in Confindment, or three miles from the place of meeting. And that all such Fines be put in the Box.

III

THAT the Mast^r. be Chose by Ballot, Viz. the Wardens Shall Stand Candidates for the Masters place every Lodge night before each St. JOHN'S day, and the Cand^s. withdraw from the Lodge while every free Member gives his Vote in favour of him he deems

(Journal page 116)

most Worthy. Each free mem^r. having One Vote & the Mas^r. two. When done the Cand^s. Shall be call'd in, and the Mast^r. declare him duly Elected who hath the Majority then the Mast^r. Elect Shall nominate his Wardens with the afores^d. proceedings, And Deacons according to Seniority, and a Secretary and all Master MASONS.

IIII

THAT the Master & Ward^s. do attend the Grand Lodge on Every first Wednesday of every month at the usual hours, and at all other times on proper notice when Bufinefs Require, and therein to transact all matters relateing to this Lodge as full and truely as if We the whole Body were there present.

AND if any Member refuse to Serve any of the afores^d. Offices shall be Fin'd as follows Viz. the Mast^r. 5 Shill^s. each Ward^n. and Secretary two Shill^s. each Deacon One Shilling, and to be Fined the Same if they don't Serve their full time Except for the Reasons mention'd in the 2^d. Rule. That the Master and Brethren meet on every St. JOHN day to dine together between the Hours of 12 and two o'Clock and that each Mem^r. pay 2 Shill^s. the Lodge night before each St. JOHNS day towards defraying the Charges of the Festival that the Wardens shall be appointed as Stewards to Transact all matters Relateing to the Feast that the new Officers be in Stall'd immadiately after Dinner, and all Visiters who dine, In this Lodge on said days Shall pay 2^s.6 for Dinner.

THAT on each Lodge Night every Mem^r. pay one Shilling and put 2 pence in the Box that the Jun^r. Ward. keep an Exact Account of the Reckoning and Acquaint the Body when all are in, and upon his neglegence or Omifsion he Shall be Answerable for the Difficiency.

VII

NO Visiter to be Admitted after the Hour of 9. o'Clock (nor at any time) without the Masters Leave and if Admitted Shall pay Equal with the Mem^s. Nor Shall any Bro^r. be admitted a Second time that doth not belong to a Regular Antient Lodge until he has Enter'd himself a member of An Antient Lodge as afores^d. and his name Register'd in the Grand Lodg Book.

VIII

ANY Person desireous of being made a Mason Shall be reported a Lodge night before his making by a Member of the Lodge and if not well known Shall be farther reported to the Grand Secretary with his Name, Occupation, and place of Abode with the intended time of his makeing, that the Secretary may make a Strict Enquiry into his Character, (and if approv'd off) Shall pay £1.5, one pound five shillings one moiety to be spent as a Welcome to the New Bro^r. and the Other part to be put in y^e Chest of this Lodge and at his making Shall Cloath the Lodge if Requir'd and when Enter'd Shall be Register'd in the Grand Lodge Book.

WHEN any Mason is desireous of becoming a Member of this Lodge he Shall be Reported a Lodge Night before, as above and Balloted for and when Admitted, Shall pay 2^s/6^d ~~into the box and~~ One Shilling to the Grand Secretary for Registering him to the Number of this Lodge.

IF any B^r. in the Lodge Curse, Swear, lay, or offer to lay Wager or use any Reproachful Language in derogation of GODS NAME and Corruption of good Manners, or Intrupt any Officer while Speaking, Shall be Fin'd at the Discretion of the Master & Majority.

(Journal page 117)

IF any Member of this Lodge come disguis'd in Licquor he Shall be Admonish'd by the Mast^r. for the First Offence, for the 2^d Offence he Shall be Fin'd One Shill^g. for the 3^d he Shall be Excluded without Certifycate or Benefit from the Lodge and reported to the Grand.

XII

ALL Fines, dues, &c. that Shall or may become due to the Lodge Shall Be paid the 3^d. Lodge Night after they are due, Otherwise the Transgrefsor Shall have no Vote in the Lodge and if not Clear'd on St JOHNS day Shall be Excluded.

XIII

THAT on a Lodge Night in the Masters absence the Past. Mast^r. may take his Place, and in his absence by the Sen^r. Warden, and in his Absence by the Jun^r. Warden and in the absence of all the Officers, the Members according to Seniority and Merritt Shall fill the Absent Officers places &c. And the absent Officers, on Regular Lodge Nights or otherwise duly summon'd Shall be Fin'd a discretional fine over and above the Common fine of Private Members.

1754 April the 7^th. Amendment on the Opposite: Agreed that Each absent Officer (Viz. Master & Wardens) on proper Lodge nights or otherwise duly Summon'd) be fin'd as follows that is to say: The Master Shall

S D be fin'd 1 6 each Warden one shilling — this method to hold in full force and Virtue during the Continuance of this Lodge.

XIIII

THAT the Mast^r. have full power and Authority to Call a Lodge of Emmergency, when all the Mem^s are to attend on Proper Summons.

THAT the Box, Money, and Furniture of this Lodge be in the care of Some Responsable Bro^r. as the Master and Brethren Shall think Sufficient. And the Money be disposed off for the Advancement of the Lodge, & Benefit of the Drethren.

XVI

THE Secretary Shall keep a Regular Registery of all the Members According to the Form laid down for the Same And proper minutes of the Transactions (that are proper to be wrote) and the same to be laid before the Grand Once a Quarter if Requir'd.

XVII

THAT no disputes arise between any Brethren in the Lodge but if any dispute shou'd happen out of the Lodge Concerning Masonry or Otherwise (which they can't decide between themselves) to prevent Vexatious Law suits, such disputes or Controversies shall be laid before the Lodge and there decided if pofsiable but in case such Brethren Shall not then Agree, the Master Shall Order his Secretary to take minutes of such disputes &c. and lay the same, before the Grand on their next meeting, when such Brethren are to attend and Agree as the Grand Shall Order but in case such Bro^s. will not then Agree to the decision of the Grand, Such Bro^s. Shall have no Certificate, for ever Excluded and deem'd unworthy of the Society.

XVIII

THAT the Master and Brethren of this Lodge have full power to make, Amend, or Explain these or such Other By-laws, Rules, and, Orders, as the Shall think Most proper & Convenient for the good of this Lodge and the Craft in General, But first to lay such Amendments or Additions before the Grand (for the Benefit of the Regular Antient Lodges) and leave Copies of the Same if requir'd.

(Journal page 118)

XIX

THAT every New Mason Shall pay the Tyler One Shilling and every Mason who Enter's as a Member 6 pence And the Tyler take Particular Care not to admitt any Visiter a second who doth not belong to a Regular Antient Lodge.

THAT thefe Rules & Orders be Read by the Secretary or some Other Bro^r. By the Masters Order. To every New Member And otherwise as Occasion shall Require in the Lodge.

XXI

THAT what ever is acted or Spoke in this Lodge, Shall not be discours'd nor Mention'd out of this Lodge to any Person whatsoever Except the present Members of this Lodge afores^d. under the Penalty of one Shill^g. for the First offence and Double for the 2^d and trible for the 3^d &c.

XXII

IF a Complaint be brought against a B^r. by another and he be found Guilty, he Shall Stand to the Determination of the Lodge. But if a Complaint be brought against a Bro^r. wherein the Accuser can't Support his Complaint to Conviction, Such Person Shall Forfeit Such penalty as the person so Accused Shou'd have forfeited had he been Really Convicted on Such Complaint.

XXIII

IF any Member of this Lodge withdraw and Form a Lodge without Leave and Irregularly Make Masons, they Shall not be admitted (no not as Visiters) in any Lodge (tho: the Brethren so made may be allow'd) until they make full satisfaction Render a good Reason and due Submifsion for their Offence.

XXIV

THAT no Mason be Admitted to Visit this Lodge but such as are Mast^r. Masons, least we hinder or distroy the Harmony of Working Master Masons.

XXV

AND if any Member of this Lodge be guilty of any Misdemeanor not Specified in the afores^d. Rules and Orders he or they Shall be Dealt with at the Discretion of the Lodge.

We the Master Wardens and Deacons with the rest of our fellow Members of Our Lodge N°. 20 do approve of the following Rules and orders as good and wholesome for the good Government of this Lodge to which we mutually Submit and witnefs our hand. October 2^d. 1753.


1753
Octo^r.	John M^cCormick — M	William Fox
	Sam^l. Galbraith — S.W.	Tho^s. Wier
	James Bedford — J.W.	Paul Blunt
	Noblet OKeeffe — Secret^y.	William Green
	Tho^s. Warren Discharged	Sam^l. Hutchins
	John Finch	Rob^t. Barnett
	Tho^s. Stones	William Corp
	John Scofield	Thomas Dowsett
	John Hosier	Jn^o. Forsaith
	Fenwick Widdrington	George Lankston
	James Newham
	Wm. Healy
	John Summers
	John Haughton
	John Hogan
	William Bickerton

(continued in pages-136-150.md)

Pages 136-150

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 136–150

(PDF pages 136–150 = journal pages 119–133 approx.)

Lodge No. 20, Antients — Transactions (continued)

(Journal page 119)

TRANSACTIONS.

1753

July 9 — Constituted after the Antient Manner and form of York-Masons by the Mast^r. of N°. 16 and proper afsistance (Vide Visiters) Closed at 10 with good Harmony.

16 — Lodge Night M^r. & W^s. present Open'd 8 o'Clock 1; B: Call'd off at 9. Clos'd at 10 o'Clock with good Harmony.

Aug^st. 6 — Lodge open^d at 6 o'Clock when Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first Branch. Master Present Clos'd at 10 with Harmony.

20 — Lodge Night M^r. & Sen^r. Warden present Open'd at 7 o'Clock 1; B: Call'd off at 9 Rec^d. B^r. Haket's Petition (Vide Cash Acc^ts. for the Rest) Clos'd at 10 with good Harmony.

N.B. M^r. Jn^o. Scholefield Reported by the Master & Sen^r. Warden to be made a Mason on our Regular Lodge night next ensuing.

Sep^r. 3^d — Lodge open^d at 6 o'Clock M. Present B^r. Lewis gave a Lecture in the Craft Clos^d at 10 with good harmony.

N.B. M^r. John Cleminson Reported by the Master B^r. Stone & Bro^r. Lewis M. N°. 4 to be made a Mason on our Regular Lodge Night Next Ensuing.

17^th. — Lodge open'd at 6 o'Clock M. P. Clos^d at 10 with good Harmony as Useal.

Octo^r. 1^st. — Lodge open^d at 6 o'Clock M. P. Bro^r. Lewis gave a Lecture in the first Branch when Bro^r. Scovill. Bro^r. Cleminson was made An Enter Apprintice in Our Regular Lodge. Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS.

1753 Octo^r. 15^th. — Lodge open'd at 6 o'Clock M. P. Bro^r. Fenwick Weddrington, Bro^r. James Newham enter'd Enter Apprintice, Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first part. Bro^r. Scovill Rais^d. a fellow Craft in our Regular Lodge. Clos^d. at 10 with good Harmony.

Nov^r. 5^th. — Lodge open^d. at 6 o'Clock Master absent till 9 o'Clock Bro^r. Cleminson Rais^d. a fellow Craft, Bro^r. Warren Demanded a discharge which he got. Bro^r. Lewis master of N°. 4 gave a Lecture in the Second Part, Clos^d. at 10 with good Harmony. Reported by Bro^r. Finch M^r. Byrne, Reported by Bro^r. Stone M^r. Sam^l. Welbeck both to enter into our Regular Lodge.

11^th. — Lodge of Immergency Call^d by the Worshipfull Masters Orders and Bro^r. Scofield was Rais^d. a Master Mason and part of a Lecture Given by the Senior Warden in the Chair.

Nov^r. 17^th. — Lodge Open^d. at 7 o'Clock Master Present Bro^r. Cleminson Rais^d. a Master Mason, Bro^r. Wetherinton was made a Craft, also Bro^r. Welbeck was enter'd as an aprentice, the Senior Warden and Junior Warden fin^d for Cursing and Swearing. Clos^d. at 10 o'Clock With Good Harmony.

23^d. — Lodge Met According to Order M. P. present Bro^r. Galbraith, Bro^r. Finch, Bro^r. Stone, Bro^r. Cleminson. Bro^r. Finch Reported M^r. Chevileer. Clos^d. at 10 o'Clock With Good Harmony.

(Journal page 120)

TRANSACTIONS.

1753 Dec^r. 3. — Lodge open'^d at 7 o'Clock M. P. Bro^r. Welbeck was made a fellow Craft Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first part. Clos^d. at 10 o'Clock with Good Harmony.

17^th. — Lodge Open^d. at 6 o'Clock Master Present Bro^r. Wedderington was Rais'^d a Master Mason the Brethren by a Generall Consent Elected the Master in the Chair for the Insuing half year and also the Senior and Junior Wardens for the Same, It was also Unanimously Agreed it being lodge Night to Chuse Officers that all Members Absent Should be fin^d. the Sum of 4 pence. Extraordinary Lodge, Clos^d. at 10 with good Harmony.

23. — Lodge Open'^d on Immergency at 6 o'Clock M. P. Bro^r. Welbeck was Rais^d. a Master Mason, the Lodge Agreed on St. Johns Day dinner, and paid thier Money. Bro^r. Galbraith Reported M^r. W^m. Healy to be a Member of this Most Hon^ble. & Antient Lodge of Free an Accepted Mason Clos^d. at 10 o'Clock with Good Harmony.

1754 Janr^y 14^th. — Lodge open^d. at 7 oClock Master Present M^r. W^m. Healy was made an Enter^d. Apprentice. Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first part, it was unanimously agree^d by the Lodge that Bro^r. OKeeffe Secretary of the Lodge Shou^d be Allow^d for his trouble

s d 1 from each New Made Member & 6 for a Member that enter^d. Clos^d at 10 with good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 Jan^ty 21^st. — Lodge open'd at 7 o'Clock Master Pres^t. Bro^r. Healy Rais^d a fellow Craft. Bro^r. L. Dermott G.S. Gave a Lecture in the Second part Clos^d at 10 with good Harmony.

Feb^ry 4^th. — Lodge open^d at 7 o'Clock Master Present Bro^r. Healy Rais^d a Master Mason, Bro^r. Coleman gave a Lecture in the Master, Bro^r. Galbraith Report'^d M^r. H. Butcher, M^r. R. Gibs, M^r. John Summers Clos^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

18^th. — Lodge open^d at 7 oclock M. P. M^r. John Summers made an Enter apprentice Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first Branch Clos^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

March 4^th. — Lodge open^d at 6 oClock M. P. master gave a Lecture in the first Branch Clos^d at 10 with good Harmony.

18^th. — Lodge open^d at 6 oClock Master present Bro^r. Summers Rais'^d a fellow Craft, Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first Branch, two petions for Charity, presented to our Lodge which thier Names Bro^r. Mathew Finley, Bro^r. Nicholas Bryn. Clos^d at 10 with good Harmony. it was likewise offer^d by the Master whether or noe, by an agreement made by the masters of the Regular York Lodges.

TRANSACTIONS.

[Mch. 28^th or] [April 1^st ?] — Lodge open^d at 6 oClock M. P. Bro^r. Hogan & Bro^r Beckerton Enter^d as Members in our Lodge Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the First Branch Call^d off to Refreshment at 9, Clos^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

(Journal page 121)

Aprill 7^th. — Lodge of Immergency call'^d M. P. Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the Enter^d. Apprentice, it was agreed by the Members that each Absent officer (Viz) Master & Wardens, on proper Lodge Nights, or otherwise duly ~~elected~~ Summon'd be fin'^d as follows,

s d s that is to say, Master shall be fin'^d 1 6, each warden s 1 this method to be in full force and Vertue as Long as the Continuance of this Lodge, Members present, M. Bro^r. Galbraith S.W., B. Bedford J.W., Bro^r. O'Keefe S., Bro^r. Stone, Bro^r. Houghton, Bro^r. Hogan, B. Hosier Clos'^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

15^th. — Lodge open'd 7 o'Clock M^r and Ward^s. psent B^r Dermot gave a Lecture in the 2^d: B: Call'd off at 9 o'Clock Call'd on at ½ hr: after 9 Clos'd at 10 with good Harmony.

N. B. it is agreed that a Lodge of Emmergency by call'd to which all the members of this Lodge shall be summon'd and upon his or their negleact to answer such summons he or they shall be Reported to Grand &c. M^r. W^m. Fox Reported the W^ll. Mast^r. and agreed that he the s^d. M^r. W^m. Fox be made a Mason in this Lodge on our next Lodge Night.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 April 28^th. — Lodge of Emmergency Mast^r. & War^ds psent. Open'd at 7 o'Clock Call'd off at 9, Call'd on at ½h; after 9 Clos'd 10 with good Harmony.

May 6^th. — Lodge open'^d at 8 o'Clock M. P. & Wardens. Bro^r. Dermott G.S. gave a Lecture in the 1^st. B. Bro^r. Wire Reported to become a Member of our Lodge by Bro^r. Galbraith, Call'^d off to Refreshment at 9 oClock, Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

20^th. — Lodge open'^d at 9 oClock. M. Present & Wardens. Bro^r. Wier Enter'^d a Member, M^r. W^m. Fox was made an Enter Appren-tice Bro^r. Galbraith Gave a Lecture in the first part. Call'^d off to Refreshment at 10. Clos^d. at 10½ with Good Harmony.

June 3^d. — Lodge Night M^r and Ward^s. present Open'd 2: B: Crafted B^r. W^m. Fox Fin'd B^r. Wederington (for swearing) one penny B^r. Healey fin'd (for absence) two pence Call'd off at 9 Clos'd at ½h: past ten and hope to have better Harmony on our next meeting.

TRANSACTIONS.

June 17^th. — Lodge open'^d at 7 oClock M. Present, busenefs Call^d. on to Raise Bro^r. Fox a Master Mason, likewise Master and Wardens to be chose for the Ensueing half year Bro^r. Bedford J.W. Chose Master, Bro^r. O'Keeffe S.W., Bro^r. Warren J.W., Bro^r. Bedford fin^d for Swearing 1^d Bro^r. Hosier D^o. Bro^r. Weddington D^o. a dispute between Bro^r. Bedford, & Bro^r. Weddington, in Regard of 2^d fin^d. Levied upon him which was left to four Masters of Different Regular Lodges which are Bro^r. M^cInstosh N°. 3 Bro^r. Glover 11 Bro^r. Norton 16, Bro^r. Scurlock 18 which given against Bro^r. Weddington which he made proper Submifsion Call^d off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 11 with good Harmony. N.B. Bro^r. Weddrington ommitted paying his fine.

24^th. — Lodge open'^d at two at Noon being the festival of St. John, Call^d of to Refreshment at three Call^d on in order to make Bro^r.

(Journal page 122)

Robert Whitehall an Antient Mason, he being a Moddren Mason before made him in all the parts, Master Enstall^d. & Wardens Call'^d off the Second time to Refreshment, Call'^d on to work Clos'^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

July the 1^st 1754 — Lodge Night M^r. & Ward^s. present Open'd 1: B: ½h: after 8 Call'd off at ½ h: after 9 Clos'd ½ after 10 with good Harmony.

15^th. — Lodge open'^d at 8 oClock M. P. & W^s. open^d in the 1: B: a Lecture by Bro^r. Galbraith, Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½, Clos^d. at 10½ with Good Harmony.

27^th. — Lodge off Immergency Call^d. Bro^r. M^coCormuck P.M. took the Chair for to make M^r. Paul Blunt, M^r. W^m. Green Masons, which they were made Enter apprentice and fellow Craft, in this Most Noble and Antient Society off free and Accepted Mason. Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first part Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony, the above was Reported by Bro^r. Warren J.W.

Aug^st. 6^th. — Lodge open'^d at 8 o'Clock M. P. S. W. P. J. W. Absent, Bro^r. Galbraith Gave a Lecture in the first part Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10½ with Good Harmony, paid Bro^r.

s d Galbraith 16-11½, in part off £3 8 4 which is due to him, for advancing, for the Support off the agreeable Lodge N°: 20 Bro^r. Hogan Declar^d. off this Night, on account, that he was not willing to pay into the Grand Lodge its dues, it was agreed by the whole that was present, that Bro^r. Galbraith shou'd be paid the above sume that was in the chest, Present, M: S:W: D^o. Bro^r. Healy S:D: Bro^r. Hoesier, Bro^r. Hogan.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 Aug^st. 19^th. — Lodge open'^d at 8 oClock Master present and Wardens Bro^r: Blunt & Bro^r Green Rais^d. Master Masons Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10½ with Good Harmony.

Sep^r 2^d. — Lodge open'd at 8 oClock Master & Wardens Present Bro^r. Dermott Gave a Lecture in the first part Bro^r Blunt Requir'd a Certificate has he his goeing to Jemecia which he has Rec^d. honourably, as he paid all his Dues in our Lodge N°. 20 honourably. Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10½ With the most pleasant and agreeable Harmony.

N: B: Worshipfull Master paid Bro^r: Jones 1^s as he was order'^d By Bro^r. Galbraith & the above Master to tile N°. 20, paid Bro^r. Gouf 1^st after the Lodge was Clos^d. untill the Debate was Desided By Bro^r. Galbraith & the Above Gough Tyler.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 Sep^r. 16^th. — Lodge open'^d at 8 oClock M. P. & Wardens M^r. Hutchions Made An Enter Apprentice Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first part Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½. Call^d. on to work, two Letters produc'^d by Bro^r. O'Keeffe in regard to Bro^r. Houghton whether N°. 20 shou^d. pay towards his fees, settl'^d by the Lodge to know how this money is to be paid before we agree. Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

(Journal page 123)

[Oct^r. 6^th.] — Lodge not open'^d on acc^t. off not having the Key nor Sufficient Members to open the Lodge, it was agreed by the Majority present M: & Bro^r. Galbraith to fine all Absent Members, Bro^r. Summers sent five shillings for his absence with a letter off Excuse in Regard to clear the Book next Lodge Night, agreed to fine Bro^r. O Keeffe S:W. for Neglecting to send his Key, or the masters which he had Departed after nine oClock paid for Bro^r. Houghton to Release

s d him out off confinement 3.6.

[Oct^r. 21^st.] — Lodge open^d. at 8 oClock M. P. & Ward^ss. Bro^r. Hutchins Rais^d. a fellow Craft & Master Mason, Call^d. off to Refreshment Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 Nov^r 4^th. — Lodge met as usual the Senior Warden present but went away before the Lodge was open^d, for w^ch it is left at the Descretions of the Master and the rest of the Brethren to fine him the next Ensueing Night, no officer present when the Lodge was open'd the pafs Master in the Chair, when the Lecture was given in the first part by Bro^r. Galbraith, who acted as Master Lodge at 9 and

d clos^d. with a good harmony at 10. Bro^r. Healy fin'^d for Swearing 1.

[Nov^r.] 18^th. — Lodge open'^d at 7½ oClock M. P. & W^ds. Bro^r. o Keeffe paid for his Neglect in not coming upp to open the Lodge the last Lodge Night, Bro^r. Warren fin^d. 1^s. for his Neglect in not Coming to his Lodge he being J. W. Bro^r. M^coCormick P. M. gave a Lecture in the first part, Call^d. off too Refreshment at 9½ Call^d. on to work Clos^d. at 10½ with Good Harmony.

Dec^r. [2^nd.] — Lodge open^d. at 8 oClock M. P. & S: W. agreed by N°. 3, N°. 20, N°. 36, That each Lodge shall dine at Bro^r. Bedford^s next St. John's day and N°. 20, St. John day following, & at Bro^r. Hutchins after, sign^d. by agreement by M. N°. 3 & J.W, M. N°. 20. & S. W. N°. 36, M. & S. W, paid to Bro^r. Jackson, S. W. N°. 5 for

S d Bro^r. Evans, he being ill, 2.7½ Call^d off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS.

1754 Dec^r. 16^th. — Lodge open'^d at 7½ M. P. & Ward^ss. in ord^r. to Elect officers for the Ensuing half year, Bro^r. O'Keeffe Elected Master, Bro^r. Warren S:W. Bro^r. Stones J:W. Bro^r. Healy S:D. Bro^r. Hosier J:D. Bro^r. M^coCormick P:M. of this Lodge, offer^d off his own free will to Stand Secretary for the Ensuing half year Call^d. off to Refreshments at 9½ Clos^d. at 10½ With the most agreeable Harmony it is agreed by the Hole that the Deacons Shall be fin^d.

d 9 for their Nights absent.

[1755] Jan^ry. 6^th. — Lodge open'd. M. P. & S. W. noe Lecture as there was but 4 Members present, Clos^d. at 10 with Harmony.

Jan^ry. y^e 20^th. — Lodge Opend at 7 oClock M: P. & Jr^. W^d. Brother Galbraith gave a Lecture in y^e First Part Calld of to refreshment at 9 Receivd the Order of the Stweards Lodge in regard to Bro Mitchals Funaral, as several Members being absant y^e money was not Collected Calld on to work at 10 Closd at 10 and half with Harmony.

(Journal page 124)

TRANSACTIONS.

[Feb^y. 3^d.] — Lodge opend at 7oClock Master and S. Warden presant a Lecture in y^e first Part was given by y^e Past Master B^r M^coCormick Calld of to refreshment at 9 Clos'd with harmony at Ten. Brother Hoziar fin'd for swearing—one penny.

[Feb^y. 17^th.] — Lodge open^d. at 8 oClock M.P. W^ds. Absent Bro^r. Galbraith J: G. W. Gave a Lecture in the first part Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

March y^e 3: 1755. — Lodge open'd at 8 oClock B^r M^coCormick P. M. in y^e Chair y^e Master and Wardens absent also Keys & the Keys of y^e Chest y^t none of y^e Uutencials Could be had at y^e Opening to ye Closing of ye Lodge Clos'd with harmony.

March y^e 17: 1755. — Lodge met and opend at six oClock ye Master presant Closd as Usual with good harmony.

[ ? ] — Lodge of Immergency call^d. in ord^r. to pay thier dues to the Grand Call^d. off to Refreshment Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony Master & J. W. present.

Aprill 7 — Lodge open^d as usual Master present, Call^d off to Refreshment, Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS OF THE LODGE No. 20.

April y^e 21: 1755. — Lodge mett whas Open'd by B^r Jn^o Hofier By reafon no other Member or officer whas preafant, & Clofd it with with the Afiftance of Vifiting B^rs.

May y^e 5: 1755 — Lodge met and opend at 8 OClock Brother Galbraith Past Master in the Chair, Brother Robert Barnet was made an Enter'd prentice Mason Calld off to refreshment at 9 Closd at ten with Harmony.

May y^e 18: 1755 — Lodge calld on emergency to report M^r. W^m Corp as being worthy of this Honorable sociaty. The master in y^e Chair asisted by B^r Galbraith and B^r McCormick Closd with Harmony.

May the 19: 1755 — Lodge Night Brother Galbraith P. M. in y^e Chair gave a Leture in the F. B. it was put to Ballat Whether or no the abstant Members should be Excluded which was Carried by y^e Majority for, Calld off to refreshment at 9 Closd at with Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS.

1755 May 25^th. — Lodge of Immergency call'^d M^r. W^m. Corp made an Enter apprentice m^r. W^m Tompson Reported By Bro^r. Galbraith J. G: W to be worthy to be admitted in our Regular Lodge of free an Accepted Antient Masons Call^d. off to Refreshment. Clos^d with Good Harmony.

N. B. Bro^r. Thomas Dowsett Reported to become a member in our Regular Antient Lodge by Bro^r. Galbraith J: G. W. he being worthy of being a member, by his Certificate from N°. 218 in Ireland.

(Journal page 125)

June y^e 2: 1755 — Lodge met and open'd at 7 O'Clock y^e W. M. presant Brother Barnett was ras'^d a master Mason a Lecture Given by Brother Galbraith in y^e first Branch Calld of to refreshment at ten an closd with Harmony.

June 10^th — Lodge off Immergency call^d. M. Present Bro^r. Corp Rais^d. a fellow Craft M^r. John Forsaith Reported and made an Enter apprentice in this most honourable & Antient Society of free and accepted masons Call^d. off to Refreshment at 10, Clos^d. at 10½ with the most agreeable harmony Pofsible.

TRANSACTIONS CONTINUED.

June y^e 2: [? 16^th.] — Lodge met and opend at 7 O'Clock M^r presant B^r Corp was made a Master Mason also B^r Foresaith was made a fellow Craft, The Lodge according to anual Custom Calld to Election for Officers for y^e ensuing half Year, when Brother Tho^s. Warren was duly Elected as Master, B^r Dowsett as S Warden and B^r Barnett J Warden B^r Hosiar Senior deacon B^r Corp J deacon Calld of to refreshment at 9 clos'd at ten with harmony.

Jun^o 23 — Lodge of Imerginsy calld to make B^r Foresaith a Master mason The Master in y^e Chair Clos'd with Harmony at half after 10.

July y^e 7^th — Lodge met as usual the Master in the Chair Senior Warden present Jun^r D^o absent A Lecture in the first part given by Br^o. Galbraith Opned at eight O Clock and closd half after ten with the most agreable harmony.

July 21^st — Lodge open^d at 8 oClock M. Absent S: W. & J: W. gave a Lecture in the first Part by the S: W. Call^d. off to Refreshment Clos^d. at 10½ With Good Harmony.

TRANSACTIONS CONTINUED.

August y^e 4^th — Lodge met as usual the Master and senior Warden present the Lodge opned at 8 o Clock and Closd with the most agreeable harmony at 10 O Clock.

August the 13^th — Lodge Night M^r and Juner Warden presend B^r field Visiter the Lodge Opne'd at 8 Call'd to Refreshment at 9 Clos'd at 10 With good Harmony B^r Parnet B^r Corp B^r forsith paid two months Dues to the grand.

Sep^r 1^st — Lodge open^d. M. & W^ds. absent past. M took the Chair. Bro^r. m^coCorm^k. gave a Lecture in the first part it was agreed by the Majority this Night, that the Master Shou^d. 6^d. over & above is fines, W^ds D^o. Call^d. off to Refreshment Clos^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

16^th — Lodge open^d at 8 oClock M. S: W. Absent Bro^r. Corm^k. Gave a Lecture in the first Call^d off to Refreshment. Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

October 6 — Lodge Opend at 9 O Clock B^r M^coCormick P. M. in y^e Chair B^r Hlozar all y^e Members absant Which is agreed by y^e Majority y^t Each member be find 4^d over y^e Common fine Closd at 9 & ½ with harmony.

October y^e 20: 1755 — Lodge met and opend at 8 O Clock the W^ll PM Brother Galbraith in y^e Chair and agreed by the Majority y^t Each member absant Should be fined p^r Last and that all members should be

(Journal page 126)

summond next Lodge Night and in non-apearence to be Excluded Calld at 9 & ½ and Closd at 10 with harmony.

Nov^r. 4 — Lodge met as usual Opned at 8 O clock no Lecture on acc^t of the busines of the night which was fixt on a regular footing which is that Every brother pay his quarters dues the first Lodge night after St. Johns day next and Likewise the dues of the grand Lodge with some other irregularities rectefied likewise Bro. Clemenson readmited with universal aprobation Closd with the most agreeable harmony at almost ten o Clock.

[Nov^r. 17^th] — Lodge Open^d at 8 o Clock M. S:W. J:W. absent P:M. in the Chair. W: J: G: W. paid 2.6 for Bro^r. Cleminson's Entering by the Consent off the Transactions above. Bro^r Stones has

s by the Unanimous Consent off the Lodge Agreed to pay 6 that is for our Lodge, and the Grand, has we have agreed by the Complaint he made in regard off his Situation off life not being able to Support our Lodge, in regard of his family and trade, a Complaint made by the J: G: W. against Bro^r. M^coCormick in ragard off his going to Lodge w^ds. Lodge, and Expos^d our Lodge to the R:W. G.W^ds. &c. afsembl^d. that our Lodge was going to Decay, and had noe Jewils to open the Lodge at different times, w^ch. we consider^d he had noe right to make a complaint without making his complaint first to our Lodge, and if our Lodge Shou'd not agree, then he is to apply to the Grand, for which mistake he has made Submifsion, but does insist to have the affair settl^d. in the Stewards Lodge, the Report was made by Bro^r. Lewis, call^d off to Refreshment. Clos^d at 10 with Good Harmony.

Dec^r. 1^st — Lodge met as usual where all things Concerning the Lodge ware transacted Such as the dews of the same being regulated in order to have all things rectefied against the half years Election for Master, and Wardens with other Offiers and Likewise a lecture in the first part by Bro^r. McCormick Br^o. O Keeffe in the Chair opned at 8 o'Clock Clos'd at 10 with the most mostgreafable harmony.

15^th — Lodge open^d at 8 oClock M: absent J.W. pres^t. Bro^r. Corm^k. P: M. in the Chair gave a lecture in the 1: B: M: & W^ds. Chose for the Ensuing half year. Bro^r. Climinson Elected M. Bro^r. Corp S: W. Bro^r. Hosier S: W. S: W. deacons not chose Call^d off to Refreshment at 9½. Clos^d at 10½ with good Harmony.

1756 [Jan^y. 6^th] — Lodge open^d at 7 oClock M: P: S: W. J: W. D^o. noe lecture Worshipfull Reported M^r. Geo. Lanstor to be be made, last St. John's Day. Call^d off to Refreshm^t at 8½. Clos^d. at 9 with the Same Harmony as the former.

TRANSACTIONS.

1756 Jan^ry. 19^th — Lodge open^d. at 7 oClock M: P: & S: W. Bro^r. George Lankston Enter^d. an Apprentice, Bro^r. Lewis M: 31 Gave a Lecture in the first part. Call^d. off to Refreshment Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

Feb^ry. 2^d — Lodge open^d. at 7 oClock M: & J: W. Present, Bro^r. Galbraith gave a Lecture in the first Part, the above Reported, Robert Hickman, Sam^l. Gwatkin to be made Masons, in our Regular Antient Lodge, Call^d. off to Refreshment at 9½ Clos^d at 10 with the Most Agreeable Harmony Pofsible.

(Journal page 127)

March the 1^st — Lodge night Master & Wardens present open'd at ½ h. after 8 a Lecture in the 1: B: by Bro^r. S. Galbraith J: G: W. Call'd off at 9 ·Call'd on at 10 and Clos'd at ½ h. after with Good Harmony.

15^th — Lodge open^d. at 8 o Clock M: P: W^ds. abs^t. Bro^r. M^coCorm^k. Gave in the first part Call^d. off to Refreshment, Clos^d. at 10 with Good Harmony.

April y^e 5: 1756 — Lodge night Master absant open'd at 7 O Clock Calld off at 9 Clos'd at ten and agreed by the Mijorty that y^e Master should be fined Six pence over the Common fine in his Office for detaining the Jewal from y^e Lodge. Closd with harmony.

April y^e 19: 1756 — Lodge met the master and S. W. absant B^r. M^cCormick P. M. in the Chair opend in y^e F. B. at 7 O Clock Calld off to refreshment at 9 and agreed by the majority y^t y^e M. should be fined as p^r. last and all other Members according the Rules of S^d Lodge Closd at 10 with y^e most agreeable harmony.

May y^e 3: 1756 — Lodge met the M. and S. W. presant opend in the S. B. and mad B^r Langstone a fellow Craft Calld of to refreshment at . Closd at 10 with Harmony.

June y^e 7: 1756 — Lodge Night opend at 9 O Clock M^r. Absant with his Jewal S. W. and All members Except The J. W. Closd at ten with Harmony.

June y^e 21: 1756 — Lodge night M. presant opend at 8 O Clock in y^e first B when B^r Kieff P. M. and B^r. Warren P. M. required a discharge from y^e Lodge which was granted and also agreed by y^e Majorty y^t y^e Presant Officers should stand for y^e insuing half year Calld of to refreshment at 9 Closd at 10 with harmony and all agreed that S^d Lodge should meet y^e Second and fourh Wednesday of y^e Month insuing.

July y^e 14: 1756 — Lodge night M. presant opend 8 Calld of at 9 Closd at 10 with harmony.

July y^e 28: 1756 — Lodge met M^r. Presant opend in y^e F. B. Calld of to refreshment at 9 and Closd at 10 with harmony & B^r. Finch Joined y^e Lodge.

August 11^th 1756 — Lodge met at 9 Call of to Refreshment at half a nour after Nine M^r: S: W. J: W. Absent and all brothers except B^r Stone B^r Finch Closed at Ten with Good Harmony.

Sep^t. y^e 8^th — Lodge met at 7 Calld to Refreshment Master & S. W. absent Closed at half an hour after Nine with good Harmony.

September y^e 22: 1756 — Lodge night the master and S. W. absant opend in ye First Branch and postpnd the Busienfs of y^e S^d Lodge for the next Meeting Calld of at 9 Closd at ten with y^e most agreeable Harmony.

(Journal page 128)

Monthly Accounts [1753–1754]

[Full-page tabular register of members, showing Time of Entrance, Names, Time of Discharge, Reason Why, Monthly Account payments for Lodge meetings from July to December 1753, and Occupation & Place of Abode.]

Members listed (with occupations and addresses):

Name	Occupation	Place of Abode
Jn^o M^cCormick	Silver Smith	Horse Shoe Alley, Moorfields
Sam^l. Galbraith	Watch Maker	Great Arthur Street
Ja^s. Bedford	Breeches Maker	St Pauls Church Yard at ye Crown
Tho^s. Warren (Discharged Nov. 5, got a Discharge)	Silver Smith	Catherine Wheel Alley, White Chaple
Noblet O'Keeffe	Victular	Fleet Lane at Mrs. Bows
Ju^r. Hosier	Back Maker	Great Arthur Street
Ja^s. Finch	Silver Smith	Old Street
Tho^s. Stones	Silver Smith D^o.	Moorfields
John Scovill	Clock Maker	Mile end Green near ye Barly Mow
John Cleminson	Silver Smith	Horse Shoe Ally Moorfields
Fenk Weddrinton	Watch Maker	Mile end Near ye Green Gun
James Newham		Shorter Street, Welto Square
Samuel Welbeck	Shoe Maker	Daggers Court, Moorfields
	Gold Chain Maker	Hamshire Court, Whyte Chap.
W^m. Healy (Enter'd Jan^y 14)	Perruke Maker	St. Johns Square
John Summers (Enter'd Feb^y 18)	Jeweler	Blue Anchor Alley, Boling Row
W^m Beckerton (Enter'd March 1^st)	Taylor at M^r Tho^s. Greenwood, Shoe Maker, Ree, Black Fryers
Tho^s. Wier (Enter'd April 20^th)	Watch Maker at M^r Martin Le Grand
W^m. Fox (Enter'd May 20^th)	Hatter	Mitchell Street, St. Lukes Church
	Mariner	Horse Shoe Ally, Moorfields

(Journal page 129)

Monthly Accounts [1754]

[Full-page tabular register of members for 1754, showing Time of Entrance, Names, Time of Discharge, Reason Why, and Monthly Account payments for Lodge meetings January through December 1754.]

Members listed:

Name	Discharge / Notes
John M^cCormick
Sam^l Galbraith
James Bedford	In Lisbon
Noblet O'Keeffe
Jn^o Hosier
Tho^s. Stones
Jn^o. Scovill
John Cleminson	Ex. Non-payment; Ditto
Fenw^k. Weddrinton	Sick
Sam^l. Welbeck
W^m Healy
John Houghton	made
John Summers	Disch. by Certif.
W^m. Green	Ex^d for misbehavior
Tho^s. Warren	Exfor Nonpayment
W^m Beckerton	Ditto.
Tho^s. Weir	By Certificate
W^m Fox
Paul Blunt (July 29)	gone to Sea
W^m Green (D^o.)	Enterd a mason
Sam^l Hutchins (Sep^r. 16)

(Journal page 130)

Monthly Accounts [1755]

[Full-page tabular register of members for 1755, showing Times of Entrance, Names, Time of Discharge, Reason Why, Monthly Account payments from January through October 1755, and Occupation & Place of Abode.]

Name	Discharge / Notes	Occupation & Place of Abode
Noblet O'Keeffe	Excluded by his own Diclaration, see Transaction
Tho^s. Warren
Tho^s. Stones
W^m. Healy	Discharg'd By Certificate
John Hosier
Jam^s. Bedford
John McCormick
Sam^l. Galbraith		Goodmans Fields
John Summers	Excluded for Nonpayment	Victular at y^e White Lyon in White Lyon Street
W^m. Green	Exd for Nonpayment
Fenw^k Weddrenton	Exd for Nonpayment
Sam^l. Hutchins	Exd Ditto
Rob^t. Barnett (May 5, 1755)		Victular at ye Red Crofs in y^e Minories
Sam^l. Welbeck	Exd. for Nonpayment	Lock Smith at ye Golden Key dean street Soho
W^m. Corp (May 25)		Shooe Maker, Great Arthur Street
Tho^s. Dowsett (June 2)		Shaggreen Case Maker, Warwick Lane
Jon^o. Forsaith (D^o. 10)		Brewer, Bell Lane, Spittle Fields

(Journal page 131)

Monthly Accounts [1755–1756]

[Full-page tabular register of members, showing Time of Entrance (1755), Names, Time of Discharge and Reason Why, and Monthly Account payments from November 1755 through July 1756, with Occupation & Place of Abode.]

Name	Discharge / Notes	Occupation
Tho^s. Warren	June 21^st, By Certificate
Tho^s. Dousett
Rob^t. Barnett
John Hosier
W^m Corp	March 26, To Ireland by Dis.
Ja^s. Bedford
Sam^l. Galbraith	June 21, By Certificate
Noblet O'Keeffe
John McCormick
John Foresaith
John Cleminson
Tho^s. Stones
George Lankstone (1756, January 19^th, Enterd)		Glover in Great Arthur Street

(Journal page 132)

Monthly Accounts [1756]

[Full-page tabular register of members for 1756, showing Time of Entrance, Names, Quality, Time of Discharge, Reason Why, and Monthly Account payments from June through September/October 1756, with Occupation & Place of Abode.]

Members listed:

Name
John Cleminson
William Corp
John Hozier
James Bedford
John McCormick
George Lankstone
Th^s. Stones
John Finch (July 14)

(Journal page 133)

Members who pay to the Grand Lodge.

London, January 6th, 1754.

[Full-page tabular register showing Members' Names who pay to the Grand Lodge, with tick marks (+) for each month from January through December 1754, and S.F.M. (pounds, shillings, pence) column.]

Name	Notes
Noblet 6Keeffe
Tho^s. Warren
Tho^s. Stones
W^s. Healy	gone to Ireland
John Hosier
James Bedford
John Summers	Excluded for non-payments
W^m. Green	Excluded for non-payment D^o.
Sam^l. Hutchins
Tho^s. Doucet
Bro^r. Corp
Bro^r. Forsaith	S.F.M. 0 1 0
Joh Cleminson	S.F.M. 0 1 0

(continued in pages-151-165.md)

Pages 151-165

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 151–165

(PDF pages 151–165 = journal pages 134–148 approx.)

Lodge No. 20, Antients — Visitors

(Journal page 134)

Visitors.

[Full-page tabular register of Visitors to Lodge No. 20, July–November 1753.]

Time (1753)	No.	Quality	Names	Time	No.	Quality	Names	Num^r.
July 9	16	M^r.	Hugh Horan	Aug. 20	16	G. S.	B^r Finch	St. Jn^o.
" "	3	D^o.	L. M^cIntosh	Sep. 3	3	N^o.	B^r Dermot	3
" "	8	D^o.	Geo. Wilson		8	N^o.	B^r m'Intosh	+
" "	8	G. S.	Ja^s. Ryan		8		B^r Lewis	4
" "			La. Dermott		16		B^r Hagerthy	3
" "		P. M.	Alex^r. Dixon		16	M^r.	B^r Grinsel	3
" "			Tho^s. Keay		8		B^r Hogan	3
" "		S. W.	Mar^t. Allen		16	D^o.	B^r M'Cann.	+
" "		J. W.	An^n. Allen		16		B^r m'Intosh	3
" "		Mon^r.	Ja^s. Sh. Cann		16		B^r Stretton	3
" "		D^o.	B^r. Molloy	Octo^r. 1^st	16	L. W.	B^r Shea	+
" "	16	D^o.	B^r. Stretton		16	M.	Bro^r Lewis	3
" "	16	S. W.	B^r. Fourneir		3	M.	Bro^r Grinseall	4
" "	8	Sec.	B^r. Evans	S.^John	8		Bro^r Stretton	3
" "	15	G. S.	B^r. Manton		4		Bro^r Howard	+
" 16		Mr.	L. M^cIntosh		3		Bro^r Scurlock	3
Aug.^st 6		D^o.	L. Dermott				Bro^r Low
" "		G. S.	Bro^r. Stretton	Nov. 15	S. Jr^no.	S. J.	Bro^r M^cIntosh	D^o.
" 20			Jn^o. Finch		3		Bro^r Norton	16
			Bro^r. Ja. Cumber		3		Bro^r M^cIntosh	3
			Bro^r. Stone	Nov^r. 5^th	S.^John	S. M. W.	L. Dermott	+

(Journal page 135)

Visitors (continued) — 1753–1754.

[Full-page tabular register of Visitors, November 1753 to April 1754.]

Time (1753)	No.	Quality	Names	Time	No.	Quality	Names	No.
Nov. 17^th	3	M.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh	Feb^y. 17	3	G. S.	Bro^r Dermott	3
Nov. 23	1	M.	Bro^r. Lewis		1	J. W.	Bro^r. Gollins	3
Dec^r. 3^d	3	D^o.	Bro^r. Hebden	April 7^th	S.^John	N^o.	Bro^r. Fick	3
	3		Bro^r. Dermott		3	S.	Bro^r. Gollins	3
	8	M^cIntosh	Bro^r. Dermott	May 5	3	J. W.	Bro^r. Dermott	3
1754					3	N^o.	Bro^r. Gollins	1755
Jan^y. 17	17	G. S.	Bro^r. Norton		S.^John		Bro^r. Stanton	S.^John
" " 21^st	21		Bro^r. Stanton	June 10	S.^John	D^o.	B^r. M'Cann S.D.	3
Feb^y. 4^th	1	N^o.	Bro^r. Oldis		8	N^o.	B. Blahm
	3		Bro^r. Dermott		16	P. M.	Bro^r. Coleman	St.^John
			Bro^r. Dixon		16	M.	B. Blahm
			Bro^r. Stanton	July 7		S.	B. Gollins
" 18^th	4^th	G. S.	Bro^r. Dermott		1	P. M.	B^r. Privit
			Bro^r. Dixon	Sep^t. 1	3	M.	Bro^r M^cIntosh	N°. 3
			Bro^r. Coleman		3	M.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh	S.^John
			Bro^r. Stanton	[Decr. 7]	N^o. 34	..	Bro^r. Wall	N^o. 15
			B^r. Huddlestone		S.^John		Bro^r Cook
			B^r. Fallen	[1756]	18	N.	Bro^r. Scurlock	N^o. 15
Mar. 13^th	3	P. M.	B^r. M^cIntosh	Jan^o.	27	N.	Bro^r. Blackburn
	29	G. S.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh		3	N.	Bro^r. Low
" " 6^th	1	P. M.	Bro^r. Rush	Feb^y. 2^d	S.^John	S. J.	Bro^r. Cook	3
	13		Bro^r. Cook		D^o.	J. W.	Bro^r. Stretton	D^o.
Aug^t. 2^d	8	P. M.	Bro^r. Tudor		3		Bro^r. Hogon
	5		Bro^r. Hogan				Bro^r. Beckerton
" "	3		Bro^r. m^cCoard	Mar.	3	J. W.	Bro^r. Stretton	3
Sep^r.	D^o.	J. W.	Bro^r. Wall		N^o. 3	S. W.	Bro^r. Taylor
	D^o.		Bro^r. Hanlard				Bro^r. M^cDermott	6
	N. 18		Br^r. Scurlock			G. S.	Bro^r. Gollins
Nov. 18^th	27	Mas^r.	Bro^r. Low		1	J. W.	Bro^r. Tortershell	S.^John
	3	Mas^r.	Bro^r. Stretton		18	M^r.	Bro^r. Scurlock

(Journal page 136)

VISITORS (continued) — 1754–1756.

[Full-page double tabular register of Visitors, covering June 1754 to March 1756, with two "VISITERS." columns side by side.]

Left table (1754–1755):

Time 1754	No.	Quality	Names	Time	No.	Quality	Names	No.
June 3	5	Sen^l W.	Geo. Mittens	Feb^y. 17	3	G. S.	Bro^r Dermott	3
" 17^th	1	St.^John	Ja^s. Buckley	April 7^th	3	J. W.	Bro^r. Fick	3
	3	G. S.	Dermat	May 5	3	N^o.	Bro^r. Gollins	3
	16	Jun^r. W.	Geo. Stretton				Bro^r. Demott	3
	18	P. M.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh		18		Bro^r. Gollins	1755
	11	M.	Bro^r. Scurlock		S.^John		Bro^r. Stanton	S.^John
	18	M.	Bro^r. Glover		D.	D^o.	B^r. M'Cann S.D.	3
	18	S. W.	Bro^r. Eastman	June 14	8		B. Blahm
July 1	St.^John	S. W.	Bro^r. Mittens	July 7	St.^John	M.	Bro^r. Gollins
	8	D.	Bro^r. Dermott		1	J. W.	B^r. Privit
	16	N^o.	Bro^r. Dixon	Sep^t. 1	3	P. M.	Bro^r M^cIntosh	St.^John
" 13^th		Men^r.	B^r. Crauly		3	M.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh	N°. 3
" "			B^r. Huddlestone	[Decr. 7]	5	..	Bro^r. Cook	N^o. 15
	3	P. M.	B^r M^cIntosh	[1756]	N^o. 34	N.	Bro^r. Scurlock	27
Aug^t. 6^th	3	G. S.	Bro^r. M^cIntosh	Jan^o.	St.^John	N.	Bro^r. Blackburn	3
	29	P. M.	B. L. Dermott		15	N.	Bro^r. Low
	13		Bro^r. M^cIntosh	Feb^y. 2^d		S. J.	Bro^r. Cook	3
" "	6^th		Bro^r. Rush		D^o.	J. W.	Bro^r. Stretton	D^o.
" "			Bro^r. Cook		3		Bro^r. Hogon
			Bro^r. Pick				Bro^r. Beckerton
Sep^r. 2^d			Bro^r. Blackburn	Mar.	3	J. W.	Bro^r. Stretton	3
	16	G. S.	Bro^r. Evans		N°. 3	G. S.	Bro^r. Taylor
Nov^r. 18^th			Bro^r. Dermott		3	M.	Bro^r. M^cDermott	6
	16^th		Bro^r. Gollins		3		Bro^r. Gollins
Dec^r.			Bro^r. Pick		1	M.	Bro^r. Tortershell	S.^John
[1755] Jan^y			Bro^r. Gollins		18	M^r.	Bro^r. Scurlock
Feb^r	3	G. S.	Bro^r. Dermot
			Bro^r. Pick
			Bro. Dermot

(Journal page 137)

Lodge D^r. To Cash. — Contra C^r.

[Cash account of Lodge No. 20, showing Debit and Credit sides.]

Dr. (Lodge owes):

Date	Description	£	s	d
1753/1754	To Receiv^d from Bro^r Hosier for making	0	10	6
May 6^th	To receiv^d from members by Bro^r. Galbraith	0	2	—
Ap^l. 28	To Cash. Fines.	0	5	6
June 3	To D^o. D^o.		1	9
1754 Feb^y 4^th
1755 Sep^r. .16	Cash in the Chest	£	1	4

Cr. (Contra):

Date	Description	£	s	d
	By Cash paid for Jewells	1	10	0
	By D^o for Ribbons		8	3
	By D^o for Table Implements		6	0
	By D^o. for this Book and Writting	0	8	0
	For Aprons		7	6
	To Gough the Tyler		2	—
July 9^th	To Bro^r. Kemish	1	6	4
Aug^st 20	By Cash paid to Bro^r. Haket on his petition	0	5	0
	By cash paid by Bro^r. Galbraith at the Constitution of this Lodge		6	10
June 24^th	By D^o for the Chest
	A Pas Masters Jewil	1	11	6
	Cash to Bro^r Gough by Bro^r Kemish for Tyling		3

(Journal page 138)

Per Contra — Cash Account 1754.

[Continuation of the cash account — Debit and Credit sides for 1754.]

Cr. (Per Contra):

Date	Description	£	s	d
June 24^th	a Paf^s Masters Jewel	1	11	6
	Ribbons		2	9
		£	14	3
		£	1
	Debts Dues to Bro^r. Galbraith	3	8	4½

Dr.:

Date	Description	£	s	d
June 24^th	Cash paid Bro^r. m^coCormick in part for a Paf^s Master Jewell	1	1	9
	Cash paid D^o. for a Ribbon		2	6
	Cash paid D^o.		10	3
July 1^st	Cash paid D^o.	£	14
" 29^th		£	1
Sep^t 16^th	Cash paid Bro^r. Galbraith in part for a Debt Due to him for his affectionate Love which he advanc^d £3 8 41 to support this Lodge N°. 20	1	10	9
	Cash to D^o.		2
Dec^r 16^th	Cash to D^o.	1	10
May 5^th	Cash to D^o.		9	6
" 18^th	Cash to D^o.		5	1
June 23^h	Cash to D^o.	1	4	0
		£	2	4½
	Rec^d the Contents of the above being in full of all Acc^ts. London June 25^d 1755
	Sam^l. Galbraith

(Journal page 139)

Money Deliver^d out of the Lodge.

[Account of money delivered out of the Lodge, 1754–1756.]

Dr. (1754):

Date	Description	£	s	d
July 1^st	Cash paid Bro^r. M^cCormuck	0	2	6
July 15^th	Cash D^o.			3
" 29	Cash paid D^o.		10	6
Aug^st 19^th	Cash paid Bro^r. Galbraith in part off 3 16 4½ which was due to him for his affectionate Love towards Supporting this most agreable Lodge N° 20	16	11½
Sep^r 2^d	Cash paid the Tyler	1	0
" 16^th	Cash paid Bro^r. Galbraith in part	0	13	9½
May y^r 5	Paid Br^r. Galbraith	0	9	6
[1756]
May y^r 3	Receivd From Br^r. Langston for y^r remainder of his makeing	0	—	d 0
1755 June 2^d	Bro^r. OKeefe Master	0	14	0
	Money in the Chest
	Total	£0	2	1½

Cr. (Deliveries out, 1756):

Date	Description	d
April 5	Paid to y^r Tyler	1
" 19	Paid to Ditto	1
May y^r 3	Expend for B^r. Langstone	3
1756	Paid to y^e Tyler	1
July 28	Paid to y^e Tyler from y^e Box	1
Aug^st 11	Paid to y^e Tyler from y^e Box	1

(Journal page 140)

Money put in the Box.

[Account of money put in the Box, 1754–1755.]

Dr.:

Date	Description	£	s	d
1754 June 24^th	Cash put in	0	0	9½
July 1^st	Cash put in		2	6
July 15^th	Cash D^o.		1	11
" 29	Cash D^o.	1	0	5½
Augst 19^th	Cash put in		1	8
Sepr. 2^d	Cash Rec^d.		2	2
" 16^th	Cash Rec^d.		13	9½
1755 May y^e 5	For Makeing of B^r. S. Barnet	1	1	0
June 23	Cash Receivd for B^r. Forsaith	1	1	0
1755 Dec^r 15	Fines from Bro^r. Corp &c.	0	5	6

Cr.:

Description	s	d
Expended for B^r. Barnet	5	6
To y^e Grand Lodge	3	6
To y^e Tylor	1	0
To y^e Secratory of y^e Lodge	1	0

Notes and Queries

(Journal page 141)

Aister Mason, &c. — As bearing on the subject-matter of " 'Free-mason' about 1700 A.D.," A.Q.C. xxviii., 28 (1915), it may not be out of place to note this extract from MSS. at Tabley House, Cheshire, relating to the private chapel there, still in beautiful preservation:—

It was begun upon the 29th day of June A.D. 1675 upon a Tuesday, and was finished within and completed A.D. 1678, the last day of May. John Birchenough of Over Alderley, Maister Mason, William Merriman of Nether Tabley, Chiefe Bricklayer, John Kell of Over Tabley, Carpenter, and Ephraim Broadhurst of Nether Knutsford Joyner, who took his pattern from Brazen-nose College Chappell in Oxford. But Broadhurst dyed before the work was finished.

It may be remembered that Master Mason was equivalent to our present Architect.

W. B. Hextall.

Bro. Isaac Chilcott. — Subscribers to A.Q.C. will recollect the portrait of the above-named in vol. xx., 27 (1907), where it is stated that he was a member of the Loyal Monmouth Lodge, and probably also of the "Royal Augustus" which preceded it. The Freemasons' Quarterly Review for 1843, page 81, has the following:—

Monmouth.— The Loyal Lodge, 671, until lately nearly defunct, has, through the industry and zeal of Bro. Isaac Chilcot, not only revived, but is actually in most excellent order, and rapidly increasing in number and respectability, thirteen having been initiated, and as many joining; among the latter the High Sheriff. Bro. Chilcot's zeal is most commendable; he attributes his success entirely to having read and studied to the best of his power, the Masonic works of the Rev. Dr. Oliver.

W.B.H.

The Leland-Locke MS. — In 1883 Bro. Robert Freke Gould in his History of Freemasonry (i., 489) described this document—which he placed with The Steinmetz Catechism; The Malcolm Canmore Charter; Krause's MS.; The Charter of Cologne; and The Larmenius Charter; among "Apocryphal Manuscripts,"—as one "which all authorities, except Fort, concur in regarding as an impudent forgery." In 1903 he said (Concise History of Freemasonry, p. 166) that "modern writers . . . regard it as a palpable fraud and wholly unworthy of the critical acumen which has been lavished on its contents." In "Notes on Historical Freemasonry," published in The Northern Freemason (Liverpool), February, 1906, his views appear to have been modified in consequence of an article which had appeared in The New Age (U.S.A.) for October, 1904, and in his paper in the former journal he gave reasons which were conclusive to his mind "with regard to the necessity that exists for a re-hearing of the evidence in the case of the Locke MS." Several writers in the late Eighteenth Century seem to have doubted the genuineness of the document, though amongst English Masons it was accepted by both Antients and Moderns. Dermott printed it in full in the 2nd edition (1764) of his Ahiman Rezon, though curiously enough he made no mention of it in the 1st edition of 1756, three years after its publication in the Gentleman's Magazine.¹ Noorthouck has it in his edition of the Constitu-

(Journal page 142)

tions of 1784; and of course Preston and Oliver accepted it without question. Dr. Fort Newton, in The Builders (Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1914, p. 111), says of the document that "it is allowed by all to be genuine." Probably he speaks of his countrymen in the U.S.A., for in the present day few students could be found here who would subscribe to such an opinion; and the following Note from The Bodleian Quarterly Record (Vol. III., No. 26, p. 27) is therefore of great interest.

W.J.S.

The Philologist and the Forger. — The forger of literary and historical documents has many pitfalls in his path, but his fall is often long delayed. A forgery which for many years has found supporters is a masonic treatise entitled 'Certayne Questyons . . . Concernynge Maconrye; wryttenne by . . . Kynge Henrye the Sixthe . . . and . . . copied by me Johan Leylande,' published in the Gentleman's Magazine, 1753, xxiii., 417, but stated to be a reprint of Ein Brief von . . . Herrn Johann Locke (Frankfurt, 1748), where it is said that the original manuscript is in the Bodleian Library. No such manuscript, however, has ever come to light, and Mr. Madan, in his Summary Catalogue, refers to it as mythical. A student of masonry recently made a special visit to Oxford with a view to a further search for the treatise, because, as he said, 'masonically this is by no means as universally regarded as spurious as it was some thirty or so years ago.' Needless to say, he did not succeed where Mr. Madan had failed, but the authenticity of the text was still undecided. It occurred to a member of the Staff to ask Mr. Onions, one of the editors of the New English Dictionary, whether the treatise could possibly have been written as early as 1460. Mr. Onions kindly examined the text, and almost immediately denounced it as spurious on account of the occurrence of the word 'kymistrye' (chemistry), which is not found in English until about the year 1600 and which did not become common until the middle of the seventeenth century. By such slips is the forger betrayed. S.G.

Shakespeare and Freemasonry. — On p. 997 of his monumental work, The Great Cryptogram, Ignatius Donelly states:—

"Nicolai claims Bacon as the founder of Free Masonry,"

quoting from A New Study of Shakespeare, p. 192.

The purport of Donelly's book being to prove that Bacon was the author of the Shakespeare plays, it became a matter of interest to re-read these in order to discover what allusions, if any, there are to the Craft. Such reading brought to light only a few passages which seem to have any reference; these are given below, but it is not suggested that the list is complete, as other and less obvious phrases may be found by more diligent searchers.

(a) TEMPEST, IV., i.

Stephano and Trinculo steal the fine clothes hung on a line by Ariel.

Trin: . . . we steal by line and level, an't like your grace.

Steph.: I thank thee for that jest, here's a garment for't: wit shall not go unrewarded while I am king of this country. 'Steal by line and level' is an excellent pass of pate; there's another garment for't.

In HAMLET, II., ii., is an allusion which is somewhat more involved:

(b) Ham: I am but mad north-north-west; when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw.

For 'Handsaw' read 'Hernshaw,' a tribe of birds of which the Hoopoe is one. In Ancient Egypt it was a sign of the rising of the Nile when in a Southerly wind the migration of the Hoopoe took place, and when in a Northerly wind the

(Journal page 143)

Hawks returned from their sojourn in Europe, it was a sign of the Nile falling. The star Sirius was in the ascendant at this time, and in Ancient Freemasonry this star was of importance.

Earlier in this same scene is a speech by Polonius with a deeper meaning:

Pol: . . . . I will find where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed within the centre.

(c) In LEAR, II., i., occurs this sentence:

Glou: . . . The noble duke, my master, My worthy arch and patron, comes to-night.

It probably has no hidden meaning, but of the three times the word is used by Shakespeare this is the only occasion it appears as a noun. The other two cases, both unimportant, are:

(1) RICH: 3, IV., iii., 2. Tyrrel (after the murder of the Princes):

The tyrrannous and bloody deed is done, The most arch act of piteous massacre.

(2) HEN: 8, III., ii., 102. Wolsey: . . . . Again there is sprung up

An heretic, an arch one, Cranmer.

(d) A more certain allusion appears in ANTONY and CLEOPATRA, II., iii., 8.

Ant: . . . . . My Octavia,

Read not my blemishes in the world's report: I have not kept my square; but that to come Shall all be done by the rule.

In the foregoing scene, Maecenas speaks of Cleopatra: "She's a most triumphant lady, if report be square to her."

The word 'Square' is used with peculiar significance also in LEAR, I., i., 75, where Regan protests:

". . . that I profess Myself an enemy to all other joys Which the most precious square of sense possesses."

The last pertinent reference in this short list is found in HENRY 4, part 2, III., ii.

(e) Shallow (speaking of Falstaff's taking bribes to keep men out of the army): He is not his craft's master, he doth not do it right.

The late Sir Edwin Durning-Lawrence, in the course of one of his amusing letters on 'Bacon IS Shakespeare' in the Referee, said that the facts are known to members of the 33rd degree. It would be of great interest if the truth or otherwise of this statement could be ascertained, with due regard, of course, to all necessary caution.

Fred Grove Palmer.

Obituary

(Journal page 144)

It is with regret that we have to record the death of the following Brethren:—

George Atkinson, F.R.G.S., F.R.S.A., of Manchester, on 8th May, 1919. Bro. Atkinson held the rank of P.Pr.G.D. of East Lancashire. He joined our Correspondence Circle in March, 1906.

Rev. Edward Young Dixon, of East Griqualand, Natal, on the 13th May, 1919. A member of Lodge Umzimkulu No. 2113, who joined our Correspondence Circle in November, 1889.

Alfred Sydney Gedge, F.C.A., F.I.D., F.C.I.S., of Bromley, Kent, on 1st April, 1919. Our Brother held the rank of Pr.S.G.D., and that of P.Pr.G.S.C.N. He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in January, 1901, and for many years acted as Auditor of the Lodge accounts.

Frederick Brand George, of Wells, Somerset, on 20th May, 1919. P.Pr.G.D. and P.Pr.G.St.B. (R.A.). He joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1911.

Johannes M. Hamm, of London, on 17th May, 1919; a member of the Pilgrim Lodge No. 238, and Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies. He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in March, 1891.

Imre Kirafly, of London, on the 24th April, 1919. Past Grand Deacon; Past Grand Standard Bearer (R.A.). He joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1906.

John William Lambton, of Preston, North Shields, on the 13th May, 1919. P.Pr.G.St.B.; P.Pr.A.G.So. of Durham. He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in January, 1897.

William Thomas Pegge, of London, on the 7th June, 1919. A P.M. of the Cheshunt Lodge No. 2921 and P.Pr.G.Sup.W. (R.A.) India (S.C.). He joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1919.

Lieut.-Colonel Sisson Cooper Pratt, R.A., of Charminster, Dorset, on the 10th April, 1919. A Past Master of the Moira Lodge No. 92, and a Founder and Past Master of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

E. C. Rees, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on the 16th April, 1919. A P.M. of the Gosforth Lodge No. 1664, Northumberland. He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in June, 1912.

Sir William Vernon, Bart., of Chester, on the 24th June, 1919. P.Pr.G.S.B. (Staffs.), and a Life Member of our Correspondence Circle, which he joined in May, 1899.

Friday, 3rd October, 1919

(Journal page 145)

The Lodge met at Freemasons' Hall at 5 p.m. Present:— Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M.; W. B. Hextall, P.G.D., P.M., as S.W.; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary.

Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle:— Bros. Lieut.-Col. D. M. Stewart, Theo. J. Salwey, J. Heron Lepper, A. Gilchrist, G. C. Parkhurst Baxter, S. J. Owers, Walter Dewes, J. Fletcher Porter, W. F. Stauffer, Robt. Colsell, P.A.G.D.C. (as J.W.), R. F. J. Colsell, A. H. Dymond, Chas. J. Laker (as I.G.), Edw. T. Pryor, G. R. Cummings, F. Gildersleeves, Rev. F. Bavin, Dis.G.M., Jamaica, Alexander S. Bacon, L. G. Wearing, Earl D. Sido, and C. F. Sykes.

Also the following Visitor:— Bro. G. Cherry, P.G.Warden, Victoria.

Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. Edward Conder, R. H. Baxter, F. H. Goldney, S. T. Klein, Herbert Bradley, L. Vibert, John T. Thorp, Canon Horsley, J. E. S. Tuckett, William Watson, and Cecil Powell.

The W.M. read the following:—

In Memoriam.

Brethren, it is with very sincere regret that I have this evening to announce the death of our esteemed P.M.,

Bro. Edward Macbean.

Our brother's health had for some time been failing under pressure of work and anxieties imposed by the conditions of the times. On August 6th he wrote to Bro. Songhurst telling him that he was obliged to go into a nursing home in view of a serious operation, which we hoped might have restored him to us again, but this was not to be, and he passed to his rest on Saturday, August 23rd, 1919.

Bro. Macbean's name stood as the fifth on our roll of members, so that his death breaks a link we shall indeed miss with the membership of the early days of the Lodge. A few years since he was taking an active part in our proceedings, despite the long journey from Glasgow which his attendance entailed. Necessarily, of late, we had not seen so much of him, but his keen interest in the Lodge remained unabated, and he was ever ready to give his aid and counsel when called on. His last attendance at the Lodge was on 8th November, 1916, and those of us who attended the meeting at Hastings in 1913 will cherish the memory of Bro. Macbean's most recent attendance at one of our Outings.

Edward Macbean was born in America in 1845, but his earliest recollections were associated with the Island of Ceylon, where, for some years, his father held a chaplaincy. Afterwards it fell to his lot to travel very extensively, and to visit India, Egypt, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand, and to make

(Journal page 146)

more than one voyage round the world. About 1875 he settled down definitely to mercantile pursuits, and entered into business at Glasgow, in a firm of which he continued the active head till his death.

Brother Macbean was initiated in St. John's Lodge, Glasgow, No. 3 bis, in 1884, and in 1885 became a companion of the Royal Arch in Glasgow Chapter, No. 50. He was also a full member of Mary Chapel Lodge, No. 1, Edinburgh, had been accorded honorary membership of several other Masonic bodies, and had held the office of Grand Steward in the Grand Lodge of Scotland.

Passing the Chair in his Mother Chapter, our Brother became a Founder, and afterwards Treasurer, of King Solomon's Chapter, No. 2029 (English Constitution), and Past Grand Chancellor of the Grand Chapter of Scotland. An honour much valued by our Brother was his appointment as Grand Representative of the Grand Chapter of Maine at the Grand Chapter of Scotland, conferred at the instance of that distinguished American Brother—the late Josiah H. Drummond. Brother Macbean had made his mark in essays on Symbolism, Egyptian Mysteries, and kindred subjects, as well as in papers dealing with subjects relative to the Craft, in his Notes on the History of Scottish Craft Masonry, and Notes on Craft Ceremonial, when, in May, 1887, he became an early member of our Correspondence Circle, which had only come into being in February of that year. On May 4th, 1888, he was elected to the full membership of the Lodge, and appointed Steward by Brother W. Simpson at the installation meeting of that year. He served continuously in the subordinate offices for seven successive years leading up to his occupation of the Chair in 1895-6. Bro. Macbean's inaugural address took the form of a review of the work of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge up to that date, comprising the first ten years of its existence. Some pleasant light is thrown, in the course of the address, upon the relations between the then members of the Lodge. The newly-installed Master spoke of his special indebtedness to some of the Brethren, and proceeded to say:—

Bro. Speth is my sponsor in this Lodge, and to him I am indebted for having become a member of 2076.

Bro. Hughan has been my guide, philosopher, and friend masonically for many years: and to Bro. Simpson (formerly known as Crimean or Indian Simpson), a respected and esteemed P.M. of this Lodge, I owe in some measure my fondness for Eastern Worships: while our dear Bro. Rylands, of an entirely different cast of thought to the above, has done more to disabuse me of false teaching than any other person I know.

Bro. Macbean read before the Lodge papers on Scottish Freemasonry in the present Era: The formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and Master Masons to the Crown of Scotland (A.Q.C. i., 254: iii., 172: vii., 109), all valuable assets in the treasury of our Transactions, and his Memoir of his friend, our P.M. William Simpson, the great War Correspondent and Artist, expresses a tribute of admiration and affection, in which the warm heart of the author is plainly evinced. The list of Reviews appearing in our pages shows that our Brother gave useful service to the Lodge in that respect. His contribution dealing with our late Brother J. Ross Robertson's History of Lodge Fortrose, Stornaway,¹ is at some length, and in his happiest vein. Bro. Macbean there mentioned the pleasure he had experienced when, in the summer of 1903, he visited Bro. Robertson at Toronto, and during his entertainment was conducted over the "Children's Hospital," the "Lakeside Convalescent Homes," and kindred institutions in which our lamented Canadian Brother was so deeply interested. It was owing to his intimacy with Bro. Ross Robertson that Bro. Macbean wished

¹ Reviews by Bro. E. Macbean appear in A.Q.C. as follows:— Brought to Light, David Willox, vii., 94: Newcastle College Roll, D. 37, vii., 95: Menturia Lodge, Hansley, E. V. Greatbach: and St. John Baptist Lodge, Exeter, Andrew Hope, viii., 41: Lodge of Fortitude, Lancaster, H. Longman, viii., 45: Centenary of Lodge Concordia, Baltimore, E. T. Schultz, viii., 166: Lodge of Fortrose, Stornaway, J. Ross Robertson, xviii., 235.

(Journal page 147)

himself to put on record in the Transactions a Memoir of our late colleague, a desire only relinquished owing to the conditions of over-work and strain which, as we now see, led up to the sad event we record to-day.

Bro. Macbean had extended his Masonic activities beyond the bounds of Craft and Arch Masonry as a member of Knighthood of the Temple, and kindred Orders and degrees. He was also a member of the Rosicrucian Societies of England and Scotland.

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett was elected Master of the Lodge for the ensuing year; Bro. W. H. Rylands was elected Treasurer; and Bro. J. H. McNaughton was re-elected Tyler.

Forty-three Brethren and two Lodges were admitted to membership of the Correspondence Circle.

Congratulations were offered to the following members of the Lodge and Correspondence Circle who were appointed (or promoted) to Grand Office at the Peace Celebration, held at the Royal Albert Hall on 27th June, 1919:—

Brother	Appointment
Bro. Edward Armitage	Past Grand Deacon
" W. B. Hextall	do. do.
" E. A. Ebblewhite	do. do.
" R. Verney Clayton	Past Assistant Grand Registrar
" Robert Colsell	Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies
" H. J. Grace	do. do.
" William Watson	do. do.
" Henry Barrow	Past Grand Sword Bearer
" Harry Glassman	do. do.
" John Taylor	do. do.
" W. A. Tharp	do. do.

The Secretary drew the attention of the Brethren to the following:

Exhibits.

By Bro. Corpl. D. D. Mitchell.

Certificate (M.M.), issued 15 March 1808 by Lodge St. George, North Shields, No. 497, in favour of Alexander Mitchel: signed by John Hunter, Master; R. Hime, S.W.; Rich^d. Davison, J.W.; and Will^m. Reid, Secy. The Lodge was erased in 1831.

Certificate (R.A.), issued 28 February 1809 by the Chapter of Strict Benevolence, Sunderland, No. 103, in favour of the same brother: signed by Tho^s. Hardy, Z.; W^m. Tarn, H.; J. Dixon, J.; and W^m. Hodson, E.

Apron, believed to have been warn by the same brother. It is of skin lined with coarse linen, about 1ft. 8in. broad by about 2ft. 0in. deep with a curved flap. The whole of the design is hand-painted. On the body of the apron are shewn two Corinthian Columns, and between them an Arch or Dome

(Journal page 148)

with an Altar, Closed Book, Square, Level, Plum-rule, Compasses, &c. Outside the Columns are represented two Operative Masons, at work with Gavel and Square. A Rainbow and Ark are also prominently displayed. On the flap are displayed the Sun, Moon, and seven Stars. The flap is edged with red ruehed ribbon, and the body of the apron has in addition similar strips of white and purple ribbon.

Apron (R.A.), believed to have been worn by the same brother. It is of skin, about 1ft. 0in. wide by 9in. deep. On the flap are the letters T H in spangles. The whole is bordered with red and purple ribbon, indented patchwork fashion.

By Bro. Lionel Vibert.

Certificate (Rose Croix), issued to his Grandfather, Bro. John Este Vibert, on the 26th day of the 5th Month in the year of the true Light 5835, by the Grand Orient of Brazil, as member of Lodge Imparcialidade, Rio de Janeiro.

Two Aprons, presumably Craft and Rose Croix under the Grand Orient of Brazil, originally belonging to the same brother.

Presented to the Lodge.

By Bro. J. C. Brockhouse.

Certificate (Grand Lodge of England), issued September 1872, in favour of Bro. George Thistle Thornes, a member of the Lily Lodge of Richmond, No. 820.

Certificate (Grand Chapter of England), issued November 1875, in favour of the same brother, a member of the Pannure Chapter, No. 720, now the Globe Chapter No. 23.

A collection of Jewels owned by the same brother:

Royal Arch.

Steward R.M.B.Inst., 1880.

Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes: Metropolitan Lodge: Primo, 1896.

do. "Order of Merit and Honour of Knighthood," 1901.

Independent Order of Oddfellows, Manchester Union: St. Bride's Lodge: Chairman, 52nd Anniversary, 1897.

Presented to the Lodge.

A hearty vote of thanks was accorded to the Brethren who had most kindly sent objects of interest for inspection, and made presentations to the Lodge Museum.

Bro. T. J. Salwey read the following paper:—

(continued in pages-166-180.md)

Pages 166-180

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF Pages 166–180

(PDF pages 166–180 = journal pages 149–163 approx.)

Notes on Some Trade Guilds at Ludlow

By Bro. T. J. Salwey, P.Pr.G.W. (Salop).

(Journal page 149)

The town of Ludlow has been described as the most distinguished one in England, and it certainly has done something in the past to merit that description. When it took its rise is obscure, but it must have been a fairly important place in the late Saxon times, for amongst other institutions there existed a mint; one of the coins issued therefrom I have seen. In the time of Edward the Confessor there existed a society of Palmers or Pilgrims in the town, two of whom made an expedition to Jerusalem, and their experiences are the foundation of the Legend of the King's Ring. One of the results of this pilgrimage was that the King chartered the Ludlow Palmers Guild, which attained a position of great wealth and influence, which it does not appear to have used for trade purposes but with benevolent and other beneficent objects. In the Grammar School, which J. R. Green declares to be the oldest in the kingdom, we still enjoy one of those benefits, together with some others which are problematical. At all events, there was a pre-Conquest Guild founded. Shortly after the completion of the Conquest the erection of the palatial castle gave some security to the lives and property of the inhabitants. The place must have thriven greatly, for in the thirteenth century a church of unusual size was erected. Indeed, the present church stands on the actual Early English foundations. I am inclined to think this church was not an ordinary parish church, but a guild chapel, for the rector is not responsible for the repairs of the chancel, and before the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 the Town Council appointed the churchwardens, and the north transept is to-day known as the Fletchers Chancel; the Fletchers being one of the Guilds to whom I shall shortly allude. Shortly after this the town walls were built, and a snug municipality was sheltered within it. Considering that the castle was the centre of operations of the Lords Marchers of the Welsh Borders and their trains (not to say the possibility of there being some resident Knights Templar), trade might be expected to flourish and with it the Guilds that regulated those trades. Some of the Guilds became federated, among them the Stitchmen and Hammermen, which appear to have been two of the principal ones. The Stitchmen included Tailors, Mercers, Drapers, Cappers, Hatters, Glovers, Skinners, and afterwards Feltmakers, Haberdashers, Bodice-makers, Stay-makers, women Mantua-makers, Stationers, Furriers, Book-binders, and Book-sellers. I need not say more about them as our W. Master's father wrote an account of them fifty years ago.

It is more with the Hammermen or Company of Smiths and others that we are concerned, because they included the Masons, and we have access to documents referring to their origin, practices, and ceremonial, from a contemplation of which we may get some light thrown upon our Speculative Masonic system.

In the year 1461 King Edward IV. chartered the borough and gave a power of supervision of the Trade Guilds to the Town Council.

Possibly, uncertainty existed or dispute arose about the trades' customs and powers in various places, so in the 19th year of Henry VII. Parliament enacted: "That no Masters Wardens & Fellowships of Crafts and Mysteries nor any of them nor any Rulers of Guilds or ffraternities take upon them to make any acts or ordinances by them heretofore made in disheritance or diminution of the king nor of any other now against the common effect of the Peoples. But if the same acts or ordinances be examined and approved by the Chancellor Treasurer of England or Chief Justice of either Bench or three of them on or before both

(Journal page 150)

Justices of the Assize in their circuit or progress in the shire where such Acts or ordinances be made upon payne in the same Statute limited and appointed as by the same Act more plainly it doth and may appear."

Accordingly, on the 6th March, 1575, the Bailiffs, Burgesses, and Commonalty of the Borough under their Common Seal and the Occupation of Smiths and others entered into a mutual Indenture setting forth the acts and ordinances to be submitted to the Justices of Assize for their approval. An early recital is to the effect that: "Long time before the making of which s^d Statute here within this town there have been divers good & wholesome Articles, Rules, constitutions, ordinances & Acts used & practised among the said Fellowship and, Brotherhood of the said Art, Mystery, Trade, and occupation of Smiths, Fletchers, Bowyers, Goldsmiths, Ironmongers, Cardmakers, Saddlers, Coopers, Cutlers, Pewterers, Braziers, Nailers, Armourers, Plasterers, Masons, Carpenters, Plumbers, Joiners, Tylers, Slaters, Helyers, makers of Sieves or Tugars, & Hawkers of Bend Ware united & conjoined as part & parcel of the s^d Fellowship & Brotherhood of Smiths."

It is also stated that one of the objects of entering into the Indenture was: "That hereafter no indemnity, loss, or damage may grow or come to the Bailiffs of the said town in hearing or receiving the suits, causes, or matters appertaining to the said Fellowship; and that the said Fellowship by their Wardens may commence, prosecute, follow and execute their causes, suits, plaints, and informations before the Bailiffs of the said Town of Ludlow."

The first really operative statement is: "That the said Fellowship or Brotherhood of Smiths and others have been out of mind a Body politic, real, and incorporated by the name of Six men as Chief Heads and Governors of the same body and two Stewards or Wardens as officers and ministers to execute the lawful commandments of the said Six men & seek, levy, receive & gather the forfeitures, penalties, amerciaments, & Fines assessed of all & every person or persons according to the tenor of these presents."

It is then "Expressed &c. that the s^d Brotherhood or Fellowship shall & may by the name of the two Stewards or Wardens &c. sue, arrest, implead, answer & be answered in the Queens (Elizabeth) Court before the Bailiffs in all causes &c. in anywise."

It is next declared that the Six men and two Wardens may thereafter be nominated, elected, and chosen in manner and form thereafter expressed, and that John Clee, Richard Swanson, John Season, Thomas Asbache, Humphrey Lea, and Richard Grove should be the Six men, and William Bradshaw and James Fennel Wardens till the next Election.

Then the Bailiffs, &c., enacted: "That the s^d Fellowship or Brotherhood shall & may have retain & keep their accustomed ordinary & usual place for their assembly in convenient place of the church of St Laurence in Ludlow." This was the North Transept which is screened off and to this day is known as the Fletchers Chancel. The word chancel implies a place for transacting business, and the absence of the word 'parish' is suggestive.

The annual meeting day was the Sunday next after the Feast of St. Philip and St. Jacob (sic), when the Wardens were elected for two years. Provision is made for filling up vacancies caused by deaths.

The next provision was very important. It was that if any cause or quarrel should arise among the members of the Brotherhood "The same quarrel, Suit, cause, action, or demand shall be first declared, set forth, shewed & examined before the Six men, and that they determine, judge, & deem the same quarrel &c., & all controversies thereof depending or growing by the assent of both the parties as well touching private matters & causes between party & party; Causes & pleas touching the Crown Title & right of inheritance or Purchased Lands &c always excepted."

"And in case any member of the Brotherhood shall presume to sue, vex, molest or trouble by any suit &c. any of his brethren before he hath imported the cause &c. to the Six men That then the said party so offending in or impleading any of his fellows in any the Queens Court of Record or any other court

(Journal page 151)

shall forfeit for every such offence the sum of 3^s 4^d one moiety to the use of the Brotherhood & the other to the Treasury of the Town."

If payment was not made the Wardens were enjoined to sue for the same before the Bailiffs.

Elaborate provision is made for the assessment by the Six men of the members for contributions and enforcing payment. Refusal to attend for assessment or to pay was finable to the extent of 3s. 4d.

"And it was ordered &c. that any Freeman which is or which shall be free of the said Fellowship or Brotherhood . . . shall & may have and bring up such apprentice and so many apprentices in such order as they have done in times past as by the Queens Majestys Laws of this Realm it is permitted to one of the faculty so that the same person or persons so to be taken as an apprentice or apprentices cause his Indentures of Apprentichood to be enrolled before the Bailiffs of the said Town of Ludlow And also the said person or persons serving as an apprentice shall & may be at the age of Twenty-four years at the ending & determination of his term of apprentichood to be determined and so that he be bound & serve the full term of Seven years that then the said person or persons which so served as is aforesaid and willing and requiring the said Six men and two wardens or so many of them as shall living and resident within the said Town to be admitted, deemed, & judged free of the said Occupation, Art, Mystery, Trade, and Science, upon such request & suit made shall thenceforth be admitted free of them. He or they yielding and paying to the said Wardens for the use of the occupation of their Freedom in manner & form following (that is to say) The Smiths 10^s/-, the Armorer 10/-, the Fletcher 10/-, the Bowyer 10/-, the Goldsmith 10/-, the Ironmonger 10/-, the Cardmaker 10/-, the Sadler 10/-, the Cooper 10/-, the Cutler 10/-, the Pewterer 10/-, the Mason 10/-, the Carpenter 6^s/8^d, the Plumber 6/8, the Joiner 6/8, the Tyler 6/8, the Glazier 6/8, the Brazier 6/8, the Nailer 6/8, the Plasterer 6/8, the maker of Sieves or Tugars 6/8, & Coopers of Bend Ware 6/8 to the use of the said Fellowship or Brotherhood."

At this point the charges given to a newly-made Freeman should be referred to. They were published in the Transactions in vol. xii., p. 107, and will bring to mind a portion of our present ritual.¹

Next are some provisions for the continuation or completion of apprenticeships after the death of an employer.

It was also decreed that no "foreigner & stranger notwithstanding he hath been brought up in the said Trade of Smiths & others within any City Borough or Market Town within this Realm hereafter be permitted & allowed within the said Town to set up & be a free Master within the s^d Town unless "he be resident and have better testimonial as to his apprenticeship and good report and that he pay for the privilege as follows:— Blacksmiths, Armorers, Fletchers, Bowyers, Goldsmiths, Ironmongers, Cardmakers, Saddlers, Coopers, Cutlers, Pewterers, and Masons, forty shillings each and the other trades 13s. 4d. each. This reminds us of our joining members. A violation of this regulation carried a fine of 3s. 4d.

It was the duty of the Wardens to make up an annual Register of accounts and claims.

Indentures of Apprenticeship had to be registered with the Wardens within a month of sealing.

Apprentices could be assigned but only in the same trade under a penalty of 40/-.

The fees for admittance of Freemen had to be in "Ready money, Silver gage or sureties."

The Wardens had to give Bond for £40-0-0 on election day for the payment to the Six men of the monies they may receive. Default was finable in 40/-.

It was further set forth that the Six men and Wardens should have power to make lawful order tending to the wealth of the Fellowship.

The resolution of all ambiguities, doubts, or questions had to be referred to the Bailiffs, Twelve, and Twenty-five.

¹ These Charges are re-printed as an Appendix to the present paper.

(Journal page 152)

It was also stipulated that if the Fellowship should try to defeat the claim of the Borough to the moiety of fines, then the Indenture should be void.

The foregoing was submitted at Bridgnorth to Sir Edward Saunders, Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and William Lovelace, Sergeant-at-Law, Justices of Assize, on the 3rd April, 1576, and by them confirmed, subject to powers of Revision and Revocation.

Owing to the natural development of commerce and industry additional occupations arose which made it necessary for a supplementary Indenture to be entered into between the same parties on the 4th August, 1715. It opens with a lengthy recital of the original Incorporation which had now become known as the "Hammermen's Company," and states that since the confirmation by the Judges in Queen Elizabeth's time the trades of "Silversmiths, Clock & Watchmakers, Glaziers, Tinplate workers, Chairmakers, & Cabinet makers" had arisen, & that although several of these artizans were "free to some of the former trades were using & exercising the latter without paying any fine for their freedom." Furthermore, "the keeping of Public Feasts & Acts of Charity were become more chargeable than formerly & their stock much impoverished by Suits of Law what had arisen by reason of the uncertainties of their fines & other ambiguities &c., and that several members of the company chose to pay the fine for refusal to serve the office of Steward."

Therefore it was Articled, concluded, and agreed (inter alia) as follows:— "That the several Trades of Silversmiths, Clock & Watchmakers, Glaziers, Tinplate workers, Chairmakers, & Cabinet makers shall from henceforth be incorporated with deemed & taken as part of the said Fraternity of Smiths and others," and be subject to the Bye-laws, &c.

Circumstances seem to have made it necessary to amplify the ordinances, for it was now ordered that the Six men, two Stewards, and such as had served the office of Steward (mark the analogy with part of our Speculative system) should have power "to make any foreigners or others free to any of the Trades, &c., mentioned, such foreigners & others being qualifying, & paying fines as follows:— Smiths, Goldsmiths, Silversmiths, Ironmongers, Sadlers, Coopers & Makers of Bendware, Cutlers, Joiners, Clock & Watchmakers, Plumbers, Braziers, Pewterers, Tinplate workers, & Cabinet makers not exceeding £10-0-0, and to Fletchers, Bowyers, Cardmakers, Nailors, Armorers, Plasterers, Masons, Carpenters, Tylers, Slaters, Helyers, Makers of Sieves or Tugars, Chair makers, Glaziers, or other trades, belonging to the Fraternity, not exceeding £8." This new classification of the importance of the Trades is significant as being one of the signs of the times.

It was also provided that a foreigner or other who had served apprenticeship to more than one Trade, &c., need not pay a separate fine for each Trade.

The Apprentice educated within the Town could now be made free at a lower age than 24, but he had to pay not exceeding 10/- as a "treat."

A person who without approved excuse refused the office of Steward could now be fined £5-0-0, ⅔ to go to the Company's Stock and the rest to the Charity School of the Town, but if that was discontinued, to such local Charity as the Bailiffs may appoint.

Any disobedient Steward was finable in 20/- to be divided equally between the Company and the Charity School.

Power was given to the Fraternity to alter its place of meeting in the Church to any other place in the Town. As a sequel it was ordered that all duly summoned members do go along with the Stewards to such place as they may appoint (? the Alehouse) and pay an equal share of the Reckoning subject to a fine of 10/-.

The Public Meeting for Election of the Six Men and Stewards was fixed for the Saturday next after the 3rd May.

Lastly all former ordinances not repealed were confirmed.

Approved subject to powers of alteration & revokation at the County Assizes 30th August 1715.

(Journal page 153)

From this time onward there was much unrest about the restriction of the freedom to trade, and the privileges of the Guilds became greatly encroached upon apparently with the tacit approval of commercial society. Anyway, the exclusive powers of the Guilds declined; possibly the Law Courts looked upon their existence as being "in restraint of trade" and therefore not to be encouraged. Certain it is that the Hammermen's Company lost its importance except in certain faculties. The list of members from 1786 to 1830 shows that few of the higher grades of tradesmen took up their freedom, and then the membership began to be honorary, people who had not served any apprenticeship being made members and having a fictitious trade assigned to them, although in many instances they were already Freemen of the Borough through inheritance. My own father was one. He was brought up to the Law, but was assigned the trade of a Smith.

The Municipal Corporations Act of 1835, Sec. 14, after reciting the various privileges and monopolies I have described, enacted "That notwithstanding any such Custom or Bye Law, every person in any Borough may keep any Shop for the sale of all Lawful Wares, & Merchandizes by Wholesale or Retail, & use every lawful Trade, Occupation, Mystery, & Handicraft, for Hire, Gain, Sale or other wise, within any Borough."

Although this did not extinguish the Trade Guilds it was their virtual death-blow. They may have existed in places in a sporadic form for some time, but most of them died of inanition. But it must be remembered that this Act of 1835 did not apply to the City of London, so the City Companies were left, to some extent, in their pristine glory, and their ability to exercise their beneficent influence.

As a boy I knew several of the last operative Freemen, the last of whom, Mr. Thomas Cook, Plumber, became the sole depositary of all the original documents and regalia of the Hammermen's Company, which he patriotically gave to the Ludlow Natural History Society, in whose charge they are now, and from whom I have acquired this information.

Appendix.

The Charges of the Hammermen's Society of Ludlow; Established in 1511.

[Reprinted from A.Q.C. xii., 107.]

The charge to be given to everie Master made free to this ffellowship of Smithes and the rest of the members.

You shall take the Sixe men and Stewards by the hand promisinge by your fayth and truth to observe and keepe all such orders and decrees as shall be given to you in charge.

You shall be true to o^r Sov^raigne Lord the Kinge his heyres and succefsors and to the fellorshippe and occupation whereof you are made a freeman.

You shall keepe your Election day truly being the Saturday next after Holyrood Day in may yearly uppon Lawful summons given uppon payne of forfeiture to the said Occupations and Stewards the summe of three shillings and foure pence for ev'y shuch default, except a lawful excuse shewed and allowed by the sixe men.

You shall appeare at all Lawfull Summons given yo^n by the Stewards for the tyme beinge uppon uppon payne of the forfeiture of Three shillings foure pence.

You shall not procure any worke out of any masters hands and cofellors being free of this fellorshippe upon payne of forfeiture of Three shillings foure pence to this Fellorshippe to be levyed by the Stewards.

You shall not commence any suit against any freeman of this fellorshippe without Lycense of the sixe men and Stewards or the most number of them uppon payne of forfeiture of three shillings foure pence to be gathered as before.

(Journal page 154)

You shall not myssuse or speake any Ray leinge or indirect words towards any of the sixe men or Stewards uppon payne of forfeiture of three shillings foure pence to be gathered as before.

You shall pay your hall money as y^t hath been accoustomed uppon the like payne you shall not Refuse beinge chosen and Ellected to the Stewardsippe of the said fellorshippe uppon the payne of five pounds uppon denyall of the same.

You shall also be content to beare yo^r portion for all Scott and Lott that shall be seased uppon yo by the sixe men from tyme to tyme for any seasement that the occupation shall be charged withale uppon paine to be disfranchised from the said fellowshippe as a forriner.

You shall not use any other trade but what you have been apprentize or allowed or made free into uppon payne of forfeiture for every day three shillings foure pence and be disfranchised.

Noe Master of this fellorshippe shall suffer his servant or apprentize to come to the Occupation dynner or Supper But only such as shall pay one shilling uppon payne of forfeiture of three shillings four pence.

You shall take no apprentize under the tearme of seven yeres and the same apprentize name to be registered in the booke of the fellorshippe uppon payne of hindrance of the said apprentize of his trade.

You nor your wief or any other in your behalf shall not use to kneele in the Occupators pews before you have been steward.

Discussion

Bro. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M., said:—

Our hearty thanks are due to our Brother, Dr. Salwey, for the very interesting paper he has given us on those of the ancient Guilds of Ludlow which became federated together as the 'Hammermen's Company.' Personally, too, I owe him acknowledgment for the courtesy which has left it to me to supplement the subject of the Ludlow Guilds by drawing on the account given fifty years ago by my Father, Gordon M. Hills, of that association of the other leading guilds of that ancient town which came to be known as the 'Stitchmen's Company.'

The standard work on English Gilds produced by Mr. Toulmin-Smith, with an introductory Essay by Professor Brentano, contains an account of the rise and suppression of the mediaeval 'Palmers Guild' of Ludlow, which corrects our Brother's references to that body on some points of fact, and supplies much information of special interest to us.

The Palmers' Guild belongs to that class of guild association which was mainly concerned with the duties of religion; but in the Hammermen's and Stitchmen's Companies we have the record of the business activities of the trades guilds of the same community which had formerly supplied the membership of the old religious guild, as they survived after the Reformation period, lingering on well into the last century. It must be remembered that in the mediaeval period the one element which was common to all classes of such fraternities was the religious one, for in those days there was a very vivid sense of the essential closeness with which Divine and human affairs are interwoven in our daily life, a fact, unfortunately, less appreciated nowadays, to our great loss.

It is particularly interesting to follow the story of the decay of these trades guilds, passing through stages so similar to those of our Speculative Craft, and to find at the end of the history that whilst the trade associations have become as it were worn out, yet a memory of the early religious activities is maintained, at any rate, in the case of the Stitchmen, to quite a late period.

Mr. Toulmin-Smith tells us that the Palmers' Guild had been founded by twenty-seven Burgesses of Ludlow, and that later on this name was agreed upon at a meeting of the fraternity, which included men and women, held in St. Laurence's Church on Whitmonday, 1284. The Guild,—afterwards described as "The Palmeres Guyld w^hin in the paryshe Churche of Saynt Laurence,"—received the Royal Confirmation, and privileges with regard to holding property in the reigns of Edward III. and Richard II., but was founded by the good folk of Ludlow as long ago as to date almost, as we should say, from 'time immemorial.'

(Journal page 155)

It is not too much to say that to the Palmers' Guild Ludlow owed the church and its principal charities, a condition of things common in the days when guilds played so large a part in the life of the people. To take one other example, the accounts of the building of Bodmin Church in the fifteenth century show some forty guilds all more or less connected with that church. Ludlow Church in those days counted at least seventeen altars.¹ The word 'chancel' in the present connection must be taken as applicable to any portion of the church—not necessarily the Eastern—that was divided off for special use.

The objects of the Palmers' Guild were religious in that full and proper sense which includes not only the worship of God, but what is summed up in the maxim "Love thy neighbour as thyself." Hence the objects of the fraternity included the assistance of members in misadventure by theft, fire, shipwreck; in case of imprisonment or seizure of their goods; in temporary sickness or incurable disease, and provided dowries for young women; and thus conducting them along the path of their earthly careers, the guild assisted at the last sad offices, and still continued after they had passed beyond the veil to commend their souls to the mercy of Almighty God. In the old guild life the attention of the fraternities was very forcibly directed to the contemplation of the inevitable end of this mortal existence, and in this particular case the ordinance dealing specially with this religious duty seems to me very well worth recording here for the light it throws on more than one point of interest to us. The original Latin has been translated thus:—

"Services for the dead shall be duly attended by all the bretheren and sisteren.

If any man wishes, as is common, to keep night watches with the dead, this will be allowed, on the condition that he neither calls up ghosts, nor makes any mockeries of the body or its good name, nor does any other scandal of the kind. . . . And never shall any woman unless of the household of the dead, keep such a night watch."

The government of the Society was provided for in the ordinance that "Five or seven men of the guild shall, every year, choose a Rector and Stewards of the guild, who shall manage its affairs." At the time the guild took its name three chaplains were supported especially to celebrate services for the living, the dead and in honour of the Holy Cross, a dedication very naturally associated with the original objects of a Palmers' or Pilgrims' Guild. At the time of the suppression of the Guild under Henry VIII., the funds maintained a warden, seven priests, four singingmen, and six choristers, "to sing divine service w^hin the paryshe Church of Saynt Laurence," and also sufficed for the support of the Schoolmaster of Grammar and thirty-two Alms people. There was an almshouse for the poor folk and a mansion house for the ministers of the Guild, who, however, had no parochial responsibilities, as it is expressly said—"y^e ministers of the Guyld be not chargeable towardes the Cure."

The Palmers' Guild was also known as the 'Fraternity of St. John,'² which probably points to its place of meeting in the parish church, where afterwards, as I shall mention, the Stitchmen used to resort.

The Annual Meeting day of the 'Hammermen' held at one time the Sunday next after the feast of St. Philip and St. James, the first of May, at a late period was regulated to be on the Saturday next after 3rd May, which is the Feast of the Invention of Holy Cross celebrating the discovery by St. Helena. This, like other points which Bro. Salwey has mentioned, shows a similiarity with the customs of the earlier Guild.

My Father, Gordon M. Hills (1826-1895), read his paper On the Ancient Company of Stitchmen of Ludlow: their account-book and money-box before the British Archæological Society (B.A.A. Journal xxiv., 327), from which I quote

¹ English Church Architecture, by Francis Bond, I., 202. All these seventeen Altars surrounded by screens were situated as follows:— The High Altar at the East of the great chancel; three chapels in N. Aisle, and four in S. Aisle; two in each transept, and five under the arches of the Nave. ² Parish Life in Mediaeval England, by Cardinal Gasquet (4th Edition, Methuen & Co.), 265.

(Journal page 156)

the following description, which discloses a history parallel with that of the Hammermen's Company, and, I think, most suggestive in its similarity with the course of the evolution of our Craft, of which my Father was, however, not a member.

The Book and money-box, which was in 1867 in the possession of Mr. Richard Jones of Ludlow, who was admitted to the Society in 1825, and officiated as key keeper in 1832, is now, I believe, in Ludlow Museum.

My Father's account runs thus:—

The book begins with a history of its own origin in 1669, and then sets forth some facts respecting a previous account-book of the Company which dated back as far as 1563. It shews that the "com" or "composition" of the society were remodelled in 1569, and again in 1579. The statement is thus: "This Boocke was made ye xx^th day of August in the xxj^th yeare of the Raigne of o^r Soveraigne Lord Charles the Second by the grace of God of England, Scotland, Frannce and Ireland Kinge, defender of the Aposticall Protestant and true Faith, of the Holly Gospell of Jesus Christ. And in the yeare of o^r Lord God 1669."

"In the yeare whearein — Weare Bayliffs of the Samuel Weaver and — Auntient Corporacion of Tamberlayn Davies — the Towne of Ludlowe

Richard Wildo — Sixmen of the Fellowship Edward Durford } Aldermen — and Brotherhood of Tay- Samuel Weaver } of the s^d Towne — lors, Mercers, Draps, Cap- Edward Robinson one of the 25 masters — ers, Hatters, Glovers, & Robert Bond and } — Skyners. William Adams } Taylers

John Lewis, Tayler and — John Actonfurd then } Stuarts."

On the same page is continued an equally formal recital, from which it appears that "the last former booke belonging to this Companie" was begun May the 16th, 1563, in Queen Elizabeth's time; and that in 1569 "the said Companie renewed their composission," according to an act of Parliament of the 25th January of the nineteenth year of Henry VII., and the "composission" was sealed by Sir Edward Saunders, Knt., Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Thomas Carns, Justice of the Common Pleas, and by the bailiffs of Ludlow; and further, in the year 1579 an addition was made to the "composission," and the whole confirmed and subscribed by Sir Henry Sidney, Lord President of Wales and the Marches; Sir Henry Townshend, described as bailiff and recorder of Ludlow; and by the Chief Justice of Chester, and the rest of the justices, S. Bromley, Charles Fox, and E. Walter.

Then follows the charge to be given to every member on admission to the brotherhood, and a code of rules, twenty-nine in number, from which the nature and objects of the brotherhood, a trade-union or protection-society, may be very clearly apprehended.

The form of taking the charge by a new member is to take the Sixmen and the stewards by the hand, and to promise "by your Fayth and Truth" to observe and keep their orders; to be true to the sovereign and to the fellowship; and this, it appears by the last rule, was in fact an oath sworn on the Gospels, and administered by the officers.

According to the rules (1) Election-day is to be held yearly, on the Saturday following the day of the Invention of the Holy Cross (3rd of May), and every member is to attend upon pain of a fine of twelve pence in default. The meetings, though held yearly, as thus appointed, elected their officers only every alternate year, the term of office being two years (rule 4). And further (rule 18), every member is to attend at quarter-days when summoned, he is to be summoned for election-days, and even at other times is liable to be summoned, and every default is visited by a fine of twelve pence.

The officers of the association are the Six-men and the two Stewards. The Six-men, chosen by election, are to be two tailors, two mercers or drapers, and two of either of the other associated trades (rule 4). These are to appoint the two stewards, one of whom is always to be a tailor (rule 5). The Six-men are to composure the members, and to debate all questions raised against the members as to trade, or offences against the rules (6); to impose payments of scot and lot (3); but no rules or decrees are to be enforced which are "repugnant to the comon lawes of this realme, or to the hurt of the Liberties and commonwelth of this guide towne of Ludlowe" (22).

The Stewards are the executors of the Society, under orders of the Sixmen, "as by the composition" is appointed, and a member refusing to take the office is liable to a penalty of twenty shillings (rule 2). The Stewards are to issue summonses for the meetings (18), levy and collect (23) or distrain for (24) forfeitures and penalties, sue for them before the Bailiffs of Ludlowe (24); and duly to account for (22) and pay over the same to the

(Journal page 157)

Six-men, to the use of the brotherhood on election-day, yearly (23); and are at no time to make any payment or disbursement without the consent of the Six-men.

It appears (25) that the use the brotherhood had in these payments was for the relief of poor members; or when the king should require it, the fund was to be applied "towards furnishing of souldiers for the kings majestys warres,"—a requirement only once made in the record, viz. in 1689, when fifty shillings were paid for "the defence of the Council of the Marches of Wales." Almost every fee paid, as will be seen below, had an odd eight-pence. These odd pence were always "spent," it may be shrewdly guessed, on refreshment.

Freemen were to be admitted (14) only on the annual election-day and on All Saints Day (1st November). No man to be admitted a freeman or member except by a majority of the masters freemen of his own trade (8). Every freeman must have served seven years' apprenticeship in a city or corporate town, must be of good repute, and one that "can skill right well in the trade whereof desire is made to be free" (8); and none shall use any other trade than the one to which he is admitted, under the penalty appointed by the act, 5th Queen Elizabeth, and such fine as the Six-men may impose (9 and 11). Those who had served an apprenticeship in Ludlow were to pay, on admission as freemen, tailors, cappers, hatters, glovers, and skinners, 10s. 8d.; mercers and drapers, 6s. 8d. But if they had never had their time in Ludlow, they were deemed "foreigners," and had to pay much larger fees, viz., tailors, 46s. 8d.; cappers, hatters, glovers, and skinners, 40s. 8d.; mercers and drapers, 66s. 8d. (10). Freemen failing to pay scot and lot, as appointed by the Six-men, are liable to a fine of 10s. (3), and were not to commence a lawsuit against any of the brotherhood without first submitting the cause to the Six-men and Stewards, who should either decide the cause or grant licence for it to be taken before the bailiffs of Ludlow (7). A breach of the rule entailed a fine of 6s. 8d. Tailors or skinners only shall measure out garments (19), and these two trades shall not infringe upon each other's work (20). No master shall have above two shops (27); and no shops shall be let to any journeyman but "at daie or weeklie work, hire, or garment wages" (28); and lastly, it is enjoined on every member that he (21) "shall not at any time or times to assemble hereafter revile or despise or use any worde of envie, obprobie or despite against anie other of the bretheren of the same Fellowship and brotherhood, or else unreverentlie, uncomlie or unhonestlie talke, revile or behave yourself before the Six-men and Stewards, or against any of them for the time beinge, upon paine of three shillings and four pence for everie offence."

Apprentices (12) must be sons of freemen of the town of Ludlow, or of some other city or corporation. They must be twenty-four years of age at the end of their term of service, and this term must not be less than seven years; and as they must be bound within three months "of entertainyment" (13), they must probably always have been nearly seventeen years of age at the beginning. All apprentices were to be received before the Six-men and Stewards, and their indentures enrolled and registered by them within fifteen days.

As to those not of this society, none could, without licence of the brotherhood, follow any of its trades in Ludlow, under pain of 40s. per month fine (11). No other man's servant could be employed by those of the brotherhood without licence of the society,—fine, 10s. (15); and no foreigner belonging to the associated trades could work in any house in the town except a freeman's (16). Any "burgess, chancer, or resiant" of the town is prohibited from employing any but freemen of the society,—fine, 10s. No foreigner shall work as chief or master without consent of the whole company (28).

Although the book was begun in 1669, the earliest minute of the society's proceedings contained in it is of 7th of Feb. 1679, one of their quarter-days. We find there a list of members including the Six-men and Stewards and fifty-seven others. All these members then met in St. John's chancel, "beinge the usuall place of meetings," in the chuch of St. Lawrence at Ludlow. They admitted a feltmaker, and a tailor-woman, and a tailor, delivered two bonds into the custody of the steward, ordered the stewards to present one name for unlawfully exercising the trade of a tailor, not having served an apprenticeship of seven years. "Except that no members were fined for absence, this may be taken as a specimen of the business conducted on the quarter-days for very long after. The first election-day recorded is May 8th, 1680; but it is the alternate year in which no election takes place. The last election-day recorded is May 13, 1862, with the minutes of which day's proceedings the book terminates; and the society is now in abeyance. The book was inspected at intervals of from two to ten years, and the inspection certified by the signature of an officer, whose examination, apparently, had reference originally to stamps payable to Government on the enrolment of members; a 6-shilling stamp used for each member before 1698, and a two-shilling stamp afterwards. The last inspection was in 1856.

From the book a history of the operation of the society, and of its decay, may be drawn. Besides the tailors, mercers, drapers, cappers, hatters, glovers, and skinners, named in the composition, other trades were admitted

(Journal page 158)

to the fellowship. Feltmakers, called in two instances feltmakers or hatters, were frequently admitted between 1679 and 1763. Also, evidently as allied to the hatters, we have in 1680 a haberdasher; and in 1723, a "haberdasher of hatts." A bodice-maker, stay-makers, and women mantua-makers, as allies of the tailors, were also admitted, in nine instances, from 1681 to 1758. The bodice-maker admitted in 1681 figures as a tailor and Six-man in 1694. Stationers were admitted as allies of the skinners and furriers, and exercise similar to the trades of either skinner, furrier, bookbinder or bookseller; seven instances occur from 1681 to 1786.

It was not often that interlopers attempted to trade in Ludlow against the rules of the brotherhood; and usually the attempts to do so ended in their being mulcted in a fine, and being then admitted on duly conforming.

The united trades are first termed "Stitchmen" in 1710, after which this common and expressive name soon becomes the common designation for the brotherhood. Its operation as a trade-society continued in full force till 1790. The next years show a rapid decline in its trade influence; the attendances in "the usual place of meeting," St. John's chancel in the parish church of St. Lawrence, Ludlow, become very small, and the stimulating effect of social dinners at different hostelries in the town is brought to bear to improve the attendances. The list of apprentices entered ceases in 1754. The quarterly meetings are neglected, and soon there is only one meeting in the year, and after 1769 they never meet at the church. Fines and fees are reduced, to entice new members; but also the funds are diverted from trade purposes, and used to furnish forth the dinners; until, under this system of burning the candle at both ends, in 1814 the Stitchmen possessed only ten shillings. At the beginning of the present century it was simply a society of "good fellows," and those, apparently, of quite the humblest class of tradesmen. In 1801 the quarterly meetings were formally abolished, and two half yearly allowances allowed. From 1795 it was recorded as the duty of the Stewards to pay a guinea towards the dinner. After 1803 one Steward only was appointed by the Six-men. A revival now took place. The better tradesmen and professional men joined the brotherhood; but the imposition of the fine on the Steward made the meetings now become more hungry and less scrupulous, and succeeded in letting one of their pews at £3 per ann., which they resolved "should be applied to pay for the freeman's dinner." Soon after two other pews were let, and the like appropriation of the proceeds was made. The letting now proved so profitable that from 1813 to 1858 it contributed £212:1:6 to the dinners. In opposition to this selfish appropriation, it is only fair to the Stitchmen to mention their better deeds towards the church. In 1692 the Stewards were ordered to expend £3 towards buying two bells for the church, the same "to be tuneable when they or else the Stewards to keepe the money in their hands"; in 1732 they gave £5:5 towards the bells then to be made by Abraham Ruddall of Gloucester. It is pointedly recorded that this order was made nemine contradicente,—a desirable harmony, the absence of which appears to have been painfully felt on other occasions; for at the previous quarterly meeting it had been ordered that the article 21 of the Composition, against reviling, should be read at every meeting. To exhaust the public benefactions of the body, I may notice their contribution, in 1681-2, of 60s. "towards y^e buyinge of an engine ag^st ffier"; and their laudable exertions in 1743, and for many years after, in support of "the charity schole lately propagated within this towne."

* * *

The "great box" and the "little box" are mentioned so frequently in the minute-book that I shall not attempt to recount the instances. The rules at the beginning of the book (apparently appendages to the 1579 composition) mention a certain fine of 40s. shall be paid, one half to the bailiffs of Ludlow, the other half "to the comon box or treasure of this saide brotherhood." Rule 26 directs the Stewards that on the election-day, on the Saturday after "the Invention of the Cross (i.e., after May 3rd), they shall, at the end of

(Journal page 159)

their time, "true accompt and payment make to the hands of the Six-men of all that then shall remaine in your hands, to bee preservared in the comon box or treasurie." The "true accompt" was to be the special business of the Stewards on this day, for the next preceding rule had provided that all forfeitures should be paid over by the Stewards to the Six-men as soon as levied.

I believe the box exhibited to be the "comon box or treasurie" referred to in these rules written in 1669; but its age, I have no doubt, is fully a hundred years greater. In its make and appearance it . . . is as old as the reign of Henry VIII. If we bear in mind that the rules of 1669 were a mere transcription of rules that had been settled in 1579, and had previously, in 1569, been revised from a still older form, I think it is almost conclusive, from the evidence of the minute-book and from the appearance of the box, that it was the "treasury" when the oldest set of rules referred to were in existence.

The custody of the "comon box" is left by the rules with the Six-men, and the custom was for them to appoint key-keepers biennially. But there was also in existence another box which had its key-keepers; and although the second box is not mentioned in the rules, yet in the minutes "the great box" and "the little box" readily appear down to the period when the trade operation of the society came to be neglected in the middle of the last century. In the best times three key-keepers were generally appointed to each box; but even then very often two, or only one, were deemed sufficient. A box-keeper was appointed, who, it is presumed, had the care of both boxes. Some entries in the minutes shew that one of the boxes was used for the preservation of indentures and bonds, and this was the great box; for in 1722, 1723, and 1725, the ordinary annual examination of the contents of the money-box distinctly designates it "the little box." After 1840 we lose sight of the great box altogether in the minutes; and as the register of indentures had then ceased for six years, and the decay of the society made the papers kept in the box valueless, it is probable that the great box itself was disused and lost sight of about this time. One box still continued in use as a money-box, with sometimes two and sometimes two key-keepers; and the box was generally in the custody of the host of the inn patronised by the society with its dinners. The last key-keeper was appointed in 1846. . . . Thus the history of the money-box of the Stitchmen of Ludlow is traced from the time of Henry VIII. to the present day.

The box is made from the wood of the ash tree, and bound with iron. The wood was a solid block, and has been merely rounded and hollowed out.

The lid of the box is hinged; and there are three locks, a padlock between two hasp-locks. . . . The peculiarity of this box is that though its lid is scooped out on the top, outside, to a deep cup-shape, there is not, and never was, a money-slit in it. The money could only be put in by opening the box. The box is six inches and a half diameter at the largest, outside; seven and a-half inches high, up to the lid; and ten inches and a quarter high, including the lid. The inside is hollowed out to six inches deep, and about five inches diameter. The cup in the top of the lid, outside, is one inch deep.

The box is in the form very generally in use for mediaeval alms boxes of which examples from Harbledown Hospital, outside Canterbury, and Neen Sollers Church, Shropshire, are illustrated in the British Archæological Association Journal (xxiii., 104); these, however, both having a slit for insertion of money through the cover, which was not needed or desirable in this particular case.

Bro. Wonnacott, in his interesting paper on The Friendly Society of Free and Accepted Masons (A.Q.C. xxix., 112), has recorded uses of a money-box and key-keepers reminiscent of the uses of the Ludlow Societies. With regard to the great box which fell out of use when there were no longer bonds or indentures to be lodged in it, I think we may gather a very much fuller significance from Bro. Dring's valuable papers on the Tracing or Lodge Board (A.Q.C. xxix., 243, 275).

Professor Brentano, in his introduction to Mr. Toulmin Smith's English Gilds (p. clv.), gives particulars of the Statutes of a journeyman's association connected with the Shoemakers' Guild of Arnstadt in 1628. He wrote that the journeymen had their own box, containing their articles and documents secured with two or three locks, and proceeded:— "The opened box was the sign that the meeting had begun, just as with the Craft-Gilds. While, therefore, the box was open, all present had to remain with uncovered heads, and during such time all disrespectful conduct, as well as improper clothing, cursing and swearing—in short, all that showed want of respect,—was severely punished. On the other hand we find that, whilst the box was open, a social cup was handed round, to the expense of which all had to contribute."

(Journal page 160)

The Quatuor Coronati Lodge has in our Museum a handsome specimen of a "great box" which very probably belonged to a Speculative Lodge, made of mahogany and inlaid with emblems such as were no doubt in common use to hold Lodge properties in earlier days.

Bro. W. B. Hextall, in seconding the vote of thanks, said:—

Bro. Salwey has done himself less than justice in refraining from mention that he contributed the article on the Ludlow Lodge and its predecessors at A.Q.C. v., 77; and also the charges of Ludlow Hammermen at xii., 107.

When our Lodge held its "Outing" at Shrewsbury in 1906, and visited Ludlow, attention was called to the metal arrow standing upright on a gable of St. Lawrence's Church, even yet presenting its outward and visible sign of the old and extinct Fletchers' guild.

Canon Horsley writes:—

As I shall not be able to attend Lodge on Friday I send a note or two on Bro. Salwey's paper.

(1.) I do not know where or why J. R. Green declared the Ludlow Grammar School to be "the oldest in the kingdom." There has been an old controversy as to the rival claims of the Cathedral Schools of Canterbury and of York to be the oldest; but I never found Ludlow mentioned as coeval. Canterbury, my old school, dates from the primacy of its founder, St. Augustine, but received its higher status under the scholarly Theodore of Tarsus, who became Primate in 668. York was probably coeval, or nearly so, and amongst its headmasters was Alcuin, who acted as educational expert in the court of Charlemagne, and by some is supposed to have been the Naymus Grecus so familiar and so puzzling to Masons.

(2.) In the Ludlow Indenture of 1575 the Brotherhood of Smiths contained many trades, some of them very remote in aim and operation from smiths. These are grouped in the list to a certain extent, and so Tylers, Slaters, and Helyers come together. Houses were, and are, covered with tiles, or slates, or thatch; hence the three cognate trades. Nowadays we might write Tilers, Slaters, and Thatchers; but the old Saxon word Helyer is still in use. I asked my churchwarden who thatched his ricks. "A helyer from Bearsted" (the next village) he said. The helyer heles or covers the rick. A gardener heles the potato plants he earths up. And so Hell in the Apostles' Creed is the covered place, the unseen world, the ancient conception of the world being that of a flat plate with the river of ocean running round it, while above there was a hemisphere heaved up and hence called heaven, and correspondingly beneath there was the heled or covered place. Men could look up and understand something of the star-spangled arch of blue, but the reversed arch or crypt beneath was to the eyes of flesh "heled, concealed, and never revealed," or, as some would I suppose say, "hailed, concealed, and never revailed"!

(3.) Why Bro. Salwey says "the word chancel implies a place for transacting business" I cannot divine. 'Chancel' comes from cancelli, the railings which separate the sanctuary from the choir in a church, or the choir from the nave. So Cicero speaks of the cancelli fori, the bar of the tribunal. A place for transacting business would least of all be found in the chancel. Some business, some rites even, were done ad ostium ecclesiæ at, or in, the porch, in the vestry, or in the nave. A Guild or Brotherhood would no doubt have considerable latitude allowed as to what might be done in its own chapel in a church. I only demur as to what the word chancel is said to imply.

(4.) The Brotherhood met on the Sunday after the Feast of St. Philip and St. Jacob, which was, and is, May 1st. Bro. Salwey put a (sic) after the word Jacob, but obviously the earliest documents of the guild were in Latin, and

(Journal page 161)

the date would be in Festo Sancti Philippi et Sancti Jacobi. Yakoub, Jacobus, Jago, James are the same in different tongues as much as Jehochanan, Johannes, and John.

(5.) The Indenture of 1715 enumerates glaziers amongst trades "which had arisen since the time of Elizabeth"; but earlier in the paper glaziers are mentioned with their 6/8 paid for admission, and they could be impleaded in the Queen's Court of Record, i.e., under Elizabeth.

(6.) It is characteristically Elizabethan (or earlier) English when we read of "lawful order tending to the wealth of the Fellowship." Wealth, i.e., well being, not wealth, i.e., the possession of money. So thrice in the contemporaneous English of the Prayerbook we pray for the wealth (not the dangerous affluence) of the King; for the wealth (not the dangerous affluence) of the people; while in the Litany the contrast between "the time of tribulation and the time of wealth" is what is intended: the time of ill-th and the opposite time of weal-th each having its characteristic dangers and temptation. Already in Elizabethan times the word had begun to have a new and degraded meaning as if there could be no well-being without much-money-having; but here it is used in its real and original sense.

(7.) He mentions the regalia of the Hammermen's Company as extant. It would be interesting to know exactly what they were: perhas a photograph could be obtained to illustrate the paper. Many friendly societies have more or less copied Masonic ways and Masonic regalia, and a paper on such, pointing out likeness and the reason for variance, would be of interest, as also would be one on the words and ways which Masonry has taken from the Church. When I was installed as an Honorary Canon by the Bishop of Rochester, Dr. Talbot, in Rochester Cathedral, I was surprised to find how he, not a Mason, did several things which were familiar to me elsewhere.

Bro. Andrew Hope writes:—

As late as April, 1919, the custom has prevailed at the town of Chard, in the County of Somerset, for the Vicar to appoint the Vicar's Churchwarden and the Town Council to elect the other. Before the sermon, the old custom of officially notifying the Vicar (Preb. Green) of the Town Council's appointment to the Borough Churchwarden was carried out, Police-Inspector Edwards walking up the aisle, bearing the Borough Mace and a letter announcing the selection of Councillor Godby to fill the office for another year. This was at the Easter Service. The procession returned to the Town Hall in inverse order at the close of the service, and there dispersed.

Festival of the Four Crowned Martyrs

Saturday, 8th November, 1919.

(Journal page 162)

The Lodge met at Freemasons' Hall at 5 p.m. Present:— Bros. Gordon P. G. Hills, W.M.; J. E. S. Tuckett, S.W.; W. B. Hextall, P.G.D., P.M., as J.W.; Canon Horsley, P.G.Ch., Chaplain; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary; Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, I.G.; Rodk. H. Baxter, Stew.; Lionel Vibert, Stew.; Edward Armitage, P.G.D., P.M.; E. H. Dring, P.G.D., P.M.; J. P. Simpson, P.A.G.Reg., P.M.; and Sir Alfred Robbins, Pres. B.G.P.

Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle:— Bros. A. E. Pugsley, F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C., George E. King, S. J. Owers, A. J. Prewer, W. Maurice, W. Douglass, W. N. Blair, John Thompson, H. A. Badman, P.A.G.St.B., H. M. Baker, W. W. Dickson, G. C. P. Baxter, L. G. Wearing, Robt. Blake, P. H. Fox, R. Wheatley, F. J. Asbury, W. J. Williams, L. S. Green, J. C. McCullagh, Abdul Rahman, Robert Bridge, J. A. S. Bullock, F. C. Bickell, G. F. Ely, Harry Tipper, P.G.St.B., Jas. S. Protheroe, G. H. Fennell, Jas. G. Gould, Herbert Warren, Herbert Y. Mayell, J. M. Bruce, Alex. Walker, and G. W. Simpson.

Also the following Visitors:— Bros. W. J. Pratt, Finsbury Park Lodge No. 1288; H. Edwards, P.M., Marlow Lodge No. 2752; C. F. Cumberlege, Old Haileyburian Lodge No. 3912; W. O. Hickle, Hortus Lodge No. 2469; Rev. G. Freeman Irwin, P.Asst.G.Chap.; Sydney A. White, P.G.St.B.; S. H. Walker, Welwyn Lodge No. 3227; F. G. Portlock, Warrant Officers' Lodge No. 2346; J. S. M. Ward, Lodge Rangoon No. 1263; G. H. Stainer, Lord Charles Beresford Lodge No. 2404; R. J. H. Stretton, Carnarvon Lodge No. 703; Arthur Hyams, Barnet Lodge No. 2268; W. H. Warren, Evening Star Lodge No. 1719; and Ramsden Walker, P.M., United Northern Counties Lodge No. 2128.

Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. W. H. Rylands, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; T. J. Westropp; William Watson, P.A.G.D.C.; S. T. Klein, P.M.; Ed. Conder, P.M.; John T. Thorp, P.G.D., P.M.; Count Goblet d'Alviella; F. J. W. Crowe, P.A.G.D.C., P.M.; Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.M.; and Dr. Wynn Westcott, P.G.D., P.M.

(Journal page 163)

The resignation of Bro. Henry FitzPatrick Twiss, I.S.O., Lit.Doc., was received with much regret.

One Lodge and twenty-five Brethren were admitted to membership of the Correspondence Circle.

Bro. James Edward Shum Tuckett, M.A., F.C.S., T.D., P.Pr.G.Reg., Wilts., the Master-Elect, was regularly installed in the Chair of the Lodge by Bro. Gordon P. G. Hills, assisted by Bros. J. P. Simpson, W. B. Hextall, and Edward Armitage.

The following Brethren were appointed as Officers of the Lodge for the ensuing year:—

Brother	Office
Bro. William Watson	S.W.
" Herbert Bradley	J.W.
" Canon Horsley	Chaplain
" W. J. Songhurst	Secretary
" F. H. Goldney	D.C.
" T. J. Westropp	S.D.
" L. Vibert	J.D.
" R. H. Baxter	I.G.
" Sir Alfred Robbins	Steward
" J. H. McNaughton	Tyler

The W.M. proposed, and it was duly seconded and carried:— That Bro. Gordon Pettigrew Graham Hills, P.Pr.G.W., Berks., having completed his year of office as Worshipful Master of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, the thanks of the Brethren be and hereby are tendered to him for his courtesy in the Chair and for his efficient management of the affairs of the Lodge; and that this Resolution be suitably engrossed and presented to him.

The W.M. delivered the following Installation Address:—

(continued in pages-181-195.md)

Pages 181-195

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF pages 181-195 (journal pages 164-178 approx.)

INAUGURAL ADDRESS.

BRETHREN,

[Decorated initial T with ornamental border]

T this truly impressive moment in my life there are in my heart two hopes struggling to find adequate expression. The first is the hope that my Brethren of this illustrious Lodge will believe how deep is my feeling of gratitude for the great honour they have done me in calling me to rule over them. The second is the hope that during this coming year I may be enabled to maintain the prestige and dignity which are part of the honourable tradition of that high Office. To all Brethren of this Lodge of both Circles and in all parts of the World my first message from its Chair is one of Hearty Good Will.

As in accordance with time-honoured custom a newly-installed Master of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge must deliver an Inaugural Address, I crave your attention while I lay before you some thoughts on:—

THE TRUE FUNCTION OF TRADITION IN MASONIC RESEARCH.

Masonic Traditions—like other Traditions—are for the most part built up of statements concerning persons and places which may generally be labelled either as (1) antecedently likely to be true or (2) antecedently likely to be false. To the latter class belong some of the stories to be found in the Legendary History of the Old MS. Constitutions, and all those wild fables of the remote past which are so characteristic a feature in the works of the earlier Masonic writers and which had such a disastrous effect upon the minds of scientific historians and archæologists that by them Freemasonry was until comparatively recently treated with contempt as unworthy of a moment's serious consideration. It is evident that Traditions such as these can seldom commend themselves as suitable subjects for further research. When a Tradition or Legend, for example, assures us that Grand Master Noah opened a Grand Lodge in the Ark assisted by Shem and Ham as Grand Wardens and with Japhet acting as Grand Tyler or Outer Guard, one instinctively feels that the chance of finding corroborative contemporary evidence, whether documentary or otherwise, is not sufficient to justify a serious student in making any considerable investment of time and energy in the search. But the period of the great activity of the mediæval Builders and the centuries which preceded and which followed the 'Revival' of 1717, are rich in Masonic Traditions which, while they cannot in the present state of our knowledge rank as historical truth, may fairly be included in Class I., as consisting of statements which are likely to be true, and, therefore, worthy to be retained with a view to further examination in the light of the new discoveries which are constantly adding to our stock of knowledge. And it should not be forgotten that there are Traditions which must necessarily be consigned to Class II., but which may, nevertheless, be founded on Facts—the Facts having undergone distortion even to the extent of being forced to yield a meaning diametrically opposed to the Truth. Unfortunately, much promising material of a Traditional kind has been relegated to the limbo of disrepute, and with an air of finality which is very much to be deplored, by over-confident judgments liable at any moment to be reversed by fortunate discoveries of additional evidence sufficient to convert what was a mere Tradition into a certain Historical Fact. Let me justify this statement by a few examples.

There are at least two distinct legends which connect the famous Sir Christopher Wren with the Craft. One represents him as 'Grand Master' and describes the movement which resulted in the formation of the Grand Lodge of 1717 as due to his neglect of the duties of that office. This has by some writers been dismissed as a fable worthy only of a place in Class II., but the Old Charges

(journal page 165)

and the Regius MS. bear witness to 'General Assemblies' distinctly suggestive of a 'Great (i.e., Grand) Lodge' at which the King's Surveyor-General might very well have been the presiding officer. The story concerning Sir Christopher, who was the King's Surveyor-General, may have arisen in consequence of the survival of some such mediæval practice, and it should not be put out of court because the Title Grand Master smacks of the Grand Lodge of 1717. The other legend represents Sir Christopher simply as a Freemason and a frequent attendant at the Lodge of Antiquity. Freemasonry was in active being in his time, and it must be conceded that it is antecedently extremely likely that the foremost Architect of the day was a member of a Society so near akin to the Art of which he was so distinguished an exponent. Yet the greatest of our Masonic historians has declared that:—

"The admission of the great architect—at any period of his life—into the Masonic fraternity seems . . . a mere figment of the imagination, but it may at least be confidently asserted that it cannot be proved to be a reality."¹

The italics in the above quotation are not in the original but are used to mark a passage which does not add to the value of what is otherwise a most valuable summary of the evidence then before the writer. The latest pronouncement on this subject, having equal authoritative weight, is very decidedly favourable to the truth of the tradition or legend. It is that of Dr. Chetwode-Crawley and is quoted by Bro. Wonnacott in the course of his review of the History of the Lodge of Antiquity by Bro. Rylands (A.Q.C. xxv., 205):—

"In view of the more recent investigations the case stands somewhat thus. Omitting Aubrey's testimony we find in the course of the Acception, in the stream of family tradition, and in the obituary notice of 1723, such grounds for inferring Sir Christopher Wren, like others of his stamp and day, to have been connected with the Craft, that we should be justified in feeling the liveliest surprise if it could be shewn that the fact was otherwise. Admitting Aubrey's testimony, we find the probability turned into such a certainly as actuates men in the conduct of their daily life. Rebutting evidence there is none. The witness and his testimony are such as the Court must admit."

The strange story of the Sackville Medal is another case in point, and here also the unfavourable judgment has already been reversed. Tradition steadily maintained that in 1733 a medal in honour of an Englishman named Charles Sackville had been struck at Florence by one Lorenz Natter. The earliest mention of the medal was supposed to be that in Johann Bode's Pocket Book (1776-1793) for 1777, where a specimen was said to have been formerly preserved at Leipsic but to have mysteriously disappeared. The existence of the medal—for long strenuously denied—was at length made certain by the discovery of other specimens (two are now at the British Museum and two at the Bodleian). It is a curious fact that in the writings of Masonic historians of the 'Authentic' School one too frequently finds an unreasonable hostility to the 'High' or Additional Degrees of Freemasonry, those who framed them being represented as cheats and rogues and those who acquired them as weak-minded dupes. Now Johann Bode and Lorenz Natter were both devoted members of the Strict Observance and engaged in the propagation of that Rite in foreign parts (Sweden, Denmark, Russia, etc.). Also the Sackville Medal with its Ab Origine motto is clearly a Strict Observance medal. So it was loudly and confidently asserted that the medal was:—

"certainly a fraud perpetrated at a much later date (than 1733) in the interests of the Strict Observance."²

And in another place it is described as:—

"a notorious medal supposed by many students to have been struck at a much later period in St. Petersburg for the purpose of proving the early existence of certain so-called High Degrees."³

¹ R. F. Gould, Hist. of Freemasonry, vol. ii., p. 55. ² ib., vol. iii., p. 300. ³ A.Q.C., vol. iv., p. 182.

(journal page 166)

Of poor Bro. Natter it has sometimes been said 'He was a rogue because he perpetrated a fraud like this medal,' and of the medal 'It is a fraud because it was perpetrated by that rogue Natter.' It is to two distinguished members of the Authentic School, Drs. Begemann¹ and Chetwode-Crawley,² that we owe the clearing up of this mystery. They have proved conclusively that none of the arguments against the authenticity of the Sackville Medal were justified, and that Johann Bode and Lorenz Natter were quite innocent of the fraud imputed to them. Incidentally, they afford additional reason for the growing conviction that for the origin of the Strict Observance we must look beyond the Baron von Hund and perhaps even as far back as 1730.³ This miscarriage of justice was due to pre-conceived notions about the High Degrees. The important subject of the development of Additional Degrees has been made needlessly complex and difficult by arbitrary final pronouncements as to the lateness of the origin of certain Degrees and Rites in the absence of direct evidence and in the face of Tradition.

Arguments and objections without number have been directed against the famous Charter of Larmenius by critics none of whom had ever seen the original. It has been confidently said that it was 'manufactured' in 1705 by an Italian Jesuit Bonanni,⁴ it has been proclaimed a 'counterfeit . . . without any 'doubt prepared under the rule of . . . Cossé-Brissac (1776-1792),⁵ it has figured amongst the 'Apocryphal Manuscripts,'⁶ it has been dubbed a 'fraus pia' of between 1805 and 1810,⁷ 'its reality no serious student could possibly maintain,'⁸ evil indeed have been the things said of its contents.⁹ But in 1911 Bro. Crowe was able to produce what purports to be actually the original Charter of Larmenius,¹⁰ and some at least of the objections are seen to be without justification. Few will be found to believe that this most interesting document really dates from 1324 and that the Story of Transmission is true after all, but if not—what is the truth about its origin? The field is open for new efforts, and the subject is not merely interesting, it is one of very great importance in connection with the history of more than one Masonic Rite or System.

The traditional connection between the London Masons' Company and Speculative Freemasonry was testified to by Dr. Anderson in the 1723 Book of Constitutions, but it was commonly regarded as one of the Doctor's flights of fancy until Bro. Conder's great discovery¹¹ showed that once again Tradition was right and the Critics wrong.

The Locke-Leland MS., in the absence of the original and also on account of certain alleged impossible manufactured archaisms in the copy which is all that is now in evidence, is usually classed as a fraud, and as the matter now stands this verdict is perhaps inevitable. But it is quite likely that there did exist, and perhaps does still exist awaiting discovery, some such document, and that the version which we now possess is an effort of memory rather than a deliberate attempt at imposture.

Many Masonic Traditions, other than those alluded to, which were formerly condemned as utterly valueless, have been found to yield good results on re-examination, but many more still await similar treatment at the hands of patient investigators who are not content to abide by the judgments pronounced against them.

The labours of what we now call the 'Authentic School' have raised the study of Masonic History and Archæology to an equality with other branches of science, and it is not possible to over-estimate the value of the service so rendered or to exaggerate the debt of gratitude which we who follow owe to those who have

¹ A.Q.C., vol. xii., p. 204. ² ib., vol. xiii., p. 142. ³ ib., vol. xiii., p. 149. ⁴ Clavel, Hist. Pittor., etc., 1844, p. 214. ⁵ Findel, Hist. of Freemasonry, 1865, p. 691. ⁶ Gould, Hist., vol. i., p. 500. ⁷ Woodford, Cyclopædia, 1878, p. 109. ⁸ Woodford, Cyclopædia, 1878, p. 109. ⁹ A.Q.C., vol. xxvi., p. 170. ¹⁰ ib., vol. xxiv., p. 185. ¹¹ E. Conder, jun., Hole Craft, etc., 1894. Also A.Q.C., vol. vii., 178; vol. ix., p. 28; vol. xxvii., p. 81.

(journal page 167)

been the pioneers. At the outset their work was necessarily to a great extent destructive, the weeds and tares had to be rooted up, the rubbish removed, the ground cleared to make room for a new and healthier growth. And so nothing which could not be substantiated by unimpeachable evidence was permitted to pass, and (to change the metaphor) the foundations of the new edifice were laid, well and truly laid, on the bed-rock of solid fact, encouraging the hope that upon the foundation thus laid would arise a superstructure alike perfect in its parts and honourable to the builders. That our own Lodge of the Quatuor Coronati has played a great part in this work is known and appreciated by men of learning within and without the Craft and throughout the world. But the attitude of mind which was so essential to the success of the labours of the pioneers of the Authentic School carried with it a certain danger from which, it must be confessed, they and we have not wholly escaped, namely, the tendency to pronounce final judgments resting upon partial and therefore inconclusive evidence, and the failure to recognise the true value of and to make the full use of Masonic Tradition. Sir Gilbert Scott has drawn attention to this:—

"the fables of the Freemasons have produced a natural reaction, and the degree of truth that there is in these traditions has consequently been overlooked."¹

The fact is that an antecedently likely Tradition, one which is either contemporary with or not too far removed in point of time from the personages concerned, and one which is fairly frequent and persistent, is probably true, although the available evidence may be wholly insufficient to establish it as such. In such a case a final judgment against is as great a blunder as the conclusion that because an event may have happened therefore it must have happened. The mischief caused is not only that investigation in a certain direction and on a particular subject by other students is checked, but, and this is far more serious, their power of discernment becomes warped by the creation of illusory "data,' as happened in the case of the Sackville Medal. The tendency to under-estimate the value of tradition was noticed by Bros. Speth and Rylands; the former on one occasion declared that:—

"He invariably attached greater credit to tradition than some of the brethren were willing to concede,"²

and the latter replied:—

"In my opinion it is as unsafe to cast aside tradition entirely, as it is entirely to credit it; there seems always to be a nucleus of truth . . . . ."³

Bro. Rylands was right, there is generally a nucleus of Truth, and it is worth while to seek diligently until it is found. The fact which has too often been lost sight of and upon which I lay special emphasis in this my Inaugural Address is that Tradition is not an Enemy sowing tares amongst the wheat but a Helper-in-the-Harvest, the precise value of whose assistance depends entirely upon the intelligence with which we ourselves make use of it.

Brethren, I greet you well.

After the subsequent banquet, Bro. G. P. G. Hills, I.P.M., proposed "The Toast of the Worshipful Master":—

BRETHREN,

The very pleasant duty and privilege now falls to me of proposing the health of our W.M., W.Bro. James Edward Shum Tuckett; but, before I call upon you to drink to the toast of the evening, I shall try, according to established custom, briefly to put before you a short record of our Brother's career, and to give you some idea of his many qualifications as a gentleman, a scholar, a good

¹ A.Q.C., vol. i., p. 68. ² ib., vol. xi., p. 170. ³ ib., vol. xi., p. 170.

(journal page 168)

citizen, and an earnest Mason, which assure us that he will most worthily fulfil the duties of the honoured position which he occupies this evening.

The name Tuckett or Touchet—in the older form still in use at the present day—has an honourable history known to students of genealogy; and so it is that our Brother can trace his direct descent from ancestors settled in Devonshire, at Honiton, so far back as 1630. Coming to a more recent period, his great-grandfather, Richard Tuckett, who lived from 1749 to 1819, was in practice there as a 'Scrivener and Writer,' discharging very much the duties of a modern solicitor. He took an active part in the politics of the time, and acted as election agent for Mr. George Shum, who, in 1796, and again in 1802, was one of the three members returned to Parliament as representatives for Honiton. It is owing to this association that our W.M. carries on the traditions of his family in bearing the name Shum, first borne by his grandfather, Richard George Shum Tuckett (1795-1859), godson and protégé of the M.P. Shum is a name which has a special Craft interest for us, since this particular George Shum, M.P., who lived till 1805, was a prominent Mason of the day, and President of the Board of Stewards in 1789; his son, Bro. George Shum, Junior, was a Grand Steward in 1802. With these associations, it is not surprising to find that Bro. Tuckett's great-grandfather and grandfather were both ardent Masons: their certificates and regalia are amongst his masonic treasures, and, in fact, to this day he wears the Royal Arch sash and apron which they had in use more than a hundred years ago.

Bro. Richard George Shum Tuckett, our Brother's grandfather, was a solicitor. In 1842 he became Registrar, and, later on, Deputy-Judge of the Bristol Court of Bankruptcy, during the prolonged illness of the Judge, Mr. Serjeant Ludlow. From practical experience gained in these capacities, he was able to give valuable service by his assistance in the drafting of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act of 1847. Bristol owes something to his public-spiritedness as the originator of the Bristol Water Works Company. His marriage in 1818 with Miss Eliza Churchill was an alliance with a family distinguished in military history, for the lady claimed direct descent from Sir Winston Churchill, father of the first Duke of Marlborough; and relics of that hero—in the form of baby-linen—are still religiously preserved by that branch of the family.

Bro. R. G. S. Tuckett was initiated, passed, raised and exalted at Chard in 1819. The youngest son of his marriage was Michael Adolphus Shum Tuckett (1840-1882), the father of our W.M., but as regards his connection with Masonry no particulars are known, as his early death, at the age of 42, prevented him from making any marked progress in the Craft.

I have dwelt a little upon our Brother's family history because I think it is most interesting to note how the very qualities which we honour in him to-day may clearly be seen to be the legacy of the characteristics of his good old English Stock.

Our W.M., James Edward Shum Tuckett, was born, just outside Bristol, on March 3rd, 1870. Educated at Bristol Grammar School, he rose to be Senior Prefect, and passed to Cambridge, with an open Scholarship at Gonville and Caius College. Taking his degree as B.A. in 1892, he was 25th Wrangler in the Mathematical Tripos, 1892; took Second Class Honours in the Natural Sciences Tripos, 1893, and graduated M.A. in 1895. Shortly after he became a Fellow of the Chemical Society. Bro. Tuckett then launched out in his profession as a Schoolmaster. Starting with a brief sojourn at Christ College, Brecon, seven and a half years were spent at Eastbourne College, until, in 1902, he joined the Staff of Marlborough College as an Assistant Master. In 1904 he became a Housemaster, and in 1916 was selected by the Council to be Bursar of the College.

Bro. Tuckett has a record of military service reaching back to the days of the old Volunteer Force,—in the Officers' Training Corps, Cambridge University Rifles, South Wales Borderers, Royal Sussex, and Wilts. Regiments, leading up to his position as Major, second in command, of the Marlborough College Battalion, O.T.C. At the last Coronation, he and his Commanding Officer received the Coronation Medal, "as His Majesty's own personal gift," and in 1914 Bro. Tuckett was awarded the Territorial Decoration. Through the period of the War senior officers of the O.T.C. were not allowed to leave their Corps, but during the

(journal page 169)

school holidays Major Tuckett was employed on attachment to various Battalions of the Black Watch training in this country. Last July our Brother retired with permission to retain the rank and to wear the prescribed uniform of Major.

It was at Eastbourne in 1898 that Bro. Tuckett became a member of the Craft, being initiated in the Hartington Lodge, No. 916, and exalted in the Hartington Chapter the following year. After his removal to Marlborough he joined the Lodge of Loyalty, No. 1533, and the Methuen Chapter, No. 1533, occupying the Chair of the former body in 1906, and being 1st Principal of the Chapter in 1910 and again in 1913. In 1910 Provincial Grand Honours were conferred on him as Grand Registrar and Grand Principal Sojourner, in Provincial Grand Lodge and Chapter of Wiltshire. In 1911 Bro. Tuckett was one of the founders of the Old Marlburian Lodge, No. 3533, and became a joining member of Robert Thorne Lodge, No. 3663, Bristol, in 1915. Bro. Tuckett has also joined the Order of the Temple, is a Knight of Malta, and has received the associated degrees conferred under the Camp of Baldwyn, Bristol. He has also taken the 18° A. & A. Rite at Bristol, and has qualified as a Life Governor of the three Masonic Institutions.

In 1910 Bro. Tuckett joined the Correspondence Circles both of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge and of the Leicester Lodge of Research, and soon gave evidence of his assiduity and activity in research by contributing papers to our Lodge on:—

The Earliest Baldwin K.T. Certificate (A.Q.C. xxiv., 285); Dr. Rawlinson & the Masonic Entries in Elias Ashmole's Diary (xxv., 237); An Apollonian Summons (xxvi., 31); Some Further Light on J. Morgan of the Phœnix Britannicus (xxvi., 71); Napoleon I. and Freemasonry (xxvii., 96);

and a valuable note—of generous length equivalent to a paper—on

Lord Harnouester (xxvii., 63).

Other literary work in connection with the Craft took the form of a history of Freemasonry in Marlborough 1768-1834 (1910); our Brother was also part author of the History of the Masonic Temple, Marlborough (1911), and a contributor to the Wilts. Masonic Calendar, of which he was for some time an Assistant Editor.

Thus it came to pass that in October, 1914, Bro. Tuckett's patience and industry received recognition by his election as a member of the Lodge, and since then this energetic student has favoured us with further papers on:—

Nicolas Perseval and La Triple Union (xxvii., 217); Savalette de Langes, Les Philalètes, and the Convent of Wilhelmsbad, 1782 (xxx., 131); The Early History of Freemasonry in France (xxxi., 7); The Minute Book of a Loge des Maîtres at Amiens, 1776-1790 (xxxi., 124); The Origin of Additional Degrees;

and placed us under still further obligation to him by the interesting address with which he has inaugurated his year of office.

Devotion to the Stuart Cause, Bro. Tuckett tells me, has been a tradition in his family, with the understanding that the 'Cause' died finally, with Henry Benedict Cardinal Duke of York, so that I may fairly denominate our Brother 'a Speculative Jacobite.' It is this old association, however, which has given special gist to his researches into French and Continental Freemasonry and so-called 'Stuart Masonry' in its still unravelled intricacies, to the elucidation of which several of his papers have been directed.

Bro. Tuckett is a diligent collector of MSS., Books, Pictures, Prints, Jewels, Medals, China, Certificates, etc., relating to Freemasonry; of Stuart Books and Medals; of Books, etc., relating to the French Revolution and the Emperor Napoleon I. Mere possession, however, is not enough for him, but he has always hunted out and written up the history and associations of each item as acquired,

(journal page 170)

and hence, no doubt, obtained much of that knowledge which has enabled him, besides the papers already mentioned, to contribute many interesting notes to the pages of our Transactions and to that useful periodical the Miscellanea Latomorum.

Our Brother is, I am sure you will agree, a man of many tastes and activities, to complete the record of which I must tell you that he pleads guilty to a keen interest in Archæology in general, and has also found an outlet in musical composition. His Part Song Sweet fa's the eve, and the song Sae far away, published by Novello, are tuneful settings to the words which appeal to lovers of simple melody.

One particularly happy incident recently served to bring out our Brother's powers of order and harmony. In July he took a leading part in the settlement of the strike of the Building Trades at Marlborough, by himself drawing up the actual details of a scheme which proved acceptable to all parties and brought to a satisfactory conclusion the dispute which had for five weeks paralysed the work of the locality.

Brethren, I give you the toast of Bro. James Edward Shum Tuckett, a gentleman, a scholar, a good citizen, an earnest Mason,—the W.M. of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, wishing him a most happy and successful year of office.

[Illustration: Decorative tail-piece — ornate cartouche with scrollwork and landscape vignette]

(journal page 171)

NOTES AND QUERIES.

"EVEN" AND "THREE MASTER MASONS" IN 1529.— Whether by a mere coincidence or by design the traditional right of the early Freemasons to form a Lodge when seven were 'gathered together' gets a side-light from the history of no less an architect than Michel Angelo Buonarotti. The dangers which had gathered round Florence, his native city, had been accentuated in 1529 by the ascendancy of the violent party. The Signory often felt the unspoken message "see that your walls be strong," and appointed their great fellow citizen at a wage of 30 florins of gold for 40 days. We have during the great War got accustomed to see men taken from peaceful pursuits to serve in the defence of their country, so are less surprised than students of the life of the great painter and sculptor felt at his amateur work on the ramparts of Florence. In those days, as now, no one was astonished, and at least one contemporary soldier has recorded his approval and admiration of the works done, and even such an authority as Vauban has spoken of them with favour.

The letter is in the Buonarotti Archives. I copy and italicize the translation given by Mr. Charles Heath Wilson, K.C.I., of The Life and Works of Michelangelo Buonarotti (2nd edition, London, 1881, p. 319). The date is 31st March, 1529:—

Magnifice Vir. This will be presented by the master mason Fabbriano Neretti with six companions, also all master masons, all of whom desire to serve your Signory on the walls of your bastions. They are capable men and will not require to be watched over, and their work will be such to merit your praise and tomorrow others will come making up the number of ten masters, which your worship requested me to send. On Saturday I spoke of them to Giovanni Rinuccini your associate, and he told me to send them this morning to you from him, as the said Giovanni sent them to me, and I wished to speak to your Signory but you did not come to the palace, for they wish to be placed in a body altogether so that their work may be seen, would that it might please God, that there were many of this sort.

Therefore I exhort you to show them a good countenance and to keep them, for their work will merit commendation. I spoke of them on Friday to your Signory on the height, when I gave you my name that you might have some knowledge of me. I have written these few sentences as above by commission of Giovanni Rinuccini, and also because I wish that this people should be well served by intelligent men able to do honour to your Signory, to whom I recommend myself. —May Christ have you in his keeping. Yours NICCHOLAIO DATI.

Another note is dated 17th June, 1529, and is as follows:—

I give notice to your Signory of the assignment of the first ditch above the road . . . We Giovan Battista and Lionardo Chiari master masons and companions undertake to excavate it, . . . other contracts for the fosses of the new works are preserved but all are of similar character.

Making no assertion as to the nature of the Master Masons' Guild, employed by the future architect of St. Peter's and the decorator of the Sistine chapel, the facts are of much interest. They are the confirmation to our ideals and a lesson to their countrymen that a band of skilled 'masters' and 'companions' should afford. They are non-political, working (without need of any watching save 'the All Seeing Eye'), wishing to work together as a 'lodge'; a perfect group of 'seven' forming the body, but reinforced by three more, skilled workers of equal ranks. They are in spirit, if not in organization, the worthy compeers of their

(journal page 172)

English contemporaries, who, at a later day, determined to receive 'accepted' brethren, and, almost unintentionally, founded a movement which (while it keeps within its ancient landmarks) is a power potent for good-will and integrity.

T. J. WESTROPP.

Foot Cloth—Painted Cloth—Floor Cloth—Flooring.—On the 2nd July, 1744, Père Simonnet, Prior of Heurgeville (Heurtrégeville) wrote to his publisher on the subject of the illustrations for his proposed book (see A.Q.C. xxxi., p. 27). The original letter is in my possession, and it contains what must surely be one of the earliest (if not the earliest) written description of a Lodge Foot Cloth. The following is the passage referred to:—

. . . Before him (the Master of the Lodge) is an Altar or elongated table covered with a Pall (Drap Mortuaire) on which is embroidered the Tomb of Hyram with 'la tête decharnée,' two crossed swords, palms, cypresses, and winged-clocks. Lastly a Cloth (Tapis) painted on oil-cloth (toile cirée) entirely covers the floor (sol) of this redoubtable place. But as the number of figures shown hides the design and because this Cloth is as full of mystery as was the Shield of Achilles of olden time it is reserved to form the subject of the next engraving.

It must be understood that no engravings or drawings have survived with the letter, so that we have the description only.

Foot Cloth (Tapis de pied) covering completely the Floor (Sol) of the Third Chamber or Place of Assembly of the Free Masons properly called The Lodge, used only on the days appointed for the Reception of some new Brother. The original of this piece came into the possession of a Profane in a very singular manner and the information to be derived from it throws much light upon the pretended Mysteries of Masonry. The position of this Cloth is in front of the Throne or Grand Master's seat and it is laid in accordance with the Points of the Compass. The two Columns of the Temple of Solomon forming the entrance thereto are thereon depicted as also the Plan of the Tabernacle which Moses set up in the Desert. The cylindrical object (L'espece de silindre) which is in the middle together with the other operative building tools are the honourable Signs of the offices and dignities of the Brethren present and they are scattered about at random. The Rough Ashlar (La Pierre brutte) which appears above is the Symbol of Primitive Matter or Nature (l'image de la matiere primitive ou la nature) and that is what the Cabalistic Signs graven upon it are intended to show. The situation of this Rock is outside (en dehors de) the Column J. Outside the Column B is the situation of a Five-Foot long Chest (Coffre de cinq pieds) closing with three keys which they call The Ark (l'Arche) and in which are locked up all the ornaments of the Lodge. The J represents the word JAKHIN and the B Booz which proves the truth of the discovery made by Mr. Banier.

For information concerning Mr. Banier see A.Q.C. xxxii., p. 6. The four Illustrations proposed by M. Simonnet were:—I. The Tower of Babel. II. The Novice in a Chamber of the Lodge hoodwinked. III. The Novice introduced into the Chamber of Reception where he receives the Light (ou on debande les yeux). IV. Foot Cloth, etc. (as above).

The Table Cloth or Pall styled 'Drap Mortuaire' presents some surprising features in connection with an Initiation ceremony. The objects depicted upon it are suggestive rather of 'high' or 'additional' Degrees. The 'tombeau d'hyram,' 'tête decharnée,' 'deux sabres en sautoir' (which may very well be really 'un os et une épée en sautoir'), the 'palmes' and 'ciprès,' and the 'horloges ailés' (which may very well be 'têtes d'Anges montées sur des ailes') are all familiar in the Ecossois 'Elu' Degrees. This letter was written in 1744, the year in which appeared Le Parfait Maçon and La Franc-Maçonne, both of which books treat of Ecossois Degrees.

(journal page 173)

One of the objects depicted on the Foot Cloth is an 'espece de silindre,' and it is surrounded by 'building tools scattered about at random or in confusion.' If this mysterious 'cylinder' was really part of a broken column we should here have something highly suggestive of another and very important high Degree. It seems possible that what Père Simonnet had secured were not Craft pictures at all. Whether this be so or not there are several points about this description which are of interest in connection with Bro. E. H. Dring's Tracing Board Lecture in A.Q.C. xxix., which he repeated with such success at Bristol on 17th July, 1920. Though the Rough Ashlar occurs, there is no mention of a 'Perfect Ashlar' nor even of the 'Pierre Cubique taillée en pointe.' The Ark came in for a good deal of attention in the course of the Discussion reported in A.Q.C. xxix., p. 313, etc. Bro. Dring said that he was unable to state definitely whether the Ark (and other Symbols now regarded as R.A.) appeared in connection with Craft working during the eighteenth century or not. It will be noticed that the 'Pierre brutte' and the Ark balance each other in M. Simonnet's description of the particular picture he had before him.

J. E. S. TUCKETT.

Freemasonry in France 1732-3.—For the following interesting paragraphs I am indebted to M.W. Bro. Melvin Maynard Johnson's Freemasonry in America prior to 1750. The Boston Weekly Rehearsal, 19th February, 1732/3 contains with its news from Paris:—

On the 5th, the Nuncio having made his Publick Entry in the accustomed Manner, is now busily employed in the Ceremonious Part of his Functions; that is, in making Visits to the Princes and Princesses of the Blood, in paying and receiving Compliments to and fro among the Cardinals, Ministers, and prime Nobility. On Monday, his Excellency, being a FREE MASON, is to lay the first Stone towards the building of the great Altar in the Church of S. Sulpice.

This by a Papal Nuncio is surely remarkable even allowing for the fact that the first Bull directed against Freemasonry was not launched until 1738. The Boston Weekly News Letter, 9th June, 1737, announces that:—

. . . the old Cure of St. Sulpice the Great Pro(t)ector, and Father Tournemin the celebrated Preacher and Jesuit, were going to initiate themselves, (when) out comes an Order from the King, like a Thunderbolt, and throws down the Babel Building.

J. E. S. TUCKETT.

A Roman Catholic estimate of English Freemasonry.—The Right Rev. Sir David Hunter Blair, Bart., sometime Abbot of Fort Augustus, has recently published his reminiscences in a volume entitled A Medley of Memories (Arnold, 1919). Born in 1853, he was educated at Eton, and went into residence at Magdalen College, Oxford, in January, 1872. It was not till March 25th, 1875, that he was received into the Roman Catholic communion, which eventually led to his joining the Benedictines, and rising to be Abbot of this Scottish house of the Order. He writes (p. 57):—

I was admitted, I think in my second term at Oxford, into the mysteries of Masonry, for which there was at that time a good deal of active propagandism in the University. We had an exclusively University lodge, the Apollo, with handsome premises near the Union, the citizens having an amalgamation of their own (as Angelo Cyrus Bantam would have put it), somewhere in a back street. Our Worshipful Master was a prominent High Church clergyman, many well-known dons belonged to the lodge, and masonic bigwigs from London used to come down from time to time to encourage and instruct us. There was a deal of pleasant and quite harmless conviviality about our meetings and sub-

(journal page 174)

sequent "banquets," as they were somewhat hyperbolically called; and I not only thought the masonic ritual rather impressive, but was very favourably struck by the active benevolence of the brethren, and by the excellently managed schools for boys and girls which they maintained at large cost. I rose to be Provincial Grand Organist of Oxfordshire, and used to conduct the music at Oxford and Banbury meetings. But I do not remember ever being asked to join in any dark conspiracies against Church or State. After I had become a Catholic, and had severed my connection with Freemasonry as a matter of course, I ventured on one occasion to write to a Catholic journal, to say that English Masonry, according to my experience of it, was a sort of charitable goose-club on a large scale, supported by a great number of highly respectable people, who could not see anything wrong whatever in either its principles or its ceremonial. My letter elicited a rather truculent (and anonymous) rejoinder—it now adorns my scrap-book—to the effect that I was evidently one of the hoodwinked, and that my letter showed unmistakable signs of diabolic possession.

GORDON P. G. HILLS.

The "Opera di San Pietro."—Mrs. Hugh Fraser, in her book of recollections, entitled More Italian Yesterdays, tells the story of "a poor mason called Giovanni Borgi," an operative, engaged on the staff at St. Peter's Rome about 1780:—

He belonged to the "Opera di San Pietro"—that is he was one of the workmen engaged for life by the administration of St. Peter's for the maintenance and repair of the Basilica, the Vatican Palace, and its many dependent buildings. The "opera" was a close corporation and included artisans of every necessary craft, from mosaic workers to bricklayers, plumbers and carpenters. Of course the privileges were largely hereditary, the Italian traditions of Guilds leading the son to follow the trade or profession of his father whenever possible, but high character and a blameless record were also indispensable qualifications for every appointment.

This reference to an operative craft organisation, and the qualifications of its members is of interest, as a relic of mediæval methods, and the character of Giovanni Borgi is in accord with our speculative use of the word 'Masonic.' Borgi spent his nights in administering to sick and dying in the Hospital of Santo Spirito on the "Borgo," and his sympathy was aroused for the boy waifs and strays of the city for whom he founded an asylum. Pope Pius VI. bought the Palazzo Ruggia as a permanent home for the Asilo. The founder, "Tata" Giovanni, as he was affectionately called, died June 28th, 1798. In after years Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti of Sinigaglia, afterwards Pius IX., was for four years director of the institution.

It will be remembered that some interesting particulars about Pope Pius IX. and his actual membership of the Craft appeared in a recent volume (A.Q.C. xxvi., 218).

GORDON P. G. HILLS.

The Leland-Locke MS.—The very interesting discovery by Mr. Onions (noted ante, p. 141) appears to prove conclusively that the so-called Leland-Locke MS., in the earliest form in which it is known to us, is a forgery: that is to say, it cannot possibly be an actual copy of an original dating back to the time of King Henry VI., who reigned from 1422 to 1460.

As a fact, however, it does not claim to be a direct copy of such a document, and it may therefore be useful to set out its traditional history as recorded in 1753. It may be assumed that:—

The Gentleman's Magazine of September of that year first printed the document in England. It stated that it was a "Copy of a small

(journal page 175)

Pamphlet, consisting of 12 pages in Octavo, printed in Frankfort, in Germany, in 1748," but this print has not been traced. It is, however, said to have been taken from
a Manuscript "found in the Desk or Scritoir of a deceased Brother" with a covering letter (dated May 6, 1696) addressed by John Locke (1632-1704) "to the Rt. Hon. . . . Earl of . . . .," and this letter says that Locke has
"by the help of Mr. C . . . . ns procured a copy of that MS. in the Bodleian Library which you were so anxious to see." No such MS. has been traced there.
The MS. is said to have been headed Certayne Questyons with Awnsweres to the same, Concernynge the Mystery of Maconrye, and to have been "faythfullye copyed by me Johan Leylande Antiquarius" (?1506-1552), from
the original "wryttene by the Hande of Kynge Henrye the Sixthe of the Name."

In the Notes said to have been added by Locke it is assumed that this John Leland is the well known Antiquary who lived in the reign of Henry VIII. It may, however, be noted that there was another of the same name, a Grammarian at Oxford, in the reign of Henry VI.

I have already mentioned (ante, p. 141) that what in all probability is the first printed copy of the MS. in a Masonic work, is in The Pocket Companion, published by J. Scott, London, 1754, where it was used to refute the strictures of Dr. Robert Plot in his Natural History of Staffordshire 1686, pp. 316-318. In The Pocket Companion, immediately following the author's "Detectation of Dr. Plot's Account of the Free-Masons," appears a re-print of An Apology for the Free and Accepted Masons . . . Translated from the French, by a Brother. Printed at Frankfort, M,DCC,XLVIII.—precisely the place and year given for the untraced print from which the Gentleman's Magazine is said to have obtained its copy. This may be pure coincidence, but it should also be noted that the version in The Pocket Companion was apparently not copied direct from the Gentleman's Magazine, as it gives names which the latter omits: "the Rt. Hon. . . . Earl of . . . . ." becomes "the Rt. Hon. Thomas Earl of Pembroke," and "Mr. C . . . . ns" appears in full as "Mr. Collins." This seems fair evidence in support of the claim made by the Gentleman's Magazine to its use of a Frankfort publication, and so may carry us back one step in our endeavour to get to the original.

The letter and notes said to have been by Locke may be quite genuine, though it would have been easy for a writer at a later date to include references to the Earl of Pembroke, Mr. Collins, and Lady Masham, all of whom are known to have been his friends.

One would like to find a reason for its appearance. The Act 3 Henry VI., c. I. may be dismissed, although the period is suggestive. A more promising suggestion seems to be the formation of the Grand Lodge of the Antients in 1751, but this also may be ruled out because Dermott made no use of the MS. before 1778, though he had the opportunity of doing so in 1756 and 1764. The Frankfort Apology of 1748 seems altogether the most appropriate place for its first appearance, but without further information it is perhaps useless to speculate upon the probable date of the 'forgery.'

Bro. Hextall has called attention (A.Q.C. xxvi., 1913, p. 124) to a letter dated 9th October, 1753, which appeared in the Gentleman's Magazine shortly after the publication therein of the Leland Locke MS. This letter stated that the MS. had been "since unartfully printed in various shapes," but no such reprints have yet been traced. The letter was addressed from Norwich, and the writer mentioned that "The Brotherhood were so well pleased with it that there was not a Magazine to be got in this City, and orders were given for a fresh supply."

W.J.S.

(journal page 176)

OBITUARY.

[Decorated initial T with ornamental border]

T is with much regret that we have to record the death of the following Brethren:—

Osborn Hambrook Bate, of South Africa, on the 30th September, 1919. Bro. Bate held the rank of Past District Grand Warden (E.C.) and Past Provincial Grand Master (D.C.). He joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1889.

Wm. Booth, of Stockport, on the 5th December, 1919. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Grand Standard Bearer (R.A.). Bro. Booth became a member of our Correspondence Circle in March, 1912.

George William Capel, of Surbiton, Surrey, on the 6th October, 1919. Past Master of Lodge No. 19. He joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1894.

James Couch, of Hatfield, Herts., on the 27th November, 1919. Past Master of Lodge No. 1601. Bro. Couch became a member of our Correspondence Circle in June, 1907.

Henry J. Dalgleish, of London. Past Provincial Grand Deacon of Devon. He joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1907.

William Fisher, of Chiswick, on the 30th September, 1919. Bro. Fisher held the rank of Past Assistant Grand Pursuivant and Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies (R.A.). He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in October, 1907.

George John Gissing, of Kingston-on-Thames, on the 14th August, 1919. Past Master of Lodge No. 1056, L.R. He joined our Correspondence Circle in March, 1907.

Henry Charles Hermann Hawker Houndle, of London, on the 30th September, 1919. Past Provincial Grand Warden, Surrey. Bro. Houndle became a member of our Correspondence Circle in January, 1890.

Robert Sinclair Laurenson, of South Africa, on the 29th August, 1919. He was a member of Lodge No. 2486, and joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1919.

Rev. Thomas William Lemon, D.D. (Oxon.), of Bude, Cornwall, on the 16th December, 1919. Bro. Lemon was Past Provincial Grand Warden and Past Provincial Grand J., Devon. He joined our Correspondence Circle in September, 1887.

Stanley Llandaff Burnett Lines, of Toronto, Canada. He was a member of Lodge No. 50 (N.S.W.C.), and joined our Correspondence Circle in November, 1910.

Benno Loewy, of New York City, on the 19th August, 1919. Representative of the Grand Lodge of Hamburg. He became a member of our Correspondence Circle in May, 1894.

Edward Macbean, F.R.G.S., of Helensburgh, Dumbartonshire, on the 23rd August, 1919. He joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1887, being elected a full member on 4th May, 1888, and was installed Master on the 8th November, 1895.

James Millar, of Ketchikan, Alaska. He was Past Master of Lodge No. 155 (Canada), and became a member of our Correspondence Circle in May, 1909.

Dr. Julius F. Sachse, on the 15th November, 1919. Librarian, Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania.

William F. Stockings, of Norwich, on the 10th September, 1919. Past Master of Lodge No. 943. He joined our Correspondence Circle in October, 1902.

Dr. Henry Francis La Touche White, of Cambridgeshire, on the 24th July, 1919. Past Provincial Grand Deacon of Northants and Hunts. He joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1908.

(journal page 177)

[Blank page]

(journal page 178)

[Full-page engraved portrait of Prince Charles Edward Stuart, shown in an oval frame with decorative surround and armorial elements. Inscription at base of pedestal: EVERSO MISSUS SUCCURRERE SECLO. Caption below reads:]

PRINCE CHARLES EDWARD STUART. Engraved from life by the Prince's command at Edinburgh, during the Jacobite occupation, 1745. From the rare original in the collection of Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett, W.M.

Pages 196-210

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF pages 196-210 (St. John's Card, Members List)

ST. JOHN'S CARD

[Decorative title page with ornamental border, corner pieces, and central illustration]

OF THE

Quatuor Coronati Lodge, No. 2076, London.

[Illustration: Woodcut image of three robed figures with musical instruments or books, captioned "FROM THE ISABELLA MISSAL. BRITISH MUSEUM, ADD. MSS. 18,851. CIRCA 1500 A.D."]

27th December, 1919.

W. J. Parsett, Ltd., Printers, Margate. 1919.

[Blank page]

HEARTY GOOD WISHES TO THE MEMBERS OF BOTH CIRCLES FROM THE MASTER AND OFFICERS OF THE QUATUOR CORONATI LODGE No. 2076 St. JOHN'S DAY IN WINTER, A.D. 1919.

NOTE.

In view of the present high cost of printing, and the consequent need for strict economy, it has been decided, as a temporary measure, to omit the long list of Correspondence Circle members, and to print only the names of those who have been elected during the year, and of those who have been removed by death. Subject, therefore, to these alterations, and to resignations, etc., the full list published under date of 27th December, 1918, remains in force.

ST. JOHN'S DAY IN WINTER, A.L. 5919.

VERY DEAR BRETHREN,

[Decorated initial T with ornamental border]

T is indeed a high honour as it is most certainly a precious privilege to be called to rule over a Lodge whose members are to be found in every part of the World and I gladly avail myself of the opportunity afforded by our annual St. John's Card of coming at least this once into direct communication with you when I, following the custom established by my predecessors, address to you on this Festival A Message of Good Will to All.

From the East the Master and Officers of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge send Fraternal Greetings and Hearty Good Wishes to the Members of both Circles. May T.G.A.O.T.U. grant to each one an abundant measure of the blessings of Health and Happiness, and may He continue to prosper the Labours of our Lodge in the Future as in the Past.

Brethren, I greet you well And remain Yours faithfully and fraternally,

J. E. SHUM TUCKETT, Master.

PRINCE CHARLES EDWARD STUART.

Whether 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' was a Freemason or not is a matter of doubt (or belief). Nevertheless, his name looms largely in the History of the Craft and Allied Orders, and this has been deemed sufficient to justify the selection of his portrait for this year's St. John's Card. The Engraver, Robert Strange¹ (afterwards the famous Sir Robert Strange, Kt.), was brother-in-law to Andrew Lumisden, 'Private Secretary to the Stuart Princes,' whose name is prominently associated with the Templar Masonic Rite of the Strict Observance. The engraving was done from life by Prince Charlie's Command during the Jacobite Occupation of Edinburgh. The epigraph 'A Paris, chez Chersau, rue Sᵗ. Iaques,' served a double purpose, being both a blind to permit the circulation of the prints on this side of the Channel and also the genuine address of the publisher who issued the proofs. The following letters C.P.R. ostensibly stand for 'Cum Privilegio Regis,' and were necessary for publication in France, but to the Jacobites those letters meant 'Charles Prince Regent,' the title and powers of Regent having been conferred upon the Prince by his father, the Old Pretender, who (for his adherents) was King James III. Tradition (but at present it is only Tradition) asserts that in the Audience-Chamber at Holyrood Palace at Edinburgh on Tuesday, 24th September, 1745, a 'Solemn Chapter of the Ancient Chivalry of the Temple of 'Jerusalem' was held 'by appointment' and that 'Our noble Prince looked most 'gallantly in the white robes of The Order, took his Profession like a worthy 'Knight' and 'did vow that he would restore the Temple higher than it was in 'the days of William the Lion. Then my Lord of Athole did demit as Regent '(of the Order) and his Royal Highness was elected Grand Master.'

J. E. S. TUCKETT.

¹ Sir Robert Strange lived at 52, Great Queen Street, London, the house lately occupied by the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

MEMBERS OF THE LODGE.

IN THE ORDER OF THEIR SENIORITY.

No.	Name	Details
1a	Warren, Lieut.-General Sir Charles, G.C.M.G., K.C.B., F.R.S., The Oaks, Westbere, Canterbury. 278, 1417, 1832, P.M. Past Grand Deacon, Past District Grand Master, Eastern Archipelago; Past Grand Sojourner. Founder. First Master.
1b	Rylands, William Harry, F.S.A. 27 Great Queen Street, London, W.C.2. 2, P.M.; 2, P.Z. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Deputy Grand Director of Ceremonies (R.A.). Founder. First Senior Warden. Past Master.
1c	Rylands, John Paul, Barrister-at-Law, F.S.A. 96 Bidston Road, Birckenhead. 148, 1354. Founder.
4	Westcott, William Wynn, M.B. (Lond.), J.P. 39 Rapson Road, Durban, Natal. 814, P.M., P.Pr.G.D.C., Somerset. Past Grand Deacon; Past Grand Standard Bearer (R.A.). Past Master. Joined 2nd December, 1886.
5	Goldney, Frederick Hastings, J.P. Beechfield, Corsham, Wilts. 259, 335, 626, P.M., Pr.G.Treas., P.Pr.G.W., Wilts. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Master. Director of Ceremonies. Joined 4th May 1888.
6	Klein, Sydney Turner, F.L.S., F.R.A.S. Lancaster Lodge, Kew Gardens, Kew, Surrey. 404, L.R.; 21. Past Master. Joined 9th November 1889.
7	Ninnis, Belgrave, M.D., Inspector General, R.N., C.V.O., F.R.G.S., F.S.A. The Ems, Leigham Avenue, Streatham, London, S.W.16. 259, 1174, 1691, P.M., P.Dis.G.D., Malta. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. (Joined C.C. March 1890.) Joined 9th November 1891.
8	Malczovich, Ladislas Aurèle de. Belügyministerium, Budapest, Hungary. Lodge Szent Istvan. Formerly Member of Council of the Order, Hungary. Representative of Grand Lodge, Ireland. (Joined C.C. January 1890.) Joined 5th January 1894.
9	Conder, Edward, J.P., F.S.A. The Conigree, Newent, Gloucestershire. 1036, 1074, L.R.; 280. Past Master. Local Secretary for Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire. (Joined C.C. May 1893.) Joined 5th January 1894.
10	Greiner, Gotthelf. 33 Warrior Square, St. Leonard's-on-Sea. 92, P.M., 1842. Past Assistant Grand Secretary for German Correspondence, Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies (Craft & R.A.). Past Master. (Joined C.C. January 1888.) Joined 24th June 1896.
11	Horsley, Rev. Canon John William, M.A., Oxon, Clerk in Holy Orders. Detling Vicarage, near Maidstone, Kent. 1973. Past Grand Chaplain. Past Master. Chaplain. (Joined C.C. June 1891.) Joined 24th June 1896.
12	Shackles, George Lawrence. Wickersley, Brough, E. Yorks. 57, 1511, 2494, P.M.; 1511, P.Z., P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.G.R. (R.A.), N. & E. Yorks. Past Master. Local Secretary for the North and East Ridings of Yorkshire. (Joined C.C. May 1887.) Joined 7th May 1897.
13	Armitage, Edward, M.A. The Green Hills, Tilford, Farnham, Surrey. 16, 859, 1074, 1492, 2851, P.M.; 859, 1074, 1 (S.C.), P.Z. Past Grand Deacon; Past Grand Sojourner. Past Master. (Joined C.C. October 1888.) Joined 7th October 1898.
14	Crowe, Frederick Joseph William, F.R.A.S., F.R.Hist.S. St. Peter's House, Chichester. 328, P.M., 1726, P.M.; 110, P.Z., P.Pr.G.R.; P.Pr.G.Sc.N., Devon. Rep.G.L. Hungary. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Grand Standard Bearer (R.A.). Past Master. (Joined C.C. November 1888.) Joined 8th November 1898.
15	Thorp, John Thomas, F.R.Hist.S., F.R.S.L., F.R.S.A.I. 54 Princess Road, Leicester. 523, 2429, P.M.; 279, P.Z., P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.G.J., Leicester & Rutland. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Grand Warden, Iowa. Past Master. (Joined C.C. January 1895.) Joined 8th November 1900.
16	Watson, William. 24 Winston Gardens, Headingley, Leeds. 61, P.M., P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.G.So., W. Yorks. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Grand Standard Bearer. Senior Warden. (Joined C.C. February 1887.) Joined 3rd March 1905.
17	Songhurst, William John, F.C.I.S. 27 Great Queen Street, London, W.C.2. 227, P.M., Treas., 3040, D.C.; 7, P.Z.; 25, P.Z. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Secretary. (Joined C.C. January 1894.) Joined 2nd March 1906.
18	Simpson, John Percy, B.A. 16 Houghton Street, Aldwych, London, W.C.2. 176, P.M.; 176, P.Z. Past Assistant Grand Registrar; Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies (R.A.). Past Master. (Joined C.C. January 1905.) Joined 25th June 1906.
19	Dring, Edmund Hunt. Wentworth, The Ridgeway, Sutton, Surrey. 1297, P.M., 3444; 1297, P.Z. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Master. (Joined C.C. January 1899.) Joined 25th June 1906.
20	Hextall, William Brown. 2 Garden Court, Temple, London, E.C.4. 1085, 2128, P.M., P.Pr.G.W., Derbyshire. Past Grand Deacon. Past Master. (Joined C.C. January 1897.) Joined 5th March 1909.
21	Goblet d'Alviella, le Comte Eugène Félicien Albert, Membre de l'Académie Royale. Château de Court St. Etienne, Brabant, Belgium. Past Grand Master, Belgium. (Joined C.C. February 1890.) Joined 5th March 1909.
22	Wonnacott, Ernest William Malpas, A.R.I.B.A., F.S.I. 6 Old Cavendish Street, London, W.1. 2416, 2956, Sec., 3171, P.M., 3324, P.Pr.G.D., Herts; 23, P.Z., 2416, P.Z., 2923, P.Z., 2956. Past Assistant Grand Supt. of Works; Past Grand Standard Bearer (R.A.). Past Master. (Joined C.C. March 1904.) Joined 3rd March 1911.
23	Westropp, Thomas Johnson, M.A., M.R.I.A., Pres.R.S.A.I. 115 Strand Road, Sandymount, Dublin. 143 (I.C.), P.M. Past Grand High Priest, Ireland. Senior Deacon. (Joined C.C. November 1897.) Joined 24th June 1912.
24	Powell, Arthur Cecil. The Hermitage, Weston-super-Mare. 187, P.M., P.Pr.G.W., Bristol; 187, P.Z., P.Pr.G.J., Bristol. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Master. (Joined C.C. November 1902.) Joined 24th June 1912.
25	Hills, Gordon Pettigrew Graham, A.R.I.B.A. Firecroft, Cookham Dean, Berkshire. 2416, P.M., L.R., 2228, P.M., 3684; 2416, P.Z., P.Pr.G.W., Berks. Past Master. (Joined C.C. May 1897.) Joined 2nd October 1914.
26	Tuckett, Major James Edward Shum, M.A. (Cantab.), F.C.S., T.D. 12 Belvedere Road, Redland, Bristol. 1533, P.M., P.Pr.G.R.; 1533, P.Z., P.Pr.G.So. Worshipful Master. (Joined C.C. November 1910.) Joined 2nd October 1914.
27	Bradley, Herbert, C.S.I. Koyama, West Cliff Road, Bournemouth. Past District Grand Master; Past Grand Superintendent, Madras. Junior Warden. (Joined C.C. October 1893.) Joined 5th January 1917.
28	Vibert, Arthur Lionel, I.C.S. Marline, Lansdown, Bath. P.Dis.G.W.; P.Dis.G.J., Somerset. Local Secretary for Somerset. Junior Deacon. (Joined C.C. January 1895.) Joined 5th January 1917.
29	Baxter, Roderick Hildegar. 97 Milnrow Road, Rochdale, Lancashire. P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.A.G.So., E. Lancs. Local Secretary for East Lancashire. Inner Guard. (Joined C.C. October 1907.) Joined 5th January 1917.
30	Robbins, Sir Alfred. 32 FitzGeorge Avenue, Barons Court, London, W.14. 1928, P.M.; 1928, P.Z. President, Board of General Purposes; Past Grand Sojourner. (Joined C.C. January 1899.) Joined 24th June 1919.

HONORARY MEMBER.

No.	Name	Details
31	H.R.H. The Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, K.G., &c. Grand Master; Grand Z. Honorary Member. Joined 9th November 1908.

MEMBERS OF THE CORRESPONDENCE CIRCLE

ELECTED IN 1919.

* The Asterisk before the name indicates Life-Membership. The Roman numbers refer to Lodges, and those in Italics to R.A. Chapters.

LODGES UNDER THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION.

No.	Lodge	Location	Joined
1	No. 2774 Vernon Lodge	Johannesburg, Transvaal	May 1919.
2	„ 3442 King Edward VII. Lodge	Bradford, Yorkshire	June 1919.
3	„ 3806 Maguncor Lodge	Grantham, Lincolnshire	October 1919.

LODGES UNDER OTHER CONSTITUTIONS.

No.	Lodge	Location	Joined
4	Union Lodge No. 719 (S.C.)	Kimberley, S. Africa	October 1919.
5	St. Andrew's Lodge No. 19 (S.A.C.)	Adelaide, S. Australia	January 1919.
6	Leopold Lodge No. 31 (S.A.C.)	Gilberton, S. Australia	January 1919.
7	Marlborough Lodge of Unanimity No. 106 (N.Z.C.)	Blenheim, New Zealand	November 1919.
8	Lodge Star of Africa No. 61 (D.C.)	Jagersfontein, S. Africa	March 1919.
9	Lodge Edda (G.L. Denmark)	Reykjavik, Iceland	May 1919.

OTHER ASSOCIATIONS.

No.	Association	Location	Joined
10	Masters' and Wardens' Association	North Adelaide, S. Australia	January 1919.
11	Masonic Research Society	Portland, Oregon	January 1919.

BROTHERS.

No.	Name & Details
12	Adam, Capt. G. A. F., D.S.O., M.C. Box 3395, Johannesburg, Transvaal, S. Africa. May 1919.
13	Adam, John. Larchgrove, Shettleston, nr. Glasgow. Pr.G.D.C.; 189. October 1919.
14	Akehurst, S. C. 60 Bexres Road, Palmers Green, London, N.13. 1364. November 1919.
15	Allen, George Thomas. 129 Bedford Hill, Balham, London, S.W.12. 3661. May 1919.
16	Anderson, Thomas. 9 St. Leonards Road, Ealing, London, W. 3661. May 1919.
17	Anstey, Theodore Reginald. The Rectory, De Aar, South Africa. 3198, J.D. Nov. 1919.
18	Armstrong, James. Crofts Lea Park, Ilfracombe, Devon. 1135, J.W. March 1919.
19	*Arnold, John A. 9 Athenlay Road, Nunhead, London, S.E.15. 1658. June 1919.
20	*Ballentyne, Henry. 400 Crown Street, Glasgow. 556; 122 P.Z. October 1919.
21	Bathurst, Hervey. 4 Market Buildings, 29 Mincing Lane, London, E.C.3. P.G.Stew. May 1919.
22	Baxter, George Charles Parkhurst. 12 Queen Anne's Gate, London, S.W.1. 1826. October 1919.
23	Bernstein, S. 12 Wellington Street East, Higher Broughton, Manchester, Lancs. 1798; 815. March 1919.
24	Bickell, Frederick Chas. 54 Lambton Road, Wimbledon, London, S.W.19. 1602. May 1919.
25	Biney, J. A. P.O. Box 27, Onitsha, Lagos, Nigeria. 3780, J.W. November 1919.
26	Blake, Robert. 57 Grosvenor Road, Ilford, Essex. P.Pr.A.G.D.C.; 2005, H. Nov. 1919.
27	Bolton, George. The Mount, Bailey Hills, Bingley, Yorks. 600, I.G.; 600. Oct. 1919.
28	Bonser, Howard John. 6 Russell Mansions, Southampton Row, London, W.C.1. 569. March 1919.
29	Bonser, James. 14 Marlborough Road, Nuneaton, Warwickshire. 432. November 1919.
30	Bright, Capt. John William. Bank of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand. 2256. October 1919.
31	Brown, Joseph William. Hokongurie T.E., Bura Hapjian P.O., Assum. 3812, W.M. March 1919.
32	Browse, Henry William James. 13 Davenport Road, Catford, London, S.E.6. 192, P.M.; 28, J. May 1919.
33	Bullock, Rev. John Arthur Smith, M.A., B.D. The Clergy House, Spital Square, London, E. 3244, Ch. June 1919.
34	Burgess, Frederick William. 138 Preston Drove, Brighton, Sussex. 1636; 315. Jan. 1919.
35	Burgess, William George. 82 Cowick Road, Upper Tooting, London, S.W.17. 1991; 31. May 1919.
36	Burgoyne, John. 6 Princes Square, London, W.2. 147. May 1919.
37	Butler, John Henry. Suva, Fiji. 1931, P.M. October 1919.
38	Cain, Daniel. P.O. Box 20, Denver, Transvaal, S. Africa. 3167, P.M.; 3167, J. November 1919.
39	Carpenter, Frank G. 341 Finchley Road, London, N.W.3. 2319, P.M. January 1919.
40	Casburn, John Robert. Guildhall, Grantham. Pr.G.D.C.; P.Pr.A.G.S. October 1919.
41	Chapple, W. R. 8 Branksome Gardens, Winchmore Hill, London, N.21. 1364. Nov. 1919.
42	Clare, Selby. Heathfield, Cardigan, Wales. 476; 476, Sc. E. January 1919.
43	Clarke, Samuel Robert. P.O. Box 49, Jagersfontein, O.F.S., S. Africa. 61 (D.C.), Dep.M. March 1919.
44	Colenso, Lt.-Col. J. E. 2/7 Gurkha Rifles, c/o Cox & Co., Bombay, India. P.Dis.G.D., Bengal. October 1919.
45	Colley, Crossley. 12 Northumberland Avenue, Benton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland. 2260; P.Pr.A.G.Sc.E. (N. Wales). June 1919.
46	*Collier, Joseph Henry. 8 St. James' Square, London, S.W.1. 3238; 52. May 1919.
47	Collins, Alexander Burnett Poole. 54 Richmond Road, Tottenham, London, N.15. 1044, P.M. March 1919.
48	*Collins, George Laxton. South Dene Tower, Saltwells, Gateshead, Durham. 3105; 2929, P.So. January 1919.
49	Collins, W. P. Freeport Club, Freeport, New York, U.S.A. 62, Ch.; 302, P.H.P. June 1919.
50	*Colsell, Robert Frederick John. Alverstone, Park Hill Road, Chingford, Essex. 12. October 1919.
51	Cooper, Henry William. Box 117, Wanganui, New Zealand. 705, J.W. October 1919.
52	Cooper, Reginald H. 600 North Third Street, Palatka, Florida, U.S.A. October 1919.
53	Cooper, Robert Geraint. 6 Dogo Street, Cardiff, Glam. 2453; 960. January 1919.
54	Cooper, William Suddaby. 29 Glencoe Street, Hull, Yorks. 2134. October 1919.
55	Cully, James Russell, Jun. Undine, 8 Woodlands Avenue, Wanstead, London, E.11. P.Pr.A.G.S. (Essex); 453. March 1919.
56	Cumberlege, Cecil Francis. 59 Westbourne Park Road, London, W.2. 3912. Nov. 1919.
57	de Salis, Lt.-Col. Edward Augustus Alfred, D.S.O. Headquarters, M.G.S.C., Harrowby Camp, Grantham, Lincs. P.Pr.G.W. (Lincs.); 362, P.So. October 1919.
58	Dempster, John M. 49 Robertson Street, Glasgow. 3? (S.C.), P.M. March 1919.
59	Derrick, George. 40 Hermon Hill, Wanstead, London, E.11. 814, W.M.; 285, J. November 1919.
60	Dexter, Arthur. 528 High Road, Goodmayes, Essex. March 1919.
61	Dickson, William Wallace. 9 Commercial Road, Swindon, Wilts. 1295, P.M. May 1919.
62	Douglas, Louis Mortimer. 89 Whitefield Terrace, Heaton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland. 3428, P.M.; 2571, P.So. January 1919.
63	Douglass, William. 1 Cranmer Avenue, West Ealing, London, W.13. 1298, Stew. January 1919.
64	Duffy, John Dennis Patrick. Bay View, The Cove, Tramore, Co. Waterford, Ireland. 5 (I.C.); 5. October 1919.
65	Dunlay, Edward Eric. 2205 Rio Grande Street, Austin, Texas, U.S.A. 456. Mar. 1919.
66	Earle, Alfred Augustine. 157 Rushey Green, London, S.E.6. 92. May 1919.
67	Ely, George Frederick. 49 Sutherland Avenue, London, W.9. 1974, P.M.; 2416, Z. March 1919.
68	Fisher, William Nicholson Hodgson. 113 Dunsmuir Grove, Gateshead-on-Tyne, Durham. 424; 424. May 1919.
69	Fox, P. H. Union Club, Trafalgar Square, London, S.W.1. 708. October 1919.
70	Garraway, Walter. Derry, Park Lane, Wallington, Surrey. 857. June 1919.
71	Gates, Harry. Aston Abbotts, near Aylesbury, Bucks. P.Pr.G.W. May 1919.
72	Gibb, James Rattray. Parliament House, Edinburgh. 1 (S.C.) March 1919.
73	*Gibson, T. B. Badarpur Ghat, Sylhet, India. 1268. May 1919.
74	Gilbert, W. N. 16 Claremont Road, Bishopston, Bristol. 1296, P.M. June 1919.
75	Goldberg, Joseph. 88 Norfolk Road, London, E.8. 1950; 1201, P.So. October 1919.
76	Gray, Major Arthur Lansdel. Katapoi, New Zealand. 6, P.M.; 1. October 1919.
77	Green, Arthur James, M.B.E., J.P. Box 92, Kimberley. Dis.G.M., S. Africa (Cent. Div.); 1574, P.Z. October 1919.
77	Green, Louis S. 4 Essex Court, Temple, London, E.C. 2265. June 1919.
79	Greer, William Jones, F.R.C.S. 19 Gold Tops, Newport, Mon. 683, J.W.; 633. January 1919.
80	*Grieve, Charles James Kerr. P.O. Box 20, Kuala Lumpur, F.M.S. 3674, J.W.; 2337, P.So. May 1919.
81	Griffiths, Ernest James. 5 Gnoll Avenue, Neath, Glam. 364. October 1919.
82	Hall, Herbert Knight. 21 Milford Road, Harborne, Birmingham. Pr.G.St.B. (Worcestershire). November 1919.
83	Halliday, Robert T., M.B. 14 St. Andrew's Drive, Pollokshields, Glasgow. 772 (S.C.), P.M. March 1919.
84	Hansen, Hans. President, Masonic Club, Fishers Island, New York, U.S.A. Oct. 1919.
85	Harben, George Alfred, M.I.Mech.E. 23 Dryden Chambers, Oxford Street, London, W.1. 1671. January 1919.
86	Harper, Edwin Francis. Fenwick House, Lordswood Road, Harborne, Birmingham. 1016, Ch. November 1919.
87	*Hartman, Frederick Thomas. 12 Water Street, Yokohama, Japan. P.Dis.A.G.D.C.; 1263, Sc.E. June 1919.
88	*Hemmans, Lawrence Fielder. 9 Lewisham Park, Lewisham, London, S.E.13. 2948; 285. October 1919.
89	Hemmings, Isaac. 116 Westbourne Road, Sheffield, Yorks. 3363. October 1919.
90	Hempson, Ernest John. 33 Henrietta Street, Strand, London, W.C.2. 2874; 153. June 1919.
91	*Henderson, John Alexander, B.A., B.A.I., A.M.Inst.C.E. Lisbellaw, Co. Fermanagh, Ireland. 205 (I.C.). November 1919.
92	Hickson, William Welsman. Marlborough College, Wilts. 1533, W.M. November 1919.
93	Holland, James. Alverstoke, Mount Stuart Road, Hobart, Tasmania. P.Dis.A.G.D.C., Queensland. January 1919.
94	Hollinrake, Wilfred. Springfield, Albert Road, Eccles, Lancashire. 1213, J.W. November 1919.
95	Hosken, Clifford James Wheeler. 18 Argylle Mansions, King's Road, Chelsea, London, S.W.3. 2190. May 1919.
96	*Humm, Capt. Percy Stanley. c/o Messrs. Cox & Co., Hornby Road, Bombay. 2832, W.M. October 1919.
97	Hunt, Thomas. Hamtun, Wellington College, Berks. P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.G.Sc.N. June 1919.
98	Hunt, Thomas George. The Elms, Thurmaston, near Leicester. P.Pr.G.S.B.; 1130, H. January 1919.
99	Illingworth, William George. St. Augustine's College, Canterbury, Kent. 1345. June 1919.
100	Johnson, Arthur. Northside, Avenue Road, Hockerill Park, Bishop's Stortford, Herts. 2729, P.M., L.R.; 7, J. May 1919.
101	Johnston, David Landale. Ayarpatta House, Naini Tal, U.P., India. Dep.Dis.G.M.; Dis.G.H. (Bengal). March 1919.
102	Jotcham, William Percy. 8 Queen Anne's Gardens, Bush Hill Park, Enfield, Middlesex. 754, P.M. March 1919.
103	Kennedy, David A. 82 Wall Street, New York City, N.Y., U.S.A. 972, S.D.; 302, King. June 1919.
104	Kennedy, John Russell. Authors Club, Whitehall Chambers, London, S.W. 2015, W.M. May 1919.
105	Ketchum, Chas. H. Key West, Florida, U.S.A. P.G.H.P. June 1919.
106	King, George Edward. 57 Aytoum Road, Stockwell, London, S.W.9. 1641, P.M.; 7 P.Z. March 1919.
107	King, Harry Bushell. 14 Brynymor Crescent, Swansea, Glam. 237; 237. January 1919.
108	Kirkby, Frederick George. Knighton Road, Leicester. 2429, J.W.; 1130. Nov. 1919.
109	Knight, Frederick Charles. 36 Marsham Street, Westminster, London, S.W.1. 2030, W.M. November 1919.
110	Laing, Alexander Mossman. 29 Roseworth Avenue, Gosforth, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland. 1664, P.M.; 1664, P.Z. March 1919.
111	Langford, George. 9 Elgin Park, Redland, Bristol. P.Pr.G.R. May 1919.
112	Latto, Alexander Jack. Casilla 760, Valparaiso, Chile. 1411 (E.C.), W.M.; 1, H.P. October 1919.
113	Laurenson, Robert Sinclair. Holpan, P.O. Klipdam, Cape Province. 2486. Oct. 1919.
114	Leask, Henry Leslie Graham. 70 Dixon Avenue, Crosshill, Glasgow. 753 (S.C.), P.M. June 1919.
115	Lewis, Troy W., A.M., Ph.D., D.C.L., Perm. Sectry., Arkansas Academy of Sciences. Little Rock, Arkansas, U.S.A., 2; 2. November 1919.
116	Ling, William Stannard. Bank House, Attleborough, Norfolk. 1193, P.M.; 996, P.So. May 1919.
117	Lord, Samuel Thomas. Leckthwaite, Manchester Road, Rochdale, Lancs. P.Pr.G.D. May 1919.
118	Macdonald, James Alexander. 19 East Street, Taunton, Somerset. P.Pr.G.W.; P.Pr.G.H. October 1919.
119	McLeod, Robert Henry. 3 Great James Street, Bedford Row, London, W.C.1. 2700, P.M., L.R.; 73, P.Z. October 1919.
120	Marles, Lieut. C. Wright, R.E. 62 Marylands Road, Maida Hill, London, W. 3244, J.D. June 1919.
121	Marquis, George C. Lexington, Missouri, U.S.A. Grand Lecturer (R.A.). June 1919.
122	Marriott, Frederick George. 6a Netherton Grove, Fulham Road, London, S.W.10. 3473; 170. October 1919.
123	Marson, Edward William. 1 Dundonald Road, Willesden, N.W.10. 2696, W.M.; 2721. October 1919.
124	Martin, J. F. Glenfield, M.D. Sunnyside, Littleport, Cumbs. P.Pr.G.O. March 1919.
125	May, William Henry. Milford House, Portland Villas, Plymouth. 3226, P.M. June 1919.
126	Milne, James Leslie. c/o Shaw, Wallace & Co., P.O. Box 70, Calcutta, India. 150; 150. March 1919.
127	Missing, Bernard. 12 Bath Lane Terrace, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland. 3428. January 1919.
128	Mitchell, William. Woodville House, Horton Lane, Bradford, Yorkshire. 974, P.M. October 1919.
129	Morgridge, George Burton. Sierra Madre, California, U.S.A. 408, Librarian. October 1919.
130	Munro, John Anderson. P.O. Box 900, Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada. 25 (Manitoba), P.M.; Prince Rupert, P.Z. June 1919.
131	Musgrave, William Wallace. King Edward Road, Nuneaton, Warwickshire. 432. June 1919.
132	Naylor, R. Owen. Orchard House, Ravenstonedale, Westmorland. 15; 15. June 1919.
133	*Neilson, Albert. Walsingham, 37 St. Kilda's Road, Stoke Newington, London, N.16. 3539, I.G.; 538, P.So. March 1919.
134	Nicholson, Ralph Wise. Club of Western India, Poona. 91 (S.C.). May 1919.
135	Nixon, Henry Edwin. Malacca, S.S. 3557; 2337. March 1919.
136	Outram, Lt.-Col. Harold William Sydney. Rock House, Highgate, London, N.6. 1635. January 1919.
137	Overy, Arthur S. 24 Clapham Road, Lowestoft. 71, J.W.; 71, A.So. January 1919.
138	Palmer, Stanley. 16 Great Russell Street, London, W.C.1. 2395, P.M.; 7, P.Z. May 1919.
139	Pankhurst, Victor V. 22 Clapham Road, Lowestoft. 71; 71. January 1919.
140	Partlow, Haywood R. Paragould, Arkansas, U.S.A. 368. June 1919.
141	Penwarden, Stanley Peter. 35 Gresley Road, London, N.19. 73. January 1919.
142	Perry, Rev. Preb. George Henry, M.A. St. Luke's Rectory, Old Street, London, E.C.2. 3051, S.W.; 3051. March 1919.
143	Petitpierre, George Jules Henri. 32 Mattock Lane, Ealing, London, W.5. 1024, P.M.; 1024, H. March 1919.
144	Phillips, Edward Martin. 191 Selhurst Road, South Norwood, London, S.E.25. 1139. November 1919.
145	Poole, Walter Godfrey. Banda Estate, P.O. Box 35, Kampala, Uganda. 3492. October 1919.
146	Porter, John Fletcher, C.B.E., M.B., J.P. Homewood, Atkins Road, Clapham Park, London, S.W.12. 3864, S.W.; 2190. October 1919.
147	Postlethwaite, William Taylor, O.B.E., LL.B. Craignair, Swinton, Manchester, Lancs. P.Dep.Pr.G.R.; 2216, P.So. May 1919.
148	Prior, Oliver Herbert Phelps. 82 Dunchurch Road, Rugby, Warwickshire. 3497, W.M. May 1919.
149	Protheroe, James Smith. 177 Victoria Road, Swindon, Wilts. P.Pr.G.D.; P.Pr.G.S.B. October 1919.
150	Proudlock, Edmund Dunn. 32 Leamington Road Villas, Westbourne Park, London, W.11. 3151. May 1919.
151	Rae, Watson Francis. Royal Exchange Buildings, Glasgow. 772 (S.C.). June 1919.
152	Raynor, John Lawrence. P.O. Box 136, Freeport, N.Y., U.S.A. 956, J.W.; Grand Lecturer. November 1919.
153	Rees, John. High School Road, Kimberley, South Africa. P.Dis.G.W.; 1574, P.Z. October 1919.
154	Ritchie, W. B. 2 Glebe Avenue, Woodford, Essex. 1540, J.W.; 1928, P.So. Jan. 1919.
155	Rooney, Richard Robert. Jagersfontein, O.F.S., S. Africa. 110 (I.C.). March 1919.
156	Ryan, Thomas. Parliament House, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. March 1919.
157	Ryde, Hugh Sterndall. 33 Millicent Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham. P.Pr.G.O.; (Craft & R.A.). January 1919.
158	Salmonsen, Otto Charles Valdemar. Jagersfontein, O.F.S., S. Africa. 61 (D.C.), O. March 1919.
159	Sawyer, Albert Ernest. 100 High Street, Southwold, Suffolk. 1983, I.G. January 1919.
160	Schneider, John Jacques. Southon, Dollis Park, Church End, Finchley, London, N.3. 179, P.M.; 3387. March 1919.
161	*Shadwell, Gilbert Colville. Forbes Place, Freeport, Long Island, N.Y., U.S.A. 2140 (E.C.); 302 (N.Y.). May 1919.
162	*Side, Erle Douglas. 59 Doddington Grove, Kennington Park, London, S.E.17. 1658, P.M., L.R. June 1919.
163	Simpson, George Honeyman. 4 Camilla Street, Gateshead-on-Tyne, Durham. 3626, S.W.; 48, A.So. March 1919.
164	Simpson, H. E. 89 The Drive, Fulham Road, London, S.W.3. 1293, P.M. January 1919.
165	Skidmore, Arthur Charles. Airedale, Tettenhall, Staffs. P.Pr.G.St.B.; P.Pr.A.G.So. June 1919.
166	Smith, Hugh Evan. 132 Salisbury Square, Fleet Street, London, E.C.4. P.Pr.G.D. (Middx.); 1471, P.Z. October 1919.
167	*Smith, Stephen George. E.T. Mess, Gibraltar. 3503. January 1919.
168	Smith, Thomas Claudius Tiberius. 27 Duffield Road, Irlams o' th' Height, Manchester, Lancs. P.Pr.G.D.; 815, P.Z. January 1919.
169	Soden, E. E. Old Staff Lines, Secunderabad, Deccan, India. 1444, P.M.; 434, P.Z. October 1919.
170	Somers, William George. 35 Carters Green, West Bromwich, Staffs. 662; 662. June 1919.
171	Steele, Henderson W. Box 783, Uniontown, Fayette County, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 651, P.M.; 165, P.H.P. June 1919.
172	Stephens, Henry Joseph. 17 Church Crescent, Muswell Hill, London, N.10. 1426; 1426. June 1919.
173	Sykes, Samuel Brook. 55 Orrell Lane, Aintree, Liverpool, Lancs. 220. October 1919.
174	Taylor, Glen Arthur. Middleton House, Briton Ferry, Glam. 162. June 1919.
175	Tesoro, Gaudencio. P.O. Box 4, Santa Cruz, Laguna, P.I. 26. January 1919.
176	Thackeray, William Alfred. Cadet College, Wellington, India. 1093, Sec.; 1093, Sc.E. May 1919.
177	Thomas, John Edward. 2 Langland Road, Mumbles, Swansea, S. Wales. P.Pr.G.St.B.; P.Pr.A.G.So. October 1919.
178	Thomson, William Thomas. Refreshment Rooms, Ballarat Station, Victoria, Australia. 29, P.M.; 7. May 1919.
179	Thornber, Albert Eastham. Fulwood Avenue, Tarleton, Preston, Lancs. 113. January 1919.
180	Townshend, Cecil Wray. c/o Standard Bank, Jagersfontein, O.F.S., S. Africa. 61 (D.C.), W.M. March 1919.
181	Travis, Henry Edward. 11 Wilson-Patten Street, Warrington, Lancs. 3597, P.M.; 148. November 1919.
182	Turner, Edward Kirk. Brand Street, Jagersfontein, O.F.S. 110 (I.C.). June 1919.
183	Turner, Joseph. 34 St. Peter's Road, Handsworth, Staffs. 2724. November 1919.
184	Tyers, Frederick George. Boys' High School, Pochefstroom, S. Africa. 3004, P.M.; 3004. June 1919.
185	Vick, Henry Hampton. 7 Collingwood Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland. 2497; 2260. January 1919.
186	Veitch, Robert. c/o C.S.R.Co., Lautoka, Fiji. 3354, I.G. October 1919.
187	Wallington, H. J. Temple Grange, Beckenham, Kent. 1293, P.M. January 1919.
188	Ward, Henry George. 2 The Crescent, Sandgate, Kent. 3872, A.D.C.; 2016. Mar. 1919.
189	Ward, John Sebastian Marlow. 39 St. James Street, London, S.W.1. 859; 1268. November 1919.
190	*White, Ernest Costley, O.B.E., R.A. Chief Secretary's Office, Zomba, Nyasaland. 1162 (S.C.), P.M. October 1919.
191	White, Henry William George. Electra House, London, E.C.2. 448. October 1919.
192	White, Richard George Charles. P.O. Box 6, Jagersfontein, O.F.S., S. Africa. 110 (I.C.), P.M.; 234, H. March 1919.
193	Wilkins, M. 75 Groveland Road, Palmers Green, London, N.13. 1364. November 1919.
194	Williams, Frank A. 59 Crouch Hall Road, Crouch End, London, N.8. 1613, P.M. January 1919.
195	Williams, Sidney James. Bradford Street, Walsall, Staffs. 539, J.W. January 1919.
196	Williams, William James. 67 Saltoun Road, Brixton, London, S.W.2. 2696. Nov. 1919.
197	Windle, George Frederick Bryant. 19 St. Albans Road, Kingston-on-Thames. 2744, P.M.; 1503, P.So. October 1919.
198	Wood, Charles James. Kenilworth, Morland Road, Croydon, Surrey. 706. March 1919.
199	Woodward, Joseph Roger. Casilla 301, Talca, Chile. 1411, J.W. October 1919.
200	Woolley, Joseph William. Charcos 692, Buenos Aires. 3466, J.D.; 617. Nov. 1919.
201	Worley, Sydney Reginald. The Meads, Woodcote Valley Road, Purley, Surrey. 92, W.M. January 1919.

DECEASED.

Name	Late of	Date
Atkinson, George	Manchester	8th May, 1919.
Baker, Louis Leroy	Tooele, Utah	1st October, 1918.
Bate, Osborn Hambrook	Cape Division, S.A.	30th September, 1919.
Booth, William	Stockport	5th December, 1919.
Capel, George William	Surbiton, Surrey	6th October, 1919.
Carter, Major Frank Bird	Perth, W. Aus.	1919.
Cole, Charles William	London	22nd February, 1919.
Couch, James	Hatfield	27th November, 1919.
Cuddon, Elias Martin	London	1919.
Dalgleish, Henry J.	London	1919.
Dixon, Edward Young	E. Griqualand	13th May, 1919.
Fisher, William	Chiswick	30th September, 1919.
Friend, Capt. B. J.	London	1919.
Gedge, Alfred Sydney	Bromley, Kent	1st April, 1919.
George, Frederick Brand	Somerset	20th May, 1919.
Gissing, George John	Kingston	14th August, 1919.
Glass, John	London	8th February, 1919.
Hamm, Johannes M.	London	17th May, 1919.
Hibberdine, William	London	January, 1919.
Houndle, Henry Charles Hermann Hawker	London	30th September, 1919.
Jennings, Thorpe Buttolph	Kansas, U.S.A.	1918.
Kielland, Kristian Semb.	Trondhjem, Norway	1st January, 1919.
Kiralfy, Imre	London	24th April, 1919.
Lambton, John William	Preston, N. Shields	13th May, 1919.
Laurenson, Robert Sinclair	Cape Province, S.A.	20th August, 1919.
Lemon, Rev. Thomas William	Bude, Cornwall	16th December, 1919.
Lines, Stanley Llandaff Burnett	Toronto, Canada	1919.
Loewy, Benno	New York, N.Y.	19th August, 1919.
Macbean, Edward	Helensburgh	23rd August, 1919.
Marples, Robert Moffat	London	1919.
Maye, William Bennett	Devon	1919.
Millar, James	Ketchikan	1919.
Nethersole, Major Alfred Ralph	Madras	1916.
Newton, Edwin B. B.	London	1918.
Peque, William Thomas	London	1919.
Plumbe, Rowland	London	2nd April, 1919.
Pratt, Lt.-Col. Sisson Cooper	Dorset	10th April, 1919.
Rees, E. C.	Newcastle-upon-Tyne	16th April, 1919.
Ridout, George	London	June, 1919.
Sachse, Dr. Julius F.	Pennsylvania	15th November, 1919.
Scott, George Lamb	Newport, Mon.	1919.
Sebastian, Robert Lee	Washington	14th December, 1918.

Pages 211-216

AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF pages 211-216 (St. John's Card, concluding pages)

DECEASED (continued from previous page).

Name	Late of	Date
Simons, Henry	Swansea	12th January, 1919.
Smith, James R.	Minnesota, U.S.A.	1919.
Speedy, James	London	1918.
Stockings, William F.	Norwich	10th September, 1919.
Tangye, Edgar	Handsworth	1st March, 1919.
White, Dr. Henry Francis La Touche	Cambridgeshire	24th July, 1919.
Witney, Frank Irving	St. Paul, Minn.	1919.
Vernon, Sir William	Chester	24th June, 1919.

[Illustration: Decorative tail-piece — ornate cartouche with rococo scrollwork and figure of a cherub or putto reading a book, set against architectural ruins]

LOCAL SECRETARIES.

[Decorative header illustration — ornamental vase with foliage]

GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

District	Secretary	Address
Bournemouth	Christopher Pearce	73, Commercial Road.
Derbyshire	T. H. Thorpe	23, St. James's Street, Derby.
Inverness	A. F. Mackenzie	15, Union Street.
Lancashire, East	R. H. Baxter	97, Milnrow Road, Rochdale.
Lancashire, North	J. R. Nuttall	13, Thornfield, Lancaster.
Lancashire, West	William Platt	132, Lord Street, Southport.
Northamptonshire & Huntingdonshire	S. B. Wilkinson	69, Billing Road, Northampton.
Northumberland	Cornwell Smith	57, Manor House Road, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
Oxfordshire & Gloucestershire	E. Conder	The Conigree, Newent, Gloucestershire.
Somerset	Lionel Vibert	Marline, Lansdown, Bath.
Staffordshire	Frank Hughes	Handsworth.
Warwickshire	F. G. Swinden	36, Westfield Road, Edgbaston.
Westmorland & Cumberland	Rev. Herbert Poole	Sedbergh School, Sedbergh, Yorkshire.
Worcestershire	W. S. Devey	43, George Road, Erdington, Birmingham.
Yorkshire, North & East Ridings	Geo. L. Shackles	Wickersley, Brough, E. Yorks.
Yorkshire, Bradford	John Robinson	5, Rushcroft Terrace, Baildon.
Yorkshire, Leeds	J. Elston Cawthorn	Elmete House, Sherburn-in-Elmet, South Milford.
Yorkshire, Sheffield	David Flather	Whiston Grange, Rotherham.

EUROPE.

Country	Secretary	Address
Denmark	William Malling	Højbroplads 5, Copenhagen, K.
Holland	J. C. G. Grasé	Naarden.

ASIA.

District	Secretary	Address
India, Bengal	C. F. Hooper	c/o Thacker, Spink & Co., 5 Government Place, Calcutta.
India, Bombay, Madras, United Provinces & Oudh	F. Chatterton	c/o Best & Co., Madras.
Japan	A. R. Catto	Box 296, Yokohama.
Philippine Islands	N. C. Comfort	Quarantine Service, Manila.
Siam	John R. C. Lyons	Ministry of Justice, Bangkok.
Singapore	Frederick Apps	26, Raffles Place.

AFRICA.

District	Secretary	Address
Bloemfontein	W. S. Mannion	Box 261.
Egypt	H. K. Baynes	Box 1400, Cairo.
Jagersfontein, O.F.S.	R. G. C. White	Box 6, Jagersfontein.
Kimberley	F. G. Richards	Sydney on Vaal. *
Natal	C. W. P. Douglas de Fenzi	P.O. Box 230, Pietermaritzburg.
Rhodesia, Mashonaland	S. R. Garrard	Brundish House, Sinoia.
Rhodesia, Matabeleland	E. A. Uttley	Box 48, Bulawayo.
South Africa, E. Division	H. Squire Smith	Box 9, King William's Town.
South Africa, W. Division	W. H. Tiffany	Box 387, Cape Town.
Transvaal, Johannesburg	T. L. Pryce	Box 247, Johannesburg.
Transvaal, Pretoria *	G. P. Mathews	Box 434, Pretoria.

CANADA.

Province	Secretary	Address
Alberta	G. Macdonald, M.D.	Calgary.
British Columbia	Dr. W. A. De Wolf Smith	Pafraets Dael, New Westminster.
Manitoba	R. S. Thornton, M.B.	Deloraine.
Newfoundland	W. J. Edgar	Box 1201, St. John's.
Saskatchewan	F. S. Proctor	Cupar.
Ontario	N. W. J. Haydon	564, Pape Avenue, Toronto.

U.S.A.

State	Secretary	Address
Florida	E. P. Hubbell	Bradentown.
Georgia	W. F. Bowe	541, Broad Street, Augusta.
Indiana	C. Mayer	29, W. Washington Street, Indianapolis.
Minnesota	Dr. J. W. Chamberlin	734, Lowry Building, St. Peter Street, St. Paul.
New Jersey	H. E. Deats	Flemington.
New York	J. C. Klinck	85, Argyle Road, Brooklyn.
Rhode Island	William H. Scott	61, Laura Street, Providence.
South Dakota	G. A. Pettigrew	Sioux Falls.
Washington	J. H. Tatsch	Old National Bank, Spokane.

CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA.

Country	Secretary	Address
Argentina	William Cowlishaw	78, Reconquista, Buenos Aires.
Costa Rica	A. G. M. Gillott	Box 385, San José.

WEST INDIES.

Territory	Secretary	Address
Jamaica	G. R. D. Rust	Post Office, Kingston.

AUSTRALASIA.

Territory	Secretary	Address
New South Wales	T. L. Rowbotham	Masonic Club, 218, Pitt Street, Sydney.
New Zealand, Auckland	C. H. Jenkins	107, Albert Street.
New Zealand, Christchurch	S. C. Bingham	27, Gracefield Street.
New Zealand, Otago	D. C. Cameron	5, Heriot Street, Dunedin.
New Zealand, Wanganui	Peter Lewis	81, Keith Street.
New Zealand, Wellington	G. Robertson	Wellington.
South Australia	Fred. Johns	Houghton Lodge, Rose Park, Adelaide.
Victoria	Herbert M. Knight	406, Collins Street, Melbourne.

STATED MEETINGS OF THE LODGE IN 1920.

Friday, 2nd January. — Thursday, 24th June.

Friday, 5th March. — Friday, 1st October.

Friday, 7th May. — Monday, 8th November.

ABBREVIATIONS.

MASONIC.

Abbrev.	Meaning
A.	Arch, Assistant.
A.G.	Assistant Grand.
B.	Bearer.
B.G.P.	Board of General Purposes.
C.	Central, Ceremonies, Constitution.
Ch.	Chaplain.
Chap.	Chapter.
Com.	Committee.
D.	Deacon, Director, Dutch.
D.C.	Director of Ceremonies.
(D.C.).	Dutch Constitution.
D.M.	Director of Music.
Dep.	Deputy, Depute (Scottish).
Dep. Dis.	Deputy District.
Dep. Pr.	Deputy Provincial.
Dis.	District.
Dis.A.G.	District Assistant Grand.
Dis.G.	District Grand.
Div.	Division.
E.	English, Excellent, Ezra.
(E.C.).	English Constitution.
G.	Grand, Guard.
G.Ch.	Grand Chaplain.
G. Chap.	Grand Chapter.
G.D.	Grand Deacon.
G.D.C.	Grand Director of Ceremonies.
G.H.	Grand Haggai.
G.H.P.	Grand High Priest (American & Irish R.A.).
G.J.	Grand Joshua.
G.L.	Grand Lodge.
G.M.	Grand Master.
G.O.	Grand Organist.
G.P.	Grand Principal (R.A.).
G.Pt.	Grand Pursuivant.
G.R.	Grand Registrar.
G.S.B.	Grand Sword Bearer.
G. Sc.E.	Grand Scribe Ezra.
G.Sec.	Grand Secretary.
G.St.B.	Grand Standard Bearer.
G.Stew.	Grand Steward.
G. So.	Grand Sojourner.
G. Sup.	Grand Superintendent (R.A.).
G Sup. W	Grand Superintendent of Works.
G. Treas.	Grand Treasurer.
G.W.	Grand Warden.
G.Z.	Grand Zerubbabel.
H.	Haggai.
H.P.	High Priest (American & Irish R.A.).
I.	Inner, Irish.
(I.C.).	Irish Constitution.
I.G.	Inner Guard.
Ins.W.	Inspector of Works.
J.	Joshua, Junior.
J.D.	Junior Deacon.
J.W.	Junior Warden.
K.	King (American & Irish R.A.).
L.	Lodge.
L.R.	London Rank.
M.	Master, Most.
Mem.	Member.
M.E.	Most Excellent.
M.W.	Most Worshipful.
N.	Nehemiah.
(N.S.).	Nova Scotia.
O.	Organist.
Or.	Orator.
P.	Past, Principal, Priest (American & Irish R.A.).
P. Dep.	Past Deputy.
P. Dep. Dis.	Past Deputy District.
P. Dep. Pr.	Past Deputy Provincial.
P. Dis.	Past District.
P.Dis.G.	Past District Grand.
P.G.	Past Grand.
P.H.	Past Haggai.
P.H.P.	Past High Priest (American & Irish R.A.).
P.J.	Past Joshua.
P.K.	Past King (American & Irish R.A.).
P.M.	Past Master.
P.Pr.	Past Provincial.
P.Pr.G.	Past Provincial Grand.
Pr.	Provincial.
Pres.	President.
Pt.G.	Provincial Grand.
Pt.	Pursuivant.
P.Z.	Past Zerubbabel.
R.	Registrar, Right, Roll, Roster.
R.A.	Royal Arch.
Rep.	Representative.
R.W.	Right Worshipful.
S.	Scottish, Senior, Sword.
S.B.	Sword Bearer.
(S.C.).	Scottish Constitution.
Sc.	Scribe.
Sc.E.	Scribe Ezra.
Sc.N.	Scribe Nehemiah.
S.D.	Senior Deacon.
Sec.	Secretary.
So.	Sojourner.
Stew.	Steward.
St.	Standard.
Sub.	Substitute (Scottish).
Sup.	Superintendent.
Sup.W.	Superintendent of Works.
S.W.	Senior Warden.
Treas.	Treasurer.
V.	Very.
V.W.	Very Worshipful.
W.	Warden, Works, Worshipful.
W.M.	Worshipful Master.
Z.	Zerubbabel.

SOCIAL, NAVAL, AND MILITARY.

Abbrev.	Meaning
A.D.C.	Aide-de-Camp.
A.S.C.	Army Service Corps.
Bart.	Baronet.
B.C.S.	Bombay or Bengal Civil Service.
C.B.	Companion of Order of the Bath.
C.I.E.	Companion of Order of the Indian Empire.
C.M.G.	Companion of Order of SS. Michael and George.
C S.I.	Companion of Order of the Star of India. (N.B.—K. or G. prefixed to the above signifies Knight Commander or Knight Grand Cross, or Knight Grand Commander of the Order concerned.)
D.L.	Deputy Lieutenant.
D.S.O.	Distinguished Service Order.
Hon.	Honorary, Honourable.
I.C.S.	Indian Civil Service.
I.M.	Indian Marine.
I.M.S.	Indian Medical Service.
I.S.C.	Indian Staff Corps.
I.S.O.	Imperial Service Order.
J.P.	Justice of the Peace.
Kt.	Knight.
M.H.A.	Member of the House of Assembly (Newfoundland).
M.L.C.	Member of Legislative Council.
M.P.	Member of Parliament.
O.B.E.	Order of the British Empire.
P.C.	Privy Councillor.
R.A.M.C.	Royal Army Medical Corps.
R.C.I.	Royal Colonial Institute.
R.D.	Reserve Distinction.
R.E.	Royal Engineers.
R.F.A.	Royal Field Artillery.
R.G.A.	Royal Garrison Artillery.
R.H.A.	Royal Horse Artillery.
R.M.	Royal Marines.
R.M.A.	Royal Marine Artillery.
R.N.	Royal Navy.
R.N.R.	Royal Naval Reserve.
R.N.V.R.	Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve.
T.	Territorial Force.
T.D.	Territorial Distinction.
V.D.	Volunteer Distinction.
V.O.	Victorian Order.

PROFESSIONAL.

Abbrev.	Meaning
A.G.O.	American Guild of Organists.
A.I.	Auctioneers' Institute.
A.S.M.E.	American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
A.K.C.	Associate of King's College.
A.M.	Master of Arts.
Am.Soc.C.E.	American Society of Civil Engineers.
Amer.I.E.E.	American Institute of Electrical Engineers.
B.A.	Bachelor of Arts.
B.C.L.	Bachelor of Civil Law.
B.Ch.	Bachelor of Surgery.
B.D.	Bachelor of Divinity.
B.P.	Bachelor of Philosophy (U.S.A.).
B.Sc.	Bachelor of Science.
C.A.	Chartered Accountant.
C.E.	Civil Engineer.
C.I.S.	Chartered Institute of Secretaries.
C.P.A.	Certified Public Accountant (Rhode Island).
C.S.	Chemical Society.
C.M.	Master in Surgery.
Dr.	Doctor.
D.C.L.	Doctor of Civil Law.
D.D.	Doctor of Divinity.
D.Lit.	Doctor of Literature.
D.Sc.	Doctor of Science.
E.S.	Entomological Society.
F.I.	Faculty of Insurance.
G.S.	Geological Society.
I.A.	Institute of Actuaries.
I.C.	Institute of Chemists.
Inst.C.E.	Institute of Civil Engineers.
I.E.E.	Institute of Electrical Engineers.
I.M.E.	Institute of Mining Engineers.
I.Mech.E.	Institute of Mechanical Engineers.
I.N.A.	Institute of Naval Architects.
I.S.E.	Institute of Sanitary Engineers.
I.I.	Imperial Institute.
J.I.	Institute of Journalists.
K.C.	King's Counsel.
L.D.S.	Licentiate in Dental Surgery.
LL.B.	Bachelor of Laws.
LL.D.	Doctor of „
LL.M.	Master of „
Lic.Mus.	Licentiate of Music.
L.S.	Linnæan Society.
M.A.	Master of Arts.
M.B.	Bachelor of Medicine.
M.D.	Doctor of Medicine.
Mus.Doc.	Doctor of Music.
Ph.D.	Doctor of Philosophy.
Pres.	President.
Prof.	Professor.
P.W.D.	Public Works Department.
R.A.	Royal Academy.
R.A.S.	Royal Asiatic Society (Members).
R.A.S	Royal Astronomical Society (Fellows).
R.C.I.	Royal Colonial Institute.
R.C.P.	Royal College of Physicians.
R.C.S.	Royal College of Surgeons.
R.C.V.S.	Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.
R.G.S.	Royal Geographical Society.
R.Hist.S.	Royal Historical Society (Fellows).
R.H.S.	Royal Horticultural Society (Fellows).
R.I.	Royal Institute of Painters in Water Colours.
R.I.A.	Royal Irish Academy.
R.I.B.A.	Royal Institute of British Architects.
R.M.S.	Royal Microscopical Society.
R.S.	Royal Society.
R.S.A.	Royal Society of Arts (Fellows).
R.S.A.	Royal Scottish Academy.
R.S.E.	Royal Society, Edinburgh.
R.S.L.	Royal Society of Literature.
S.A.	Society of Antiquaries (Fellows).
S.A.A.	Society of Accountants and Auditors (Incorporated).
S.C.L.	Student of Civil Law.
S.I.	Institute of Surveyors.
S.S.	Statistical Society.
V.P.	Vice-President.
Z.S.	Zoological Society.

NOTE.—A., M., or F., prefixed to letters indicating an Institute or Society stands for Associate, Member, or Fellow of the Society in question.

[Blank page — verso of final leaf]

[End of AQC Vol. XXXII (1919) — PDF page 216]

Volume 32

[Page 1] Frontispiece

[Page 2] Title Page

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum

[Page 3] *Blank page*

[Page 4] Table of Contents

LODGE PROCEEDINGS.

NOTES AND QUERIES.

OBITUARY.

[Page 5] Table of Contents — *Continued*

OBITUARY — Continued.

PAPERS AND ESSAYS.

[Page 6] Table of Contents — *Continued*

PAPERS AND ESSAYS — Continued.

[Page 7] Index (Subject)

[Pages 8–9] Index — Persons Referred To

[Page 10] Index — *Continued* / Contributors / Illustrations

CONTRIBUTORS.

ILLUSTRATIONS.

[Page 11] Half-Title Page

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum.

[Page 12] *Blank page*

[Page 13] Lodge Proceedings — Friday, 3rd January, 1919

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,

FRIDAY, 3rd JANUARY, 1919.

[Page 14] Lodge Proceedings — *Continued*

PERMANENT AND AUDIT COMMITTEE.

REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1918.

[Page 16] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[Page 17] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

Appendix: Pages 3–15 transcribed in this chunk

[PDF Page 16 = Journal Page 3] Balance Sheet, 30th November, 1918

BALANCE SHEET, 30th NOVEMBER, 1918.

[PDF Page 17 = Journal Page 4] Profit and Loss Account for the year ending 30th November, 1918.

PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT for the year ending 30th November, 1918.

[PDF Page 18 = Journal Page 5] The Origin of Additional Degrees

THE ORIGIN OF ADDITIONAL DEGREES.

BY BRO. J. E. S. TUCKETT, T.D., M.A. (Cantab.), F.C.S., S.W., No. 2076.

[PDF Page 19 = Journal Page 6] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 20 = Journal Page 7] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 21 = Journal Page 8] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 22 = Journal Page 9] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 23 = Journal Page 10] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 24 = Journal Page 11] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 25 = Journal Page 12] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 26 = Journal Page 13] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 27 = Journal Page 14] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 28 = Journal Page 15] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[Page 31] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued) — Discussion

[PDF Page 31 = Journal Page 18] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 32 = Journal Page 19] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 33 = Journal Page 20] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 34 = Journal Page 21] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 35 = Journal Page 22] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 36 = Journal Page 23] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 37 = Journal Page 24] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 38 = Journal Page 25] The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued) — Addendum

ADDENDUM.

[PDF Page 39 = Journal Page 26] Addendum (continued)

[PDF Page 40 = Journal Page 27] Addendum (continued)

[PDF Page 41 = Journal Page 28] Addendum (continued)

[PDF Page 42 = Journal Page 29] Addendum (continued)

[PDF Page 43 = Journal Page 30] Addendum (continued)

[PDF Page 44 = Journal Page 31] Addendum (continued) — Discussion begins

DISCUSSION

[PDF Page 45 = Journal Page 32] Discussion (continued)

[Page 46] Discussion — The Origin of Additional Degrees (continued)

[PDF Page 46 = Journal Page 33] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 47 = Journal Page 34] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 48 = Journal Page 35] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 49 = Journal Page 36] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 50 = Journal Page 37] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 51 = Journal Page 38] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 52 = Journal Page 39] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 53 = Journal Page 40] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 54 = Journal Page 41] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 55 = Journal Page 42] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 56 = Journal Page 43] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 57 = Journal Page 44] Discussion (continued)

[PDF Page 58 = Journal Page 45] Discussion (continued)

[Page 3] Blank page

[Page 5] Table of Contents — Continued

[Page 6] Table of Contents — Continued

[Page 10] Index — Continued / Contributors / Illustrations

[Page 12] Blank page

[Page 14] Lodge Proceedings — Continued